Well, is that because of economy or are there other benefits? For someone who's not very computer savvy like me, it would not be my first choice, but maybe I should give it a go.
https://www.techradar.com/news/vide...e-shows-how-the-dual-screen-handset-will-work How the dual-screen handset will work
8GB RAM is overkill? (I've never built my own rig though I like to tinker so may look into it -- out of curiosity, where does one get the OS -- presumably W10 -- for a self-build?)
Yes, I figured expandability would be one of the prime considerations where I'm limited w/ a laptop. E.g. i use a high-end gaming laptop w/ 32GB DDR ram, but I suppose I wasn't sure whether the boost to 64GB-or-beyond (not possible in my machine) would be a noticeable upgrade for my purposes. I am running a home built Windows desktop I7 with all the bells and whistles, multiple drives multiple video cards, etc.. My memory is at 32GB, a helpful hints Control/Alt/Delete, Task Manager will give you a good idea of CPU, but mainly memory usage. Since I have 5 screen I have noticed no lags but noticeably a good portion of my memory is utilized for Google Chrome 2.8Gb, IB X2 1.9Gb, than required incidentals like Malwarebytes 1/2gig, I doubt that adding more RAM will help since I am running a great deal of programs and only utilizing 35% of the 32GB.
FWIW after reading about the Intel NUC's ITT, I actually bought one of the higher-end models (i7-10710U / 64GB ram). My previous setup sounds like it was similar to yours: high-end gaming laptop w/ 32GB running 2-3 external monitors...wanted to know what I was missing by having 32 instead of 64GB. Answer seems to be not much. I'd say performance is a little bit speedier / snappier on the NUC, but nothing dramatic. Heat issues haven't seemed to be an issue thus far with the NUC, which was a concern given small form factor...I guess I wish I'd bought it instead of the laptop since it was like a third the price.
I have a laptop and a desktop. I value the desktop far more: I can put the monitor(s) wherever I want, I can hide the cpu under the desk, I can expand the thing, etc.. Somebody said that Sierracharts doesn't take much computing resources; have you seen their minimum requirements?
I am currently running SierraChart on my desktop with 8GB RAM and an I5 3470. Processor usage on average is 0,5%-2% and RAM usage on average is below 40 MB.