Luke Moll

I was watching the EVGA 1070 SC video, and in the comments someone suggested that even thought the reference and the SC cards performed the same (mean FPS) that the SC version would be more stable (I guess more consistent FPS). Sometimes maximum and minimum FPS are given, but why does no-one use box-whisker diagrams to show the minimum, lower quartile, mean, upper quartile, and maximum? It would represent how 'stable' a card is much more clearly, and save having to use 3 columns for max, min, and mean. And does any benchmarking software report upper and lower quartiles?

Hi All I'm looking at 15" laptops around £500-600, and came across a couple of HP pavilion models that suit my requirements nicely (both i5-6200, 8GB RAM, 940M graphics). Specifically, there are two almost identical models, the only difference being the more expensive one (+£30) has a 940M 4GB and the less expensive one only 940M 2GB. This would mainly be for work and light gaming (CSGO, Skyrim, nothing crazy). The only other thread I found online suggested that the 940M "wouldn't be powerful enough to make use of the extra 2GB". The screen is 1920x1080, and I'd be likely to use a second monitor, also 1080p, if that has any impact on required VRAM. Like I said, the price difference is about £30 (for a product costing ~£550), my question is would it be worth it for my use case? My desktop PC (which I won't be able to use in just over a year, hence the laptop) runs a Gigabyte gtx750 1GB (non-Ti) and I'm perfectly happy with its performance. Thanks in advance ^-^