I've upgraded RAM and HDD/SSD in a laptop before, but I am now trying to beef up two new parts of my laptop: my processor and my graphics card.

After a bit of reading, the best I can find with regard to picking a processor is first making sure that the processor is not fixed to the motherboard (mine appears to be connected via a socket and not fixed) and then making sure the socket and RAM compatibility match my current processor.  Is there more to it than that to ensure the upgrade works properly?

As for a graphics card, I'm looking at an external one.  I have a spare PCIe slot and am getting an adapter to connect the graphics card to the machine when I have it at my office workstation.  Are there compatibility issues I should be concerned with between the graphics card and my processor?

Thanks to you nerds in advance.  ;)

aside from memory and hard drives, laptop hardware isnt designed to be upgraded for multiple reasons. 

you're infinitely better off buying a new laptop. 

posted by MontyBrunswick

aside from memory and hard drives, laptop hardware isnt designed to be upgraded for multiple reasons. 

you're infinitely better off buying a new laptop. 

That was my thought, unless he's doing it for the fun of it.  Unless you're laptop is older than 3-4 years, there's not much point in upgrading anything.  An SSD is all most people need to swap - you don't need much horsepower for browsing and watching Netflix.

I render HD video for work, which is pretty intensive, and I do some infrequent gaming, which also seems to be taxing on the system unless I turn down the settings quite a bit.  I've already beefed up the storage with a SSHD (SSDs larger than 512G are still a little out of my ability to justify it) and the RAM.  The processor itself is an Intel i5, which is fine for most things, like you mentioned, but for the more taxing projects, I'd prefer an i7 with a Ghz in the 2.8 to 3.4 range.

Through my digging, I think I found a processor that costs less than a new laptop, and I know the two main keys are for the sockets to match and for the RAM compatibility to match.  I just wasn't sure if there was anything else I hadn't taken into account.

posted by O-Trap

 I just wasn't sure if there was anything else I hadn't taken into account.

many things

1. laptop CPU's are inferior to desktop counterparts. if you're rendering video, you're wasting money by getting laptop chips. They're designed to be efficient/power conscious, not for heavy lifting. buy a desktop rendering machine. A desktop i5 would run laps around a laptop i5 and be cheaper. if you go this route, look at ryzen-based machines. they have more cores than equivilent intel chips and they're cheaper.

2. the cooling solution in laptops are specifically designed to cool a chip with a certain wattage in mind. generally speaking, better processors in a specific generation will consume more power and thus generate more heat. therefore, if you drop a new cpu in a machine and don't upgrade the heatsink, you risk the chip running hot and throttling so it stays under it's tjmax. the increased wattage/throttling might result in a slower processor than the one you were replacing in the first place. Also the motherboard may not be designed to handle the increased wattage drawn by the cpu package, and eventually warp/fail. furthermore, you are extremely likely to destroy the heatsink trying to get at the cpu. they aren't designed to be removable and they usually cool mulitple components besides just the cpu.

3. Hypothetically the new cpu would work in the board but you can't guarantee that it will. there's a reasonable chance the bios has locked out all cpu's except specific ones.

4. you'll obviously void any warranty left on your computer by tearing it apart and replacing crucial components. windows is likely going to deactivate as well because the guid is very likely to change since you're swapping a critical component. so in other words you probably need to factor in the cost of a new windows license as well.

posted by MontyBrunswick

many things

1. laptop CPU's are inferior to desktop counterparts. if you're rendering video, you're wasting money by getting laptop chips. They're designed to be efficient/power conscious, not for heavy lifting. buy a desktop rendering machine. A desktop i5 would run laps around a laptop i5 and be cheaper. if you go this route, look at ryzen-based machines. they have more cores than equivilent intel chips and they're cheaper.

I've actually considered this.  Were it not that I had to travel for work as much as I do, I probably would have gone this route.

Having said that, I was just looking at one of these NUCs.  Given their size, they would seem to be fairly portable, so long as I'm willing to bring my keyboard (Logitech G710+) and my mouse (an ancient Logitech Marble Mouse).  That doesn't solve the issue of needing a larger, hi-res monitor/screen, but I usually end up having to find an alternative to that anyway, since I end up using two screens when traveling.

In any case, I came across an Intel NUC with a built-in i7 which tests in the 3-4Ghz range.
 

posted by MontyBrunswick

2. the cooling solution in laptops are specifically designed to cool a chip with a certain wattage in mind. generally speaking, better processors in a specific generation will consume more power and thus generate more heat. therefore, if you drop a new cpu in a machine and don't upgrade the heatsink, you risk the chip running hot and throttling so it stays under it's tjmax. the increased wattage/throttling might result in a slower processor than the one you were replacing in the first place. Also the motherboard may not be designed to handle the increased wattage drawn by the cpu package, and eventually warp/fail. furthermore, you are extremely likely to destroy the heatsink trying to get at the cpu. they aren't designed to be removable and they usually cool mulitple components besides just the cpu.

This is really helpful.  I'm assuming they've gotten better at this over time, as well.  My last laptop, the ASUS ROG g73, had an early-generation i7 and an at-the-time strong dedicated GPU (Nvidia GTX Geforce 540M).  For about five years, I never had an issue.  Now, it seems like I have to clean the fans every other month if I'm using it regularly.  On the plus side, it still works like a champ (sans the battery, which is shot) as long as the fans are working, despite being eight years old.

It was great for traveling and still being able to do what I needed it to do, for the most part.  It was huge, and probably the least portable "laptop" I've ever seen, but it worked.

With regard to the above NUC, I'm guessing the cooling system is sufficient for that level a processor, since it comes stock.

posted by MontyBrunswick

3. Hypothetically the new cpu would work in the board but you can't guarantee that it will. there's a reasonable chance the bios has locked out all cpu's except specific ones.

I hadn't even considered that.  Another vote for the NUC, probably.

posted by MontyBrunswick

4. you'll obviously void any warranty left on your computer by tearing it apart and replacing crucial components. windows is likely going to deactivate as well because the guid is very likely to change since you're swapping a critical component. so in other words you probably need to factor in the cost of a new windows license as well.

I bought the current laptop from a friend about three years ago.  He'd only had it for a couple months, but he wasn't getting any use out of it, which is why he sold it.  As such, the warranty isn't an issue.

Also, I use Linux for most of what I do these days, so Windows isn't a problem for the most part.

posted by O-Trap

I've actually considered this.  Were it not that I had to travel for work as much as I do, I probably would have gone this route.

The new i7's are a quantum leap forward because intel doubled the cores.

You probably won't like this advice, but it's your job and time is money.   Dell XPS 15 - 6 core i7 and discrete graphics card for about $1450 (promo right now for 17% off).  Also can have upgrade to 32GB ram if that's a bottleneck for your video rendering.

Also, if you itemize I think you can deduct the machine cost as an unreimbursed business expense (but don't quote me on that).

And to Monty's point.....have you considered a powerful desktop at home to do your rendering, and then remote connect to it when traveling?  Not sure how that would work for video rendering, but my understanding is it's quite effective for spreadsheets/big data crunching.

posted by gut

The new i7's are a quantum leap forward because intel doubled the cores.

I'm coming to realize this.  The i7 I had my eye on is a Gen. 6 or 7, and even its base frequency is SEXY.

posted by gut

You probably won't like this advice, but it's your job and time is money.   Dell XPS 15 - 6 core i7 and discrete graphics card for about $1450 (promo right now for 17% off).  Also can have upgrade to 32GB ram if that's a bottleneck for your video rendering.

I'm generally cheap, but I may have to bite the bullet on something like that soon.  When I originally bought the Asus ROG g73, it was about $1700 -- this was back in early 2011.  The fact that it still runs about as well as a standard computer, and even above average on a few tasks, is encouraging, but between it and my current machine (a pretty ho-hum HP), there just aren't enough horses in the stable anymore.  Thanks for the recommendation.

posted by gut

Also, if you itemize I think you can deduct the machine cost as an unreimbursed business expense (but don't quote me on that).

I do also still run a small, technically still active, business from my house as well.  If I can't write it off for my day job as an unreimbursed business expense, I'm sure I can do something else with the home-based business.

posted by gut

And to Monty's point.....have you considered a powerful desktop at home to do your rendering, and then remote connect to it when traveling?  Not sure how that would work for video rendering, but my understanding is it's quite effective for spreadsheets/big data crunching.

Embarrassing little tidbit: Since I'm the only one who uses a computer in our house, we've still never had home Internet, and I use my hotspot for all my Internet needs.  It's always been fast enough for what I do over a network connection.

That was actually what appealed to be about this NUC (which I bought last week).  Seems small enough that I can take it with me.  If I'm staying in a hotel, I can usually just use the television as a monitor.  They all have HDMI ports these days.  NUC has a place to add my 2TB SSHD and my two 8G RAM pieces (and I confirmed that it takes DDR4, which mine are).  The processor being an i7 with a 3.5Ghz base frequency got me all hot and bothered, too.  Wouldn't need to worry about remote work or getting Internet (or whatever delay would result in having network relay points).

In the short order, I'm guessing it'll do what I need.  Whether or not it'll be an adequate long-term solution, I'm not sure.  My next two purchases will probably be a portable monitor and a more portable keyboard.  This one is fun, but it's pretty damn big, and most laptop bags aren't long enough.

Having said that, it has crossed my mind to just get.  I used to do something similar when I worked for a marketing company here in Akron and had a work computer.  I'd use TeamViewer to get into it after hours.

posted by gut

The new i7's are a quantum leap forward because intel doubled the cores.

They aren't out yet. The productivity king right now are the Ryzen chips. You can get a 8core/16thread chip for cheaper than an Intel 6/12 chip. It's a better buy overall (for now)

This popped into my Google Feed this morning. 

Dear lord, that's fast.

http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i7-9700k-8-core-cpu-review-performance-detailed/amp/

posted by MontyBrunswick

They aren't out yet. The productivity king right now are the Ryzen chips. You can get a 8core/16thread chip for cheaper than an Intel 6/12 chip. It's a better buy overall (for now)

But actually, for video rendering, isn't the gpu a lot more important?

posted by gut

But actually, for video rendering, isn't the gpu a lot more important?

If he were utilizing GPU encoding the processor in the system would have a negligible effect on render times.

If he's doing CPU encoding the additional cores would be significantly better to have than the higher clock rates on Intel chips.