Looking for laptop recommendations? A primer.

[Schadenfreude]

You want a laptop!

But where to begin?

Well, being in the same shoes myself recently, I've researched what is out and it can be confusing - what's the difference between i5-2410 and i3-330? Nvidia and Intel HD graphics, etc. I've tried to help (some would say trolled) the notebook forums and I see several of the same questions come up, so I'm here to help(or troll) - so let's begin!

Well first start with some basic ground rules.
- I will assume that you're looking for a laptop to use as your primary PC
- For the most part, the advice I will give out will be based on a budget/value as a factor
- The post I've given is advice, not fact. If there are incorrect assumptions or something that you don't agree with, please let me know

Laptops are the complete package in themselves - which is distinctly similar to, and different than, desktop PCs.

On your desktop:
- You don't like your computer chip(CPU)? Replace it!
- You want to upgrade your videocard(GPU)? Sure!

You can't do that on laptops. You can only change the storage(HDD) and memory(RAM) on most laptops unless you're very technically proficient - on some you won't even have that option (Macbook Air, Samsung 9 Series, etc.). Also something else to consider on laptops are the display/keyboard/speakers; after all, they all come permanently attached so you'll have to like what you get.

Moving on, Laptops are more expensive than desktops:

1. It's a laptop
2. It can play current PC games at/near max settings
3. It's under $1k USD

Pick 2. The's the gist of it. While laptops have been getting closer in terms of value-per-dollar to desktops, we're still talking about almost a straight 2-to-1 ratio (or more) in favor of desktops here. As a laptop gamer, compromise will be the name of the game; a $700 desktop that you can put together will easily outpace a $1400 laptop.

That's not necessarily a bad thing; after all, for the 90% of the computer-using populace, gaming on 1920x1080 on 16xAA with ultra settings isn't a priority. If you're looking to use you laptop as a general-use machine (surfing the web, word-processing. watching Youtube/Hulu) getting hung up on system specs isn't really necessary. Most - if not all - laptops released within the last 3 years will have wi-fi access and will function fine. The only advantage newer platforms may offer may be better battery life, but for all other intents and purposes most general users won't see a dramatic - if any - difference between using Office on a Core 2 Duo laptop vs. a Sandybridge Core laptop.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's start not with "what" but some of the "how", "where" and when:

- How do I know that what I'm getting is the best "value"?
- First and foremost, it's a good idea to know what's good for you - if your computer activity centers around checking email and facebook, a $400 notebook will do you just as good and may last just as long as a $1500 laptop with all the bells and whistles.
- It helps to know what the specs mean (we'll touch on that later) but others on forums like this can help out.
- Poke around: Lurk around the forums for advice, specs and good deals.
- After you do your homework, if you find something you like/think is a good value, it may not hurt to ask on the forums for confirmation.

- When is normally the best time to get a laptop?
- Usually, the best time to buy a new laptop would be during the holidays (Nov-Dec), around Black Friday. Another time would be during the back-to-school season (Jul-Aug) as well. While this would take some amount of know-how, there normally are fairly decent sales when a spec upgrade comes around as well.

- Where do I go for good value?
- Go directly to the source if you can. You can configure and buy laptops from makers like Dell, Lenovo, Apple and Sony; if you get the same laptop from Fry's or Best Buy, you're getting 1 more middleman - and the extra costs - in doing so.
- There are well-respected laptop manufacturers that do not sell directly to the public (Asus comes to mind) and you may be able to get a good deal on them. A good 3rd party retailer would be online vendors like Amazon and Newegg.
- If you're simply looking for a good solid laptop and not necessarily the newest and the fastest, outlet/refurbished units are a solid option; Oftentimes they're brand-new units that are factory reconditioned to spec, and offer a great deal regardless of time of the year. Only caveat is that they are first come/first serve with limited stock so check frequently for what you are looking for.
(BTW, all the laptops in the above picture are refurbished or scratch/dent units)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's go onto each part of the laptop, I'll list a mini-table of contents here:

- SIZE/DISPLAY/SOUND
- CPU/GPU
- STORAGE/MEMORY


SIZE/DISPLAY/SOUND

Next, let's consider the laptop size. Laptop sizes are measured using the display size. As of December 2011, here are current laptop display sizes/resolutions, the most common ones bolded.

- 11.6": 1024x600
- 12.1"/12.5": 1366x768
- 13.3": 1366x768/1440x900/1600x900/1920x1080
- 14": 1366x768/1600x900
- 15.6": 1366x768/1600x900/1920x1080
- 16": 1366x768/1600x900/1920x1080
- 17.3": 1366x768/1600x900/1920x1080
- 18.4" : 1920x1080

In considering your laptop's size and resolution, we want a good balance: smaller laptops with lower resolution may not be able to show an entire webpage in its screen. Conversely, if the resolution is much too high on a small screen, you're going to have trouble reading regular sized fonts.

- The lowest display (1366x768) is the most abundant offering for most display sizes. Simply put; I'd recommend that display at no bigger than 14" but if there's an option for a higher-resolution display, take it. You can always turn down the default resolution but won't be able to turn it up.

- Small sizes (12.1"-): Portability>Functionality. They're typically netbook territory, which also really under-powered for the most part. 99% of the times I'd say avoid as a main system due to its cramped keyboard and really small screen; if you're looking at this size I'd strongly recommend looking at Tablets as a valid substitute as tablets that cost $200 come equipped with high-quality displays that are hard to find on even the higher-end laptops. For extended typing I personally would invest/suggest a external keyboard anyway so not having an attached keyboard is a moot point as well. Systems of this size can stay in your bag and be carried with ease.

- Mid-sizes (13.3"-15.6"): Portability=Functionality. They're the most popular sizes, and for good reason. There's a lot of good models to choose from with solid specs. I'd say the optimal sizing for a laptop would be 14", but there are sleek 15" systems designed for mobility and 13" options with enough processing power to satisfy most people. Systems of this size may be a little big for daily carry, but still can be done so (esp. the 13"/14" sizes) with little discomfort. There are new systems coming out with bigger displays (14") on smaller overall dimensions (about the same as a 13.3") - it is a newer feature so it may carry a premium and at that size the keyboard is still a bit cramped.

- Large sizes (16"+): Portability<Functionality. They're called "desktop replacements" for a reason - usually they have more bells and whistles (better quality speakers, displays, better specs etc.) available as options, but portability takes a real hit - both in its physical bulk and diminished battery life.

- Going from sight to sound - I will be brief on this topic; for the most part, laptop speakers are weak, especially on the smaller sized laptops. There is a newer trend of makers incorporating brand-name speakers onto their systems, but it's a recent trend and it only makes a difference on systems 14"+ IMO.

CPU/GPU

Moving to the CPU, there's really only 2 big players in this market: AMD and Intel.

- Intel's current offering for computer chips are the "Sandy Bridge"(SB) cores, broken into 3 categories: i3/i5/and i7. They do not expressly say "Sandy Bridge" but keep their old Core i3/i5/i7 labeling on the system. The easiest way would be to look at their model number: if the CPU listed is an i3/i5/i7-2XXXM, then it is SB. For example, a i5-2410M core is a SB core, i5-430M is not. If you're looking purely at processing speed, this is it.

- AMD's current offering is called "Sabine/Llano" and comes in 3 categories as well, A4/A6/and A8. The CPU itself is not as fast as Intel's offerings out of the box - but the bundled videocard is a much better option than Intel's, hitting a very good balance for someone on a budget.

Which brings us to the GPU - also commonly called "videocards". There's 3 big players in the market at this time; Intel, AMD, and Nvidia.

- Intel videocards are called IGP's - they come pre-bundled with the CPU already, and traditionally they do the bare minimum so the laptop can function (so in another words, no gaming). Having said that, with SB CPU's Intel has improved the IGP significantly compared to the last gen iteration and gaming on low setting is a possibility now, but it's not as powerful as AMD's IGP.

- AMD makes both IGP and discrete GPU(dGPU) units. "dGPU"s are independent GPUs not "pre-bundled" with the CPU, aimed for power-users: videogamers, visual media creators, etc. As previously mentioned, the new AMD line CPUs aren't as powerful as Intel's CPU but at the same time, the GPU/Videocard bundled in AMD's new chipset is very powerful for a pre-bundled set. It's a "jack-of-all-trades but master of none" scenario.

- Nvidia is a well-known dGPU maker, and competes with AMD. Since AMD makes both CPUs and GPUs; a lot of times, AMD systems come bundled with AMD parts and Intel systems may be bundled with Nvidia(Geforce) dGPUs.

As far as dGPUs go, both Nvidia and AMD are well respected and there's no clear winner in terms of performance. As a dGPU is an additional feature not necessary to the laptop's basic functions it does add a premium for laptops equipped with one. I will add a reference link at the end of the post.

STORAGE/MEMORY

- Newer laptops typically come with 4 gigs of DDR3 RAM. Most users rarely use/need the max amount and can be easily replaced on most models for cheaper, so I wouldn't necessarily advocate an upgrade up front.

- Now, there's a new kid on the block for data storage (commonly called a hard-drive) called SSDs: they're more stable, much faster (much, much more), and very, very expensive. In upgrading components for laptops, this would be the first recommendation for a noticeable boost in performance, but at current rates expect to pay around $90 for 64Gigs. UPDATE 12/07/11: As with all gadgets we are seeing the prices trickle down, and you might be able to get an 128 Gig SSD as low as $130. But beware, there has been a recent rash of drive failures due to faulty software. It is getting hashed out, but it's not quite 100%; if you want one of these guys - I know I do - I would recommend waiting a few more months until everything is hashed out, and proceed with caution.

- On the regular ol' HDD side, you can get 500 Gigs for around $70. Most laptops under $1K come bundled with HDDs, usually ranging in size from 320 to 750 Gigs, and they do their job well.

- One more thing; most big vendors such as Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. have two separate laptop lines; one for business, another for the general public. The business line laptops may have comparable specs as their home versions, but it costs more. What gives? It is mainly due to the build quality - generally speaking , business laptops have better build quality and will be more durable in the long run. I've also heard that customer support for business class laptops are much better as well.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So that's that. For people looking to do more research, here's a few references:

General Info
Anandtech Mobile
Engadget Laptops
Notebook Review Forums
CPU/GPU Comparo's
Mobile CPU Benchmarks
Mobile GPU Benchmarks
Good deals and outlet offers
Anandtech Hot Deals
Dell Outlet
Lenovo Outlet
Sony Outlet

 

[Schadenfreude]

Reserved for space

 

[jamiev]

My son is a 2nd year imaging science major ..lots of math, science and programming courses. His laptop is 5 years old and fading fast. Any recommendations for me? It will likely be his xmas present..thanks

 

[ThatsABigOne]

My son is a 2nd year imaging science major ..lots of math, science and programming courses. His laptop is 5 years old and fading fast. Any recommendations for me? It will likely be his xmas present..thanks

What budget? And what screen size does he want, and also, what battery life?

 

[HumblePie]

Right now, unless you want the absolute most powerful laptop out there, the best bang for the buck is an A6-3400m or A8-3500m based laptop. I have post in this forum about my experience with purchasing a 15.6" Gateway laptop for an AMD A6-3400m laptop cpu.

Unlike any intel laptop, and even quite a few AMD laptops, these A series laptops can overclock. Not just a little bit, these things are MONSTERS when it comes to price versus performance. I was able to overclock the laptop I got to 3.0 Ghz while using less voltages than when was stock for the previous high end settings.

For reference of what that means. The A6-3400m cpu has an average passmark score of 3520. This is a synthetic benchmark of it's relative performance. After overclocking the score for the laptop I got was at 6305. That was almost double the performance. I also still had stuff running in the background and more than likely could have eek'd out as slightly better score if I seriously went after trying to make sure nothing else was running while the benchmark was going. But still considering that the 6305 performance range for passmark is equivalent to an Intel Core i7-2630QM laptop cpu that goes for MORE than I paid for the entire laptop I bought. Yah this little laptop is a monster for performance. Not to mention you can't overclock that latest and greatest Intel laptop CPU like you can this one.

Add in the fact it is lightweight, LED screen, looks great, and can play all modern games. Albeit some settings have to be turned down depending upon the game as the GPU I have is the 6520G radeon cores that are built on to the CPU. That's the other thing with these CPUs. The have discrete GPUs built upon them. It's all included. Some A series laptops go further and include a full fledged discrete GPU that can be used in crossfire mode with the one built on the CPU for even more performance. Those are some serious budget gaming laptops.


So with all this power there has to be a trade off right? I meant even the OP mentioned pick two right? Maybe it's heavy? Nope mine is 4lbs for a 15.6" making it one of the lightest for it's screen size. Maybe the battery life sucks? Nope since I can underclock and undervolt the CPU at will I can make the battery last over 18 hours while surfing just the net and watching videos. Maybe it's ridiculously priced? Yah in the pay less side of ridiculous. I paid only $200 for mine brand new (I got a stellar deal and had a giftcard to use). Most are going for $350-$500 range though right now if you shop around. It runs cool and quite. Mine is also built like a tank so the build quality is seriously impressive on mine. The build quality is going to vary based off the manufacturer though of the laptop. The Gateway I have is phenomenal though with zero flex in the keyboard. It's on par with the laptop I have in my signature.


Seriously I do not see a single draw back for the price I paid for this laptop. It is better than ANY desktop I could build for the same price. It's better than any laptop in the price range. Unless you need the absolute BEST laptop performance for whatever reason then there is no reason to not get an A series AMD laptop. Look at my signature and you can see I'm not some AMD fanboy here. It has been awhile since AMD has impressed me, but they have finally done it again.

 

[Tom]

a 15.6" laptop that weighs 4 lbs, costs $200, and is built like a tank ?

 

[ther00kie16]

a 15.6" laptop that weighs 4 lbs, costs $200, and is built like a tank ?

... old Sony? They are the only ones that ever build ultra light laptops such as sub 5lb 15". an older style might be "built like a tank"

But to be serious, for an imaging major, a 1366x768 15" with a crappy screen probably won't do.

If power is necessary and weight and money are of little object, Dell xps 15 or 17 with the upgraded 1080p screen are marvelous laptops at the right price (there'll probably be a sale or 2 before christmas at <$1000 for a loaded xps). Xoticpc also has some 15" laptops with options for upgraded 1080p screens.

Lastly, do consider apple as their screens and multimedia capabilities aren't to be outdone easily.

 

[HumblePie]

a 15.6" laptop that weighs 4 lbs, costs $200, and is built like a tank ?

Pretty much. Unbelievable isn't it? The only disappointing thing is the 13x7 resolution screen. Personally I like the 1080p screen my XPS has over the Gateway laptop I bought for my girlfriend that I've been describing. Still for her it is perfect. If it had come with a 1080p and an extra discrete graphics card, like a 6750 ATI radeon, for crossfire mode I would have sold off my XPS and bought more of of those laptops.

For the price I paid though I couldn't be happier and neither could she. There isn't a laptop in that price range, hell even triple the price range, that can beat it. So why buy anything else if you are on a budget?

Now if money is no object, and you seriously need some massive portable horsepower from a computer. Or want the damn best gaming laptop for some reason then by all means spend several thousand bucks on the best. The A series laptops will never be the "best" laptops in terms of raw performance. But as they are right now they certainly are the most bang for you buck configuration of laptops. Hell they are the most bang for your buck against most desktop configurations.

 

[beginner99]

Well I still believe anything bigger than 13" isn't really mobile. Yes you can carry it around in a backpack and so forth but to use it on your lap, as a lap-top. not very comfortable with those 15"6 things. Also more than 2 kg is pushing it IMHO too unless you really only use it on a desk or table.

 

[ther00kie16]

Yea... I don't buy your figures.
For starters, notebookcheck reviewed laptops with the a6 and the cinebench scores were worse than even a i3. So I doubt that you can overclock it to meet that of a quad core i7.

The Gateway 15" AMD laptops are all listed at 5.73lb, which is standar, or was. Newer generic 15" laptops from likes of HP and Lenovo are around the 5.5lb mark and Sony's SE series, although at $900, is only 4.2lb so your laptop is a long way from one of the lightest.

Battery life on notebookcheck for a A6 system vs i5 (although the i5 system had about a 15&#37; larger battery)
idle: 6hr vs 10hr
WLAN test: 5hr vs 7hr
max load: 2hr vs 1hr 50min

Sure the integrated graphics is a bit better but according to benchmarks only about 20%. And the difference between 20fps and 24fps, if it's even that much in-game isn't going to matter.

It's much better to spend a bit more ($500) on a i5, or even i3 laptop that's vastly faster and better in about every way. Dell's having plenty of deals and even some outlet deals that could net a Sandy Bridge laptop in the same price range as the Llanos.

 

[HumblePie]

Yea... I don't buy your figures.
For starters, notebookcheck reviewed laptops with the a6 and the cinebench scores were worse than even a i3. So I doubt that you can overclock it to meet that of a quad core i7.

The Gateway 15" AMD laptops are all listed at 5.73lb, which is standar, or was. Newer generic 15" laptops from likes of HP and Lenovo are around the 5.5lb mark and Sony's SE series, although at $900, is only 4.2lb so your laptop is a long way from one of the lightest.

Battery life on notebookcheck for a A6 system vs i5 (although the i5 system had about a 15&#37; larger battery)
idle: 6hr vs 10hr
WLAN test: 5hr vs 7hr
max load: 2hr vs 1hr 50min

Sure the integrated graphics is a bit better but according to benchmarks only about 20%. And the difference between 20fps and 24fps, if it's even that much in-game isn't going to matter.

It's much better to spend a bit more ($500) on a i5, or even i3 laptop that's vastly faster and better in about every way. Dell's having plenty of deals and even some outlet deals that could net a Sandy Bridge laptop in the same price range as the Llanos.

This is the high-end CPU comparison chart.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html


Here is where the A6-3400M falls into that chart if you don't wish to search yourself for it.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+A6-3400M+APU+with+Radeon+HD+Graphics



The A6-3400m comes in at an average of 3520 for a passmark score. That is done at 1.4 Ghz P0 normal state and a 2.3Ghz "boost" state with a 500ms delay between going up and down the various states by default. So that score, while pretty darn good, actually still jumps around a bit. This is for both the A6 and the A8. Which is why right now the A6 is actually scoring HIGHER in the averages of the Passmark benchmarks than the A8. The bouncing around of the clockrates fluctuate the score by a bit.

I just went ahead and set mine to 3.0Ghz and ran the test at max speed using K10stat. Doing so I got a score of 6305. Which is what one might expect when doubling the speed of the CPU through an overclock. The only laptop CPU in the 6300 range on Passmark is the intel i7 2630QM which has a 6335 passmark average score. I'm pretty confident I could even beat that with tweaking around some more. Which makes this laptop when running at full overclocked speeds the equivalent of a much more expensive processor.

This is where the I7 2630QM is on the chart for reference.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2630QM+@+2.00GHz


True the I7 is only running around 2.0Ghz, but the 2630 is not manually overclockable like the A series processors are either.



But since the CPU can be changed drastically, it is not that hard to set it to 500 Mhz either using 0.5 to run on. Which extends the battery life out astronomically if all you care about using the laptop for is surfing the web and reading text. You don't need faster than that if you are. If you happen to need a bit more power, the CPU pops up the clock rating for you automatically for a bit until you don't need the speed anymore. Then it drops back down. The ability to manually change the rates of the power states the CPU can change to as well as the voltages that the processor runs at when at those clock rates allows so much more flexibility when it comes to delivering power and battery life that is NOT found on any Intel based laptop right now.


And the 6520G graphics are MILES ahead of the stock Intel HD3000 integrated graphics. I have no clue where you found some 20% increase from 20fs to 24fps comparison.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4444/amd-llano-notebook-review-a-series-fusion-apu-a8-3500m/11

Even anandtech reviews show much better numbers than that when comparing IGPs. Hell look at the Mafia II chart. 34 FPS for a 6220G vs 17~ fps for either HD3000 setup. That's a 100% increase not a 20% increase.


The A6 and A8 are on par in most benchmarks with i5 at stock speeds for both. They are SLOWER at stock than any of the I7.

But the power of the Llano A series CPU's comes from using K10stat to change all that. You can overclock + undervolt the crap out of them to make them perform on par with the i7s with better battery consumption to boot. Not to mention the are much cheaper. You can adjust their low end clockrates and power consumption to give ridiculously long battery life if you aren't using the laptop for much. Well beyond the limits of anything any of the I series from Intel can provide.

Not to mention the IGP on the A series is way more powerful than anything of the I series from Intel. Hell you need a 520M+ Nvidia discrete GPU to keep up with the IGP from the A series. Which adds quite a bit of cost to any intel laptop offering. Then when you consider some of these A series are being sold with crossfire setups that have either 6750 or 6770 discrete GPUs as well for MUCH cheaper than any intel setup with an nvidia 500 series discrete GPU and there is no brainer here. AMD Llano chips are the clear winner.

The only problem now is finding which one to get. Some are built better than others.

I also take back what I said on the weight. I was going off what it felt like, not the actual weight. It is listed at 5.7lbs when I looked up my model. Which is still lighter than the laptop in my signature and noticeably so. Then again I have the extended battery on mine so it would be lighter without that. But still the gateway would be lighter without it's battery when compared to my XPS without it's battery as well. I'll have to weigh them both when I get home from work with and without batteries.

 

[ther00kie16]

I think it's unreasonable to compare with a 100&#37; overclocked CPU. Sure, then the i7 could be benchmarked on turbo to give much higher results. Point is at stock speeds with turbo enabled, an A6 is at best comparable to a i3 with worse battery life.

The anandtech article is showing an A8 crossfired with a dedicated 6630m to get 6690g2. The 6620 is a bit better but the A6 only has a 6520 which is the one that I'm referencing to be merely 20% faster than a Intel 3000. The article mentions the inclusion of the 6630m dedicated gpu to cost $100 extra, for which you could probably add something like vastly more powerful 540m. And with nVidia, you have better switchable graphics support as well as the fact you are only using 1 gpu at a time as opposed to both in the case of the 6690g2, hence using less power.

The XPS 15 is larger & heavier because it has to cool a full fledged 4c 8t cpu and a much faster video card. There are similarly spec'ed laptops lighter than the XPS 15. Clevo's is 5.7lb and Compal's is 5.5lb. MSI's supposedly is only 5.3lb.

Searching past deals not counting BF, best A8 based laptop was $480 without additional dedicated graphics while there have been multiple $500 i5 laptop deals including thinkpads. The A6 has been as low as $400 but so have i3 laptops.

Edit: Oh and before I found any info, I didn't want to talk about the power draw and heat an overclocked mobile CPU would produce. Someone else was overclocking the A8 to 2.7ghz while undervolted and it got up to 85-90C, which is ridiculous for any CPU. Can't see the battery lasting even an hour if the CPU's using that much juice.

 

[KingGheedora]

Is there anyone who makes laptops similar to Sager/Clevo that are based on A8 or whatever these AMD cpu's are that have better IGP than the Intel i-series?

I just ordered a Sager/Clevo one but not for gaming. I need a laptop with good hardware for low cost and it happened to be that these boutique gaming system vendors offered the best systems that met my requirements. I didn't look into anything with AMD CPU's though.

 

[thedarkwolf]

Humble pie maybe over hyping the A series a bit but they are easy overclocks and good bang for the buck laptops. The best deal on an A8 based laptop at the moment is the HP Pavilion dv6-6135dx Refurbished for $500 that tigerdirect and a few other places have. It has a dedicated 6750M and blu-ray. I maybe biased since I bought one though . I'm just running mine at an easy cool 2ghz since I don't need anymore than that. Just about any current CPU has enough power these days to do what I want but most lappys can't game worth a damn. This one can and does so well.

 

[ther00kie16]

Humble pie maybe over hyping the A series a bit but they are easy overclocks and good bang for the buck laptops. The best deal on an A8 based laptop at the moment is the HP Pavilion dv6-6135dx Refurbished for $500 that tigerdirect and a few other places have. It has a dedicated 6750M and blu-ray. I maybe biased since I bought one though . I'm just running mine at an easy cool 2ghz since I don't need anymore than that. Just about any current CPU has enough power these days to do what I want but most lappys can't game worth a damn. This one can and does so well.

I agree it's a good ban for buck but he's overhyping and indirectly comparing.

Comparing it to a i7 quad core with 8 threads just because he can overclock it to 3ghz and yield similar scores in a worthless benchmark means nothing. Anandtech's article showed Sandy Bridge leaps and bounds ahead in more meaningful benchmarks.

He then praises its battery life not taking into consideration of what a 100&#37; overclock does to it, not to mention it's worse than Sandy Bridge to begin with. Btw, check how much battery life you have with a 100% overclock while performing some tasks. Also, the thread at notebookreview shows 80+C for overclocks of 2.4ghz+ and numerous accounts of throttling/freezing at around 2.6ghz even when undervolted. So I don't know how you could've possibly gotten it to 3ghz. I bet it's not stable at all and would crash 10min into an intense game.

He mistakenly calls the laptop light at 5.73lb and then compares its weight to a mean machine in the XPS 15.

He also mistakenly compares a dedicated gpu in Anandtech's article's chart to Intel's integrated.

The integrated gpu is also good but the A6 is only 20% faster than Intel's. The A8 is about 40% faster than the A6 so that'll be around 70% faster than Intel on paper, which is commendable.

And adding the 6750m and blu-ray at $500 is pretty awesome. Nevertheless, at $500, I'd still rather go for a Dell refurb deal with i5 and nVidia graphics or pay a little more for a new one at places like xoticpc.

Edit:
As an example: Dell has a xps 15 in outlet with i5 and 525m (no blu ray though) for $539. 525m is weak but the 540m, which is somewhat close to the 6750m, is just an overclocked 525m. Lenovo outlet has a ideapad with i5, 555m (faster than 6750m) and blu ray for $616. And my friend recently got a similar lenovo but new with 2630qm for ~$700.

 

[HumblePie]

I agree it's a good ban for buck but he's overhyping and indirectly comparing.

Comparing it to a i7 quad core with 8 threads just because he can overclock it to 3ghz and yield similar scores in a worthless benchmark means nothing. Anandtech's article showed Sandy Bridge leaps and bounds ahead in more meaningful benchmarks.

He then praises its battery life not taking into consideration of what a 100% overclock does to it, not to mention it's worse than Sandy Bridge to begin with. Btw, check how much battery life you have with a 100% overclock while performing some tasks. Also, the thread at notebookreview shows 80+C for overclocks of 2.4ghz+ and numerous accounts of throttling/freezing at around 2.6ghz even when undervolted. So I don't know how you could've possibly gotten it to 3ghz. I bet it's not stable at all and would crash 10min into an intense game.

He also mistakenly compares a dedicated gpu in Anandtech's article's chart to Intel's integrated.

The integrated gpu is also good but the A6 is only 20% faster than Intel's. The A8 is about 40% faster than the A6 so that'll be around 70% faster than Intel on paper, which is commendable. And adding the 6750m and blu-ray at $500 is pretty awesome. Nevertheless, at $500, I'd still rather go for a Dell refurb deal with i5 and nVidia graphics or pay a little more for a new one at places like xoticpc.

WTF are you talking about??? I did no such thing. The 3.0 Ghz is IntelBurn V2, OCCt, and an hour of prime 95 stable. Used to do longer prime95 runs but I was only doing an initial stability test before running benchmarks. It has not crashed once.

Also It is perfectly legit to compare the utmost performance this PC can get to the utmost you can get from other CPUs. This thing running at 3..0 Ghz performs on par in almost every single benchmark I've thrown at it to an i7.

As far as the integrated versus discrete I did no such thing. Did you not look at the link I posted? I even made a very distinct point to have you look at the Mafia II benchmark that this site did in it's review. The 6620G was at 34 FPS and the HD 3000 was at 17 fps. That is NOT a 20% increase. That was NOT the 6630M which was higher still in fps. Read what I post next time.

Beyond the weight, which I was going off memory, I haven't stated anything factually incorrect. But even then I'm about to go weigh the laptop in a bit to make certain that the listed specification weight is correct. It is not always the case, but it could be.



Again, if you are all about running an A6 or an A8 at the stock speeds it will get trounced by I7's and is better in some areas by I5 and even some I3s. There is no denying that. For the price I3's and some slower I5's are about the same cost as the A8. The A6 is a bit cheaper at sub $400 ranged a few times like the one I bought. But the true potential of these A series chips is in their ability to be manually clocked and volted to whatever you can get them to. You can't change the settings for clock rate and voltages on the Intel I series of laptop chips. When you factor THAT in, which again is apart of the total package of a product you are buying, then the A series flat out dominates the I series in terms of bang for buck. The A series competes with the I7's for a fraction of the cost at a 2.6+ overclock.

As for battery life, again the A series has many steppings of speed you can set. Yes, if the laptop ran constantly at 3.0 Ghz, even undervolted, the battery consumption would remain high. I doubt the laptop would last more than 2 hours at full blast. But then again, NOTHING that intel offers would do the same either. Actually nothing out there would have a good battery life if running at full speed constantly and a fast full speed at that. Just isn't going to happen.

But the fact remains that the A series can be stepped down dramatically while still have a massive OC headroom for the higher states of performance. Which means if you aren't using your laptop for much and set the low state for something like 500 Mhz to do what you need to do, the battery is going to last a long fucking time. Longer than any of the I series which can not be lowered to do so.


Structurally speaking, the I series processors from Intel are much better. Flat out better. They obtain more IPC than the A series. However, Intel doesn't allow the consumer full control over their CPU to adjust them based on the need of the user unlike the AMD A series. That ability for a consumer to manually control their CPU is what gives the AMD A series CPU as massive edge in the bang for the buck category. It allows it to flat out dominate Intel in my eyes. Price, performance, battery, heat, and all the important things when considered for a laptop end up being in Favor of AMD because you can adjust them.

 

[ther00kie16]

I'm not quoting all that. But 1hr stable isn't much. After a few months, if you don't get any problems running at that speed as your highest p-state, I'll be surprised. How is it legit to compare 3ghz when you won't be using that speed 99.9&#37; of the time? And have you checked the temps or battery life at that speed? According to reviews, your L502x with a i5 and 540m has 2hr battery life under full load, with a i7 it gets ~1h30m I doubt that Llano would could compete with the speed and battery life. Most of that is moot, however, since you would almost never be putting the laptop under full load on battery. Nevertheless, you can't deny the heat aspect. Although it's true that the 2630qm hits 90C in the L502x, that's at stock voltage while people in the huge owner's thread on notebookreview are getting that high at 2.4ghz while undervolted, a far cry from the 3ghz mark that's supposed to challenge the i7. So unless you have the pick of the crop, in which case list of your voltages and temps, or you are mistaken again and the laptop's throttling during your 1hr stress tests.

Also, I've mentioned that the 6620 should be roughly 70% faster than Intel's 3000, which most games do show, so 100% difference in 1 game doesn't mean much unless that's all you play. In fact, you can take a look at Starcraft II, a more popular game, in which Intel's gpu is 20% faster than AMD's.

But enough of arguing, you are clearly overreacting.

And your claims of AMD dominating in terms of price, performance, battery, heat is outlandish.

Given that the deal posted was for a refurb, I've posted similar Intel refurb deals, albeit with slightly weaker graphics but nVidia mobile graphics is usually highly overclockable since you don't mind that. Anyone can tell you, including yourself, that Intel wins in performance. Battery benchmarks are also solidly in favor of Intel. I can't find a review site posting temperatures of Llano but owners were posting 85+C at only 2.4ghz, which is uncomfortable for performance that's still relatively far from stock i7 quad. Lastly, typical consumers looking for bang for buck will not be overclocking a laptop. That falls under the category of an enthusiast. So although Llano is a good choice for the typical consumer, I think you are wrong for basically labeling it as a Sandy Bridge killer.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking up all this info to argue but for myself. I'm looking for a nice powerful laptop and thought the overclocking ability of Llano may make it appealing. I'm just providing info for others. And with options in the form of a decent gpu, blu-ray and 1080p screen, it looked quite right for me at first. However, I think I'll stick with waiting for a Dell or Lenovo deal.

 

[Schadenfreude]

Structurally speaking, the I series processors from Intel are much better. Flat out better. They obtain more IPC than the A series. However, Intel doesn't allow the consumer full control over their CPU to adjust them based on the need of the user unlike the AMD A series. That ability for a consumer to manually control their CPU is what gives the AMD A series CPU as massive edge in the bang for the buck category. It allows it to flat out dominate Intel in my eyes. Price, performance, battery, heat, and all the important things when considered for a laptop end up being in Favor of AMD because you can adjust them.

I agree - to a certain point. The APU line laptops are capable machines that offer a big bang for the buck for lower-end laptops. Having said that - I doubt that someone who is using this thread would have the technical comfort level to OC the CPU right out of the box.

Also, my belief in the cost-to-performance ratio that I mentioned - admitting that it is edging ever closer - still stands. the APU may do well and looks like Intel's upcoming IGP for Ivy Bridge may be a performer as well, but if a person were to look for a system to game on with a limited budget - for pure-performance-for-the-buck (barring any GC/offers at hand) I'd still recommend a desktop over a laptop without hesitation.

My son is a 2nd year imaging science major ..lots of math, science and programming courses. His laptop is 5 years old and fading fast. Any recommendations for me? It will likely be his xmas present..thanks

With your request, I would definitely consider your son a "power user" - that is, it sounds like he is specializing in those types of courses which may have a powerful computer as a quasi-prerequisite for the course/major; or at the very least, he would be able to put that computational power to good use. You may be better off in telling him that you're looking to purchase a laptop for Xmas, give him the budget you're looking at, and let him decide as he is likely more familiar with what he needs.

Having said that, if you're still intent on picking out a laptop for him, I'd say look for a laptop with an Core-i7 Intel Sandy-Bridge Processor (if that is within your budget; those are the higher-end CPUs so there is a price premium). Videocards are more for gaming (which the Intel is weaker than AMD if it does not have a separate video card) so it's a non-issue for your son's needs; but to be fairly realistic any current-gen laptop will be quite a bit faster than his 5-year old laptop that he currently has so while the Core-i7 is an ideal solution, I'd be fairly surprised if a A6 (that'd be AMD) powered laptop wasn't good enough for your son's needs.

Just glancing over what' available at the Dell Outlet website, Inspiron 17R - N7110 seems like a heck of a deal for the price - it's got a nice CPU for his classload and even a good enough GPU where he may be able to game on it if he so chooses. The only downside is that it is a bigger size (17") so I'd avoid it if he needs to be mobile with it on a regular basis.

Another great deal would be the Vostro 3550 it's got a decent CPU, fairly cheap and it's a business line laptop - I've personally had an older model Vostro and I was impressed with how durable they are.

 

[HumblePie]

To ther00kie16,

As far as temps go, I haven't ran any software to check it while I was doing benchmarks to push the CPU. I'll have to do that later when I can get a hold of the laptop from my girlfriend again. However, I will state that the laptop ran noticeably cooler than my dell XPS when both were running benchmarks against the CPU only.

Also as far as temps go, much of that has to do with the build quality of the laptop manufacturer itself. The TDP of the APU is far lower than that of an I7 though. Which means it is suppose to throw out much less heat.

As far as stability goes. Your comments are delusional at best, or seriously deceptive at worst. Running intelburn v2 for a full set of tests, OCCT, and prime95 while being perfectly stable during it all is the epitome of stability testing. You don't know squat if you said what I did wasn't proof enough of the stability of the overclock I did. I'm calling you out on this one because what you said was FLAT OUT WRONG. No denying or changing your tune on this one. You have zero, absolutely zero flocking clue about what you are talking about here. So don't attempt to say anything further. For flock sake, I hadn't read anything that idiotic in awhile except when I read junk posted by the shills in P&N forum.


You are correct in that many people won't have the desire and possibly the know how to overclock a CPU. Although I wouldn't go that far when it comes to people reading these forums. If I was still working retail and the average family walked in looking for a laptop to purchase, I most certainly wouldn't assume them to have the desire or knowledge to overclock a CPU. But this is a techy geek forum. Many here are a bit above the rest in terms of some technical knowledge. They may not all be geek gods, but I'm fairly certain the majority of forum goers here could figure out how to watch one of the many Youtube videos out there showing in exacting detail how to overclock an A6 or A8 cpu.

You strike me as fanboy shill at the very least with your deceptive and practically flat out wrong arguments.



To Schadenfreude,

When it comes to budget light gaming, I'm not so sure. $300-$400 for an A6 laptop is hard to beat even from a desktop standpoint. The only reason to get a desktop is the bigger screen. But still thinking about putting together a basic desktop you have do purchase all the following.

Case
Power supply
Motherboard
Memory
Video card
CPU
Heatsink
Fans
Hard drive
Optical drive
Monitor
Keyboard
Mouse
Operating System


That is everything you need to have a working gaming computer. Most of those parts average around $40-$60 for "budget" components that are new. Deals can sometimes be found for slightly lower cost. Still the most expensive pieces for a budget system are going to be the Monitor and Operating system for a first time game system buyer. Of those they are going to be around $100 each for the cheaper versions.

Let's say an average of $40 for all the parts, monitor and OS included in that average, and we are still talking about 40x14 = $560 for your average budget gaming PC. Of which we are talking using older and slower graphic cards. Most of which have only a slightly faster speeds than the A6 or A8 built on GPUs. For equivalent cost comparisons at $500 range the A series laptops start coming with additional discrete GPUs built on that exceed the speeds of budget gaming GPUs.

Speaking realistically, I don't see the cost value anymore in putting together your own budget gaming computer. I've put together TONS of those in the past and unless something convinces me otherwise I don't see the need for cheap gaming desktops with the introduction of these A series laptops.


And for those thinking my budget gaming laptop price is strange, here is one using the absolute cheapest items available on newegg. This for something equivalent in performance to the base of an A series laptop.

Case $30
Optical Drive $18
CPU A6-3500m $90
Motherboard $60
(4GB of 2x2GB sticks) Memory $19
500GB Hard drive $84 - wtf is up with the prices of hard drives? These were $40 at one point.
18" LCD monitor for $90
Cheapest reliable Bronze certified Power Supply $45 - although these have MIR often
Cheap $5 mouse - although it won't be all that great for gaming or last that long
Cheap $12 keyboard - again cheap and won't last long. Nor that great for gaming but functional.
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit OEM single license for $100

Sure one can go with a cheaper CPU but they would have to purchase a video card instead. So it ends up being a wash in price. $40 CPU + $40~$50 video card = $90 A6 APU combination.

Yes you can search around, have patience, and find deals for all those parts for slightly cheaper prices. But this was something I whipped together right now using the absolutely cheapest prices available on Newegg. Add in the fact that you have to now BUILD the desktop and install the OS as well. That is a cost I can't calculate, but I'll ask you what a few hours of your time is worth.

So what is the grand total of all those parts I listed? $553...... so my guesstimate was perfectly on target when I stated $540 for a basic entry level gaming desktop computer built with the cheapest parts from scratch. The performance would be the SAME as a $400 LLano laptop and worse than the $500 ones out there. You would need to spend another $50 for a 6750 video card and abit more for the CPU to reach the same performance of a $500 A8 laptop deals out there. Which means you are at over $600 for a gaming desktop to equal the same performance levels of a $500 laptop? And if screen size is concern you can buy a big monitor and hook it into your laptop to have the same feel as a desktop. But you end with with portability and the fact you don't have to spend time putting together a laptop versus building a cheap gaming desktop.


Realistically speaking if you are going for a cheap gaming desktop, I wouldn't bother. Get a Llano laptop for $500 or less and be done with it. Now if you are looking for a mid grade gaming, that changes things. You will get more for your money from an $800 gaming desktop versus any $800 laptops out there. It only goes up from there from performance gains versus price at higher price points in regards to desktops versus laptops. However, I feel this really is the first time in history that laptops compete on the low in for price versus performance against budget desktops.

 

[ther00kie16]

Yea, use hwmonitor to monitor temps & power usage, cpu-z to monitor voltage and check to see battery life when it's oc'ed. If you get me those #s, I'll be better able to judge whether an A8 laptop is worth picking up.

When I questioned your statement of stability it was because you stated you ran the test for only 1hr, which almost anyone on this board would back me up in saying that doesn't prove 100&#37; stability.

Anyway, an A6 with a 6520g, as I said multiple times, is only roughly 20% faster than Intel's igp so it's almost a wash. The A8 with 6620g, I concede, would fall into budget mobile gamer category.

 

[HumblePie]

Yea, use hwmonitor to monitor temps & power usage, cpu-z to monitor voltage and check to see battery life when it's oc'ed. If you get me those #s, I'll be better able to judge whether an A8 laptop is worth picking up.

When I questioned your statement of stability it was because you stated you ran the test for only 1hr, which almost anyone on this board would back me up in saying that doesn't prove 100&#37; stability.

Anyway, an A6 with a 6520g, as I said multiple times, is only roughly 20% faster than Intel's igp so it's almost a wash. The A8 with 6620g, I concede, would fall into budget mobile gamer category.

I was running CPUZ-ID to make sure the clocks were running correctly. I had some problems with making k10stat run through the task manager initially and not setting the correct PState I wanted so I was using CPUZ to make sure I was running at proper speeds while I was doing my benchmarks. I assure you the 6305 passmark score was not a throttled score on the A6 I was testing.

As far as stability, in the old days the only real stability test was prime95. Of which it was highly recommended to run for a full 24 hours but a min of 5 hours. Since then the "stress" part of the prime95 test has changed. What would take a min of 5 hours can be accomplished in an hour. I have that combined with other massively stressing benchmarks like OCCT and IntelBurn v2 which run their full cycles of much less time. Thus most will say that my full set of runs with an hour of prime95 is perfectly 100% stable. Which is why I said you are full of malarky.

The 6520G is not merely 20% faster than the HD3000 intel IGP. You are smoking crack if you think so, because NO WHERE does ay benchmark show that. The vast majority of benchmarks shows much greater than a 20% increase. Benchmarks of the 6520G versus an Intel HD3000 typically show the 6520G at a 80-120% increase in FPS. Not to mention there are features you can enable during games on the 6520G that you can not enable on the HD3000. And when you OC the CPU you also OC the GPU as a result for the A series which makes them even faster.

Again, I have no clue where you are looking at video performance benchmarks for the 6520g to come to your conclusion.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

6520G is at 181 while the Intel HD 3000 is at 209 on the list so you can see 3d mark scores.

If the A series laptops also come with a separate discrete ATI GPU, that will run in crossfire mode for even more graphical performance. Intel does not offer this and to get a better graphical experience you need to have a separate discrete GPU which will not run in SLI or crossfire mode with the intel HD 3000. So basically the built in IGP for intel sandy bridge chips won't be used at all if a discrete GPU is used in the laptop. Except in Optomus setup, which means the HD 3000 will turn on for 2D settings and lower power consumption, but it will turn off while the discrete GPU turns on for 3D apps.

Like the A series IGP, the intel sandy bridge IGP performance also based on the speed and performance of the CPU part of the chip. The Intel HD 3000 IGP runs noticeably slower on an i3 sandy bridge versus a higher end i7. So when you are comparing price versus performance and factoring in the ability to overclock, the A series blows the crap out of the water of any Intel i3 or i5 sandy bridge setup. Every A6 and A8 CPU I've see has all reached 2.6 Ghz at stock voltages at the very least. I haven't seen or heard of a one not capable of that speed at stock volts. That is a couple hundred Mhz over the "boost" state for these chips. It is nothing for an OC. A decent overclock 3.0Ghz is not hard to reach for any of these chips either. Any given A series chip may not reach 3.0 Ghz while also running under volted, but they should all be able to reach it at stock volts or a slight bump in voltage. At which point the A series laptops are going to blow the crap out of the water in terms of performance, especially basic gaming performance, of any Intel laptop for roughly the same price. It's a no frikking brain-er here.

 

[ther00kie16]

Yea, look at the link you posted, it's ~20&#37; for the newest 3dmark scores. And if you look at frame rates on that site, it attests to that. Also, Anandtech's article also states 6520g on the A6 is around 70% performance of the 6620g, which is showing up to 200% performance of Intel's i5 igp in 2 games but only 170% or less in others. So if you factor in that 70% performance of the 6520g compared to the 6620g, it ends up being around 20% faster again, thus proving the 3dmark scores.

Crossifre mode, according to the owners' thread is actually hurting performance for the most part due to poor driver support. So crossfiring actually hurts performance as well as battery life. Another driver issue is the graphics switching, which is inferior to nVidia's optimus.

I'm not saying A6 or A8 won't reach 2.6ghz at stock clocks. In fact, most in the owner's thread are undervolting at 2.4 and 2.6ghz. However, with the fan running 100%, they are still seeing temps near 90C, which makes me wonder how you can get 3ghz without melting melting components or have an unbearably hot chasis. That's why I want to see your voltages and temps at that speed under load.

And as for gaming, there was a deal (now sold out) on newegg for a i5 + 540m for $550 with free $25 gift card. So it's not as if you can't get a intel + optimus in the same price range. But I'm still interested in your temps because the A8 I can get with a 1080p screen at a reasonable price, which is important to me.

 

[HumblePie]

20&#37; 3d mark scores is not a 20% fps increase FFS. You state one and then try to use something else to prove it. You said, it is only 20% performance increase over intel so that is like 24 fps versus 20 fps. That IS NOT THE CASE. It is like 20 fps for intel versus 38 for the A6. One is playable FPS and the other is not.

The netbookcheck bookmarks use the i7 as a baseline for the performance of the intel hd 3000 graphics which is vastly faster than any of the i3s. To see relative performance of an A6 graphics you need to overclock it to i7 performance speeds and then compare. It is much greater than what is listed.

 

[ther00kie16]

20% 3d mark scores is not a 20% fps increase FFS. You state one and then try to use something else to prove it. You said, it is only 20% performance increase over intel so that is like 24 fps versus 20 fps. That IS NOT THE CASE. It is like 20 fps for intel versus 38 for the A6. One is playable FPS and the other is not.

The netbookcheck bookmarks use the i7 as a baseline for the performance of the intel hd 3000 graphics which is vastly faster than any of the i3s. To see relative performance of an A6 graphics you need to overclock it to i7 performance speeds and then compare. It is much greater than what is listed.

The i7 quad is only better in heavily threaded games like Civ 5. Throw those out and you see that the i7 and i5 are pretty close in the Anandtech article. Have you even looked at all the #s? As I've said at least 3 times now, the A8 doesn't manage more than about 70% greater fps, and many times less, than the i5. If you take into account of the A6's 70% ratio compared to the A8 according to the article, you get 1.19 or roughly 20%. Does it look like I'm only backing up fps with 1 3dmark score when i keep giving the #s from the article? Look at more than 1 game.

 

[ther00kie16]

A final question regarding your overclocking. Can't find documentation for it since it doesn't have a proper site. In the owners' thread, someone mentioned only having 2 p states with k10stat. Is that true? If not, how many can you have?