Are there any 2 in 1 laptops that can run games?
Nothing.Here’s a review of the 10 best 2-in-1 laptops. You know how many don’t use Intel HD graphics as their primary? One. It’s got NVidia 940m AND Intel HD. And no, the 940m isn’t made for gaming.Do you know why? Because expecting the best of EVERYTHING…. portability, touch, performance, weight, tablet form factor… is unrealistic. Expecting it all for LESS than what you would normally expect to pay for a gaming laptop? That’s crossing over into Entitlement.If you want to play games on a 2-in-1…. here’s how you do it.Purchase a gaming desktop.Purchase your games on Steam.Streamplay your games from your desktop to your 2–in-1 while you are in the house and on the same LAN.Otherwise… if you expect to purchase a “gaming” laptop for under $1000, don’t expect it to be an ultra-light class... or a 2-in-1.
What gaming laptop should I purchase? Is there any within the $700-$900 range?
I advise against buying a “gaming” laptop. You are just gearing yourself up for disappointment, whether you look for gaming performance, battery life, ergonomy, longevity of your purchase a value standpoint, or portability. Something’s gotta give.Your budget suggest that you are looking for “balanced” solution for portable gaming. This is actually going to be the least value should you choose that route. Granted, you might just find yourself a decent i5, low-end to middle-low-end GPU with a SSD, which on paper would “make sense”, only to leave you dissatisfied in the end.Not knowing your circumstances, I cannot really say should you build yourself a desktop for that price, buy a PS4, buy something portable for gaming OR possible studying or any combination of the above, as a decent portable laptop with integrated graphics plus PS4 would run you the same amount as your budget stands. But I’m quite positive that any other option would provide better value for you.
Which is the best laptop with the given specifications?
HP Pavilion 15-au003tx laptop key specs:15.6-inch HD LED Backlit Widescreen display6th Gen Intel Core i5 Mobile Processor i5-6200UWindows 10 Home OS8 GB DDR4 RAM / 1 TB HDDIsland-style Backlit Keyboard with Numeric keypadNVIDIA 2GB GeForce 940MXFast Charge, Charges 90% battery in 90 minutesDigital threaded Design for premium lookB&O play with Dual speakers and audio boost for enhanced listening pleasureEthernet LAN port, DVD RWWi-Fi ac, Bluetooth v4.2 connectivity: Rs.50,990
What is Best Buy's employee discount on laptop computers?
I was looking into buying a MacBook computer and I wanted to know what the price would be once my boyfriend gets a job there (in the tech park of the store). The retail price is around $999. Thanks :)
Linux won everything but gaming, and Windows won in gaming. Why?
Aside from all the irrelevant, emotional and quite frankly complete wrong facts and figures, there is also one rather important technical reason why windows 'won' gaming: Windows simply gives a game all the resources it wants, at the cost of deriving other components from it's resources. This is basically what the DirectXX core does: giving all available system resources to the current active game-application. It leaves only a tiny bit off left-over resources to core os functions.Unix, Linux system design does not permit this kind of resource-grabbing. It does not allow one application to monopolize all the available system resources. Combine this with the dominant position on the desktop market and it was for professional game developers historically an easy choice the make.As for the statement that Linux won everything: I find it rather a bold statement to make.Latest IDC figures (2016) seems to put Windows server market server share around 30% worldwide. This share is in decline for years, but it is still a hefty portion and quite profitable (the only actual thing that really counts in business).And although Android is running on a linux kernel, Os-wise it is a very different beast than your stock linux os distro. As a side note: Google is developing a complete android-replacement: Project 'fuchsia' and its non-linux 'magenta' microkernel. Given the fact that Android utterly dominates the mobile market, and given a possible scenario that Google decides to really push the replacement of Android (a not entirely unrealistic scenario), the future of linux on mobile will be rather bleak, don't you think?Contrary to popular lore, Linux is also not dominating the market of dedicated network devices (routers, bridges, switches, etc). This market is all proprietary.But there is something to say about the amount of linux servers that serve as routing devices, but I would probably place those devices in the Linux server category, rather than count them as a dedicated network device.The same case goes for the console market: there is no dominating linux-based console. Period. Sony playstation system software is a proprietary fork of BSD (not Linux!). All other dominant console systems use all proprietary system software, with the possible exception of the latest xbox console (running a windows 10 variant). So linux isn't even visible in the console market.Like, I said, quite a bold statement.
How long would it take a human being to count to 1 billion one at a time?
You may think it would take a billion seconds. That's 31.7 years. But the answer is not that simple. Take 999,999,999. Unless you can speak really quickly, you cannot say this number in just one second. That's just one unique number, right? Wrong. 9/10 of all numbers you will count will have the same amount of digits.It takes about 2.5 seconds on average to say a 9 digit number so I will use that. It can then be estimated to take 2.5 billion seconds (79.25 years) to count to a billion. You can be more precise and continue down with 8 digit numbers but this is a good upper bound value.Coincidentally, the life expectancy at birth in the US is around 79 years, so if you somehow knew the numbers the second you were born and started counting then, it would take all of your life to count to a billion. This can't happen however. You wouldn't be able to sleep, work, or eat. If you devoted 8 hours to counting, then it would take 237.25 years so your offspring would have to continue your legacy.As a side note, there is a trick to counting to higher numbers without spending too much time. Count to 100, then restart, but keep track of all the 100s you have counted. You can count a number a second now. With 8 hours of counting a day, and using 31.7 years from earlier, it would take 95.1 years.Overall, you would most likely die before you finished counting to a billion, one way or another.
You have $999 to spend but you would prefer to spend that on something else than buying iPhone X. On what would you spend it and why?
If I had 999$ which is approx 64,000INR I would definitely invest it in BITCOIN.The rates are pretty low right now, and with any luck you can buy them at 3200–3400$(since rates are really volatile due to the China's ban on ICOs) They are sure to go up again and hit north of 5,000$ at least by the end of year.I'd never waste that much money on a phone that doesn't even use fingerprint scanner. I feel bad enough for buying a OnePlus five.