I'm kinda iffy about that Asus, tbh. D: It may be an OK choice for newer games, however I've heard that the APU sucks for DX9 games, which Mabi based on. Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics beats that AMD GPU by 24% in 3DMark05, according to http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-7640G.69836.0.html
And even for newer games, the AMD "dedicated" GPU is not much faster than the integrated HD 4000.
On the CPU side, Intel totally destroys that AMD A8, especially in single core performance (which is the Mabinogi use case). In terms of compute performance, the A8 is inferior to a low-end Intel i3 overall. Considering how heavily Mabi uses the CPU (it basically maxes out a core on my beastly desktop i7-3770K), the A8 would struggle pretty badly. D:
The NVS 5400 is quite a bit faster than the HD 4000 on top of that.
That, combined with the average build quality... makes it a poor choice imo. I mean, it would be fine as a typical throw-away laptop, and if you're lucky, it could last a long time, too.. but I would buy something nicer, especially as a graduation thing. :<
And...
The NVS isn't "underclocked 630m," but rather it's a 630m running at a proper safe speed where stability and long-term longevity is improved. I kind of hate how consumer GPUs, especially the mobile ones, run above sensible speeds in order to lure consumers with better benchmark scores. It's why there's so many people complaining that their laptops have dying GPUs. :|
Another option, if you're okay with only having an HD 4000 integrated GPU (at the same cost as a T430), is the ThinkPad X230 line. You basically trade gaming performance for small size. You can also upgrade to a sweet IPS display, which has much better viewing angles/colour than a typical laptop screen.. for like $50. If I needed a laptop for school or work right now, it's what I'd get tbh. Although the NVIDIA GPU in the T430 is quite tempting as well.
Oh, and this is an older T series from back when the ThinkPad line was still owned by IBM, but lol:
[video=youtube;-CrpUU3cCPE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CrpUU3cCPE[/video]
Yay for engineering. Good luck doing that with a random HP or whatever. Specs on paper aren't everything.
Here are the GAMING benches for it's slightly faster big brother in competition against an i7 CPU;
Anandtech;
[Image: http://images.anandtech.com/doci/5831/trinity-vs-ivybridge-gaming-new.png]
The AMD APU does better in more graphics - oriented titles, HD 4000 does better in titles where the i7's CPU performance pulls it's weight.
Keep in mind it's an i7 just like the X230.
CPU power; Mabi was made back in 2003 and can run on mid-level CPUs from 2003. Trinity may only be able to carry out about 75% as many instructions per clock in a thread versus the Intel processors, but it's not going to bottleneck the game in the least. I don't know what the problem is on your i7, but my Phenom II picks up to about 60% usage on one core from Mabi and I'm running at a good 40-60fps. (my Radeon HD 4250m doesn't quite keep up with my CPU) And the A8-4500m is slightly faster on the CPU side than my Phenom II n930.
On that note, I'm running Mabi maxed out at 720p on a IGP slower than Intel 3000 HD graphics, let alone Intel 4000 or Radeon HD 7640g.
Her day to day usage won't even begin to strain Trinity either. She's not running high level programs.
As for the 630 vs NVS, like I said, underclocked. The problem isn't the manufacturer speeds of the chips, it is laptop manufacturers who choose to go with the "as thin as possible" and / or can't make a proper heatsink array while using cheap as all get out thermal paste.
Lastly on build quality, I've always found Asus to have good build quality in comparison to most companies out there. Lenovo might be slightly better in their use of a magnesium frame versus Asus's choice in dense polycarbonate, but unless she has a track record of being a clutz, that won't be an issue. Also unlike Lenovo, Asus is a company which I know always provides more than adequate ventilation for their PCs. Not to mention, internal component quality is going to be the same if not better on the Asus.
And that X230 is nearly twice the cost of the Asus. ($695 vs $380.) So twice the cost for what is going to be about the same level of gaming performance and more CPU power than she is going to use. Is it really worth it given her usage and budget scenario where there is no gain in her perceivable performance for twice the cost? Honestly that seems like a losing situation to me.
And for the heck of it, more benchmarks from around the web;
HH
[Image: http://hothardware.com/articleimages/Item1846/JustCause2.png]
[Image: http://hothardware.com/articleimages/Item1846/FarCry.png]
[Image: http://hothardware.com/articleimages/Item1846/Metro.png]
[Image: http://hothardware.com/articleimages/Item1846/batman2.png]
PcPer
[Image: http://www.pcper.com/files/imagecache/article_max_width/review/2012-05-13/gametesting.png]
For the A8, take of 10-15% max off those figures for what you can expect for game framerates (given that the Trinity IGP is most bottlenecked by RAM speed)