Video via USB 3/Displaylink Question

I recently bought a new Core i7 (Ivy Bridge) laptop (Samsung's latest gaming rig) with the thought of ditching my Sandy Bridge Desktop altogether. I do a lot of image editing, multitrack audio recording and video editing (oh, and gaming) and am used to a dual monitor setup. I have grown tired of matching so many audio and video plugins between 2 machines... I also bought a Toshiba Dynadock (connects via USB 3 and uses DsiplayLink drivers) to continue using my 2 Viewsonic Monitors whenever I am using my laptop "as a desktop". The Samsung has a Geforce GTX 675M with 2GB of VRAM which is QUITE snappy. I guess I was naive to think that USB 3 could handle the video throughput of games with high to maximum settings (Arkham City, for example). It can't. Playback/responsiveness is choppy. I haven't had a chance to test out responsiveness with video editing yet. Can I expect the same? It will be a while before I have time to fully load/install Adobe CS5 on it and thought I would ask while I still have a return window on the Dynadock. Thanks in advance!

 

Then I say emphatically - KEEP YOUR DESKTOP! In spite of what the notebook makers would like us to believe, notebooks are NOT good "desktop replacements" or good gaming machines.

It is not about power - but in fact, power is the problem!

The problem is, gaming and graphics editing place huge demands on our systems. Full tower PC cases are challenged to keep the internal heat within normal limits when systems are taxed. To achieve good temps, PC cases typically have multiple large (120mm or larger) case fans moving tons of cool air through the case. PC CPUs have large heat sinks with very fast moving fans. Notebooks don't.

Notebook makers are jamming desktop power into tiny notebook cases and calling them "desktop replacements". Not so! Notebook cases, being tiny and thin are physically incapable of supporting the necessary multiple large fans needed and notebook cases are impossible for the "normal" user to open up for full exposure of the interior for proper and thorough cleaning of heat trapping dust.

Because of notebook's extremely limited cooling capability, "mobile" CPUs are are used in all notebooks. These CPUs are designed to toggle down in speed when temps exceed a certain level. That drastically reduces performance capabilities right when you need maximum performance the most!

Notebooks were and are designed for the road-warrior to stay connected and to create and present PowerPoint presentations. Notebooks are designed to be lightweight, thin, and easy on the battery. Notebooks were not designed to support gamers, CAD/CAE or graphics design work - that is all marketing fluff!

Then of course, what if you want upgrade your graphics? Add more RAM? Add a 3rd monitor? This is all relatively easy (with lots of options) with a desktop, but almost always impossible with notebooks, or at most, very limited options and expensive with notebooks.

My advice is this. If you MUST have mobility, then you have little choice but to get a notebook. But if you are considering a notebook just to downsize the footprint your desktop takes on your desk, put it on the floor and stick with the PC.

 

Thanks, Digerati. I need to put more thought into this after reading your response. The whole point of this exercise was to have ONE machine that I could use at home AND take to work (or on the road) to utilize apps and audio/video plugins that my employer has no budget for. Matching plugins between two machines typically takes weeks to months to complete, as I have MANY. (I am also a bit attached to my not-yet-year-old desktop because it's my very first homemade rig. Specs:Core i7-2600K @3.4 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 1 GB VRAM. Footprint is not an issue here as my tower is already under the desk on wheels.) I am now considering the possibility of keeping the laptop (Specs: Core i7-3610QM @2.3 GHz, 16GB RAM, 2GB VRAM) which has the most brilliant display I've seen on a non-Mac machine and just hooking up one external (2nd display) monitor. Thanks SO much for your well thought-out response. Any thoughts on what sort of performance difference I can expect between these two different generation processors would also be welcome. Decisions, decisions. But the dock is almost surely going back. This is a prime example of the utility of REAL social media. I'm laughing (and pointing) at YOU, Facebook and Twitter.

 

There are too many variables. The GPU, graphics' RAM, system RAM, bus speeds and more all contribute to the "over all" performance of a computer.

If looking at just the CPU, if equal number of cores, I would go for the fastest. But note the graphics on your slower 2.3GHz CPU has twice the amount of graphics RAM. In today's graphics oriented world, that may be the turning point.