• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Please help. Gaming laptop recommendations.

Yup, from what I can tell, you do have an M.2 slot (which you said you are currently using).
It may depend in that case on the speed of the M.2 ssd you are using. Do you happen to know your M2 ssd model number or transfer speed?
And as I said, check Windows to make sure you aren't having any extra unnecessary services starting up.


The M.2 slot on mine runs as a regular SATA slot. It isn't even compatible with NVME so that's a limiting factor as I could only put a standard M.2 drive in there. The other hard drive connects in a space bottom left of the mainboard via a SATA adapter and cable, it's own connector is visible there next to the bottom left screw hole on the board. I don't think I've done that bad a job of keeping its insides clean and free of dust and other contaminants.
 
The M.2 slot on mine runs as a regular SATA slot. It isn't even compatible with NVME so that's a limiting factor as I could only put a standard M.2 drive in there. The other hard drive connects in a space bottom left of the mainboard via a SATA adapter and cable, it's own connector is visible there next to the bottom left screw hole on the board. I don't think I've done that bad a job of keeping its insides clean and free of dust and other contaminants.

That's all good, but you didn't answer my question if you know which M2 SSD you're using in that slot.
It may be a 'standard M.2', but M.2 SSD's can go up to 3500 MB/s of read speed just as easily (and they are quite affordable these days - you can get 1 TB for example with 3500MB/s of read speed).
So, speed-wise, you could probably accelerate the boot by either getting a faster M.2 SSD, or by checking if there are any extra services starting with Windows that might be impacting boot speed).
 
That's all good, but you didn't answer my question if you know which M2 SSD you're using in that slot.
It may be a 'standard M.2', but M.2 SSD's can go up to 3500 MB/s of read speed just as easily (and they are quite affordable these days - you can get 1 TB for example with 3500MB/s of read speed).
So, speed-wise, you could probably accelerate the boot by either getting a faster M.2 SSD, or by checking if there are any extra services starting with Windows that might be impacting boot speed).

Oh well I did get one of that speed. Another factor which I failed to mention was the processor it's an AMD E2000 combined CPU/GPU with a clock of 1.8ghz and only two cores
 
Oh well I did get one of that speed. Another factor which I failed to mention was the processor it's an AMD E2000 combined CPU/GPU with a clock of 1.8ghz and only two cores

Hm....
How much RAM do you have? And is it single channel or dual channel? RAM can easily slow down Windows booting times and AMD cpu's do like dual-channel modes (and OEM's had a tendency in the past to ship AMD laptops with single-channel RAM, knowing full well it would impact their performance).

The CPU is based on Jaguar Cores it seems, and 2 cores isn't a lot... but I don't think it would be limiting transfer speeds since a CPU is usually orders of magnitude faster than an SSD (but the RAM might) - but it COULD play a part.

Something else might also be happening. Its possible that Acer artificially limited the M2 slot speeds. After all, it wasn't listed in the 'official' specs... in which case, they wouldn't officially 'support' it... but it does work.
 
Hm....
How much RAM do you have? And is it single channel or dual channel? RAM can easily slow down Windows booting times and AMD cpu's do like dual-channel modes (and OEM's had a tendency in the past to ship AMD laptops with single-channel RAM, knowing full well it would impact their performance).

The CPU is based on Jaguar Cores it seems, and 2 cores isn't a lot... but I don't think it would be limiting transfer speeds since a CPU is usually orders of magnitude faster than an SSD (but the RAM might) - but it COULD play a part.

Something else might also be happening. Its possible that Acer artificially limited the M2 slot speeds. After all, it wasn't listed in the 'official' specs... in which case, they wouldn't officially 'support' it... but it does work.


There is only one ram slot as you can see in the photo and it has 16 gig in that slot after the photo was taken, I replaced the 8gig module, and 4gig soldered to the board.
 
There is only one ram slot as you can see in the photo and it has 16 gig in that slot after the photo was taken, I replaced the 8gig module, and 4gig soldered to the board.

Yeah, I figured.
I hate it when OEM's decide to solder x amount of RAM to the motherboard. It basically forces it to run in asyncronous mode with whatever RAM module you install (unless you have exactly same type of RAM that's soldered to the mobo). So for example, if you upgrade the RAM like you have, and that RAM module has higher speed than the soldered RAM, the removable module will have to downclock to match the RAM soldered to the motherboard.

AMD cpu's don't like asyncronous RAM. It WILL work (obviously), but it will be a bit slower than proper dual-channel. It's one of the reasons I usually opt for laptops that do NOT have soldered RAM on the motherboard.

At any rate, this might be the best that you can achieve given how the OEM designed the system (they really did AMD a disservice if you ask me - but that was kind of the intent with that generation of AMD hw, and Intel was paying OEM's to discourage use of AMD hw).

Something similar is happening again (this time with DELL). Only now, its being caught ahead of schedule and OEM's are being called out on it.
 
Yeah, I figured.
I hate it when OEM's decide to solder x amount of RAM to the motherboard. It basically forces it to run in asyncronous mode with whatever RAM module you install (unless you have exactly same type of RAM that's soldered to the mobo). So for example, if you upgrade the RAM like you have, and that RAM module has higher speed than the soldered RAM, the removable module will have to downclock to match the RAM soldered to the motherboard.

AMD cpu's don't like asyncronous RAM. It WILL work (obviously), but it will be a bit slower than proper dual-channel. It's one of the reasons I usually opt for laptops that do NOT have soldered RAM on the motherboard.

At any rate, this might be the best that you can achieve given how the OEM designed the system (they really did AMD a disservice if you ask me - but that was kind of the intent with that generation of AMD hw, and Intel was paying OEM's to discourage use of AMD hw).

Something similar is happening again (this time with DELL). Only now, its being caught ahead of schedule and OEM's are being called out on it.


What tricks are Dell getting up to?

Oddly I'm running games like Saints Row 3 on this machine and in native mode just using the screen on the laptop it runs smoothly nearly all of the time.
 
What that's downright dirty

Dell has a track record with doing this to AMD (as do other OEM's).
In short, before Ryzen (and in some cases even TODAY), OEM's would frequently give AMD laptops bad cooling, single-channel RAM (and solder the RAM onto the motherboard to limit upgrade options and performance - in the name of 'saving costs' [even though the savings in question were/are negligible and wouldn't actually add much or anything to the total price of the laptops - a business practice OEM's implement for laptops in general Intel and AMD) to this day sadly]), low quality screens/displays (poor color range and low refresh rate - the situation IS getting better today on this front, but some OEM's are still giving AMD slightly inferior quality displays, or at least ones with not as many perks). They would also exclude SSD options from AMD laptops, AND they would frequently charge MORE money for the AMD laptop (the price would actually be comparable to an Intel laptop with better displays, dual-channel RAM, SSD options, better cooling, etc.).

In short, they were charging more for AMD laptops that had inferior build quality and overall design (despite the fact that if they actually put effort into it, the AMD system would still cost less with better components and it would perform more than good enough for majority of people out there at the time).

Intel had a major hand in contributing towards these kinds of business practices by actively paying OEM's to NOT use AMD hw, and as a result were forced to pay about $1 billion (a proverbial 'drop in the bucket' for 10 years of bribery) to AMD.

Now, don't get me wrong, Intel DID have superior CPU's at the time of bulldozer, but for A LOT of people out there, those kinds of CPU's simply speaking weren't necessary and qould have been adequate enough.
Even I considered an AMD laptop at the time because I knew the things I'd use it for would be adequate, but lack of money and bad laptop designs on the part of OEM's discouraged me from buying anything back then... and to be fair, I'm glad I waited (because I managed to get my hands on Acer Predator Helios 500 PH517-61 desktop replacement (Ryzen 2700 and Vega 56) with outstanding cooling, performance and its dead quiet under maxed out loads... plus good options for upgrades and a nice display - this was actually a 'hidden gem' for me) - and for the price it was offered, it was a STEAL (plus, it was superior to anything else on the market back in 2019 - and it still has more than enough performance to run anything you throw at it with ease).

I doubt I'll be upgrading to anything newer anytime soon, unless my needs for 3d animation change to the point where I'll have to get something more powerful in a few years time as my studies in 3D animation progress.
I think I'll wait until 2023 or 2024 before I upgrade. That will mark 4 to 5 years for me (I had a previous laptop with Intel Dual core and NV 9600m GT for 9 years before upgrading to this one).
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top