• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sony VAIO CW (14" gaming laptop!)

Throckmorton

Throckmorton

Lifer
It seems like hardly anyone on this board is aware of this laptop, because it never gets recommended when someone says they're looking for a 14" laptop with a good graphics card. All I see is ASUS this ASUS that! Maybe it's because the CW has only been around a couple months.
I got mine a couple weeks ago and I love it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16834117970
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...&storeId=10151
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=427692

Pros:
--nVidia GT 230M (slightly faster than a 9600M). In a few months it will have a GT 330M
--Great cooling system. Max CPU temp I recorded over several hours of gaming at was 68°C
--Crisp chiclet keyboard
--Light weight
--Solid build, firm hinge, looks high quality
--1366x768 res is perfect for this smaller screen size
--Battery Care function, which lets you set the max battery charge to some set % to extend its life
--Available big battery
--Good price... starting is about $800 with 230M, $750 with 210M.

Cons:
--Screen has poor vertical viewing angle. You really have to tilt it so it's aligned with your sightline
--No dedicated volume and brightness buttons, you have to use Fn + function keys
 
Chiclet sized pixels... Chiclets for keyboard buttons... And the whole thing is flimsy, like a Chiclet.

For $800, get a 15 incher with much better features and build quality, methinks! :-D
 
hans030390 said:
Because for $100-200 more, you can get an ASUS that is considerably more powerful (GT 260M).
Click to expand...

And on 6-cell batteries, the Sony offers over TWICE actual battery life (almost 5 hours vs. 2 hours for the Asus at idle). By Asus I assume you mean the G51vx right now on newegg. Multiply these numbers by 1.33 for the extended battery.

Since I do need a battery life of 4 hours, the Asus for now is off my list of consideration. The Sony offers perhaps the best balance of performance vs. battery life, other than the amazing UL series.
 
I would be thinking more of the X83VP series if you want gaming (which I do, and why I ordered one for my son this morning). Sony was our other choice though- FW520 is a very well specced machine, just too big for my 11 year old to lug around all the time.

I believe ATI 4650 is in the same league as GTS230M/240M. If you're willing to drop to GT210M, the UL80 offers something like 9-14 hours of battery and hybrid graphics.

Asus are excellent values in gaming laptops, which is why they are always being talked about.
 
jimhsu said:
And on 6-cell batteries, the Sony offers over TWICE actual battery life (almost 5 hours vs. 2 hours for the Asus at idle). By Asus I assume you mean the G51vx right now on newegg. Multiply these numbers by 1.33 for the extended battery.

Since I do need a battery life of 4 hours, the Asus for now is off my list of consideration. The Sony offers perhaps the best balance of performance vs. battery life, other than the amazing UL series.
Click to expand...

And the ASUS with the GT 260M will play twice as many games at an acceptable frame rate.

I don't consider anything with a GT 230M a "gaming" laptop, so to me the argument doesn't make any sense anyway (my previous laptop had a 9650M GT and while it handled a decent number of games, I would never consider it a machine built for gaming). The Sony CW is a mid-range laptop by all considerations. Decent battery life, decent performance, decent price. The reason a number of people (like myself) suggest several ASUS laptops is because they excel at one thing while performing worse at others, and that one thing is what we're looking for. My UL30A has an abysmal X4500MHD onboard graphics chipset, but the real-world battery life is around 8-10 hours. The G51Vx has great performance (for the price), but lacks in the battery life department.
 
Of course, the CW is not purchaseable now and will get a i3 and nvidia 330m pretty soon. In the end though, it's all about usage scenarios... I need battery life to last X hours and performance to exceed Y (given that I already have a gaming PC), and Asus's current offerings can't satisfy both. Now, if the UL is getting a CPU upgrade and a 240m equivalent that I don't know about... (cmon asus, a market's waiting for you!)

The ULxxvt is an amazing product, but I think asus needs a higher-tier similar solution with hybrid graphics.

Personal note: I'm currently upgrading from THE first gen MacBook pro (overheating 1.83 core duo and ATI graphics) so my standards for acceptable mobile graphics are a bit ... Lower.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, I've seen too many Sony laptops fall apart. . . . literally . . . fall apart.

Mentioning Sony + gaming in the same sentence should be punishable by death . . . . slow. . . and painful . . . death =.=

Thats my biased, endorsed by Nazi's everywhere, dreams of sex with Stalin in a pink tu-tu induced lop-sided opinion. 😵 BARKEEP !! Another round of turpintine if you will.
 
Last edited:
jimhsu said:
And on 6-cell batteries, the Sony offers over TWICE actual battery life (almost 5 hours vs. 2 hours for the Asus at idle). By Asus I assume you mean the G51vx right now on newegg. Multiply these numbers by 1.33 for the extended battery.

Since I do need a battery life of 4 hours, the Asus for now is off my list of consideration. The Sony offers perhaps the best balance of performance vs. battery life, other than the amazing UL series.
Click to expand...

I don't think people buy Asus gaming laptops in hopes of getting great battery life. Gateway puts 9-cells in their gaming laptops, which is nice.
 
slugg said:
Chiclet sized pixels... Chiclets for keyboard buttons... And the whole thing is flimsy, like a Chiclet.

For $800, get a 15 incher with much better features and build quality, methinks! :-D
Click to expand...

I think you're missing the point-- the smaller size is a FEATURE not a downside.

As for build quality, the CW is as good as it gets short of a unibody aluminum Macbook. Everyone who has reviewed one, played with one in a store, or bought one says the same thing.
 
CurseTheSky said:
And the ASUS with the GT 260M will play twice as many games at an acceptable frame rate.

I don't consider anything with a GT 230M a "gaming" laptop, so to me the argument doesn't make any sense anyway (my previous laptop had a 9650M GT and while it handled a decent number of games, I would never consider it a machine built for gaming). The Sony CW is a mid-range laptop by all considerations. Decent battery life, decent performance, decent price. The reason a number of people (like myself) suggest several ASUS laptops is because they excel at one thing while performing worse at others, and that one thing is what we're looking for. My UL30A has an abysmal X4500MHD onboard graphics chipset, but the real-world battery life is around 8-10 hours. The G51Vx has great performance (for the price), but lacks in the battery life department.
Click to expand...


There's only one 14" laptop with a better graphics card, the Lenovo Y450 with 240M. But that laptop looks pretty low quality to me.
 
Plus one for the smaller size. I for one do not want to think about lugging a 15" or larger to class or to work every day. Which I will tempted to do if the battery life is anything respectable (i.e. better than 2 hours). Which is all but required for the laptop to be useful given that I already have a gaming desktop. This is also incidentally why the UL30vt is such an attractive option despite the significantly worse graphics solution (but still far better than a Radeon Mobility X1600).

Any references for the CW build quality? I have mixed experiences with Sony products.

As again, your personal usage case prevails.
 
What modern laptops have the Radeon x1600?

If you're looking for something with better-than-average graphics, I'd go for the Radeon 4200/4100.
 
jimhsu said:
Plus one for the smaller size. I for one do not want to think about lugging a 15" or larger to class or to work every day. Which I will tempted to do if the battery life is anything respectable (i.e. better than 2 hours). Which is all but required for the laptop to be useful given that I already have a gaming desktop. This is also incidentally why the UL30vt is such an attractive option despite the significantly worse graphics solution (but still far better than a Radeon Mobility X1600).

Any references for the CW build quality? I have mixed experiences with Sony products.

As again, your personal usage case prevails.
Click to expand...

http://www.digitaltrends.com/product-reviews/sony-vaio-cw-series-notebook-review/

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc...s-vpccw1s1e-r--655984/review?src=rss&attr=all

http://www.techshares.net/2009/11/sony-vaio-cw-series.html <-- not sure what they mean by small keyboard. Maybe the lack of extra keys along the right side?

Best Buy sells them so you can check them out there. That's what I did, and I was sold. I usually avoid Sony products because of the rootkit debacle but I had to buy this.
 
Decembermouse said:
What modern laptops have the Radeon x1600?

If you're looking for something with better-than-average graphics, I'd go for the Radeon 4200/4100.
Click to expand...

An old one that I'm trying to sell on Ebay. Specifically, a 15" Macbook pro with 1.83 Ghz Core Duo.

As that is the laptop I currently have, that is also my reference point for any new purchase.

I would go for those new 15" MBPs, but unfortunately the one with discrete graphics is a thousand dollars over my current budget. That and the fact that the 9400M in the cheaper (actually affordable) 13" and lower end 15" models is actually a downgrade. The battery life is very nice, compared to the ~90 min I currently get while only surfing in Windows.
 
Last edited:
I don't consider a P7450 + 230m a gaming laptop. Its a low end one at best. Just my opinion though.
 
Throckmorton said:
I think you're missing the point-- the smaller size is a FEATURE not a downside.

As for build quality, the CW is as good as it gets short of a unibody aluminum Macbook. Everyone who has reviewed one, played with one in a store, or bought one says the same thing.
Click to expand...

My point is that you're losing so much for that extra inch shaved off the screen size. I agree, smaller laptops are nice to have (I'm on a 12 inch right now), but if you want a gaming laptop, there won't be too much of a difference in portability between 14 and 15 inches. I think the performance-to-dollar ratio of a 15 inch outweighs the portability advantage of a 14 inch.

12 or 13 inch gaming laptop? Then I think it's worth the price premium. I have yet to see one, though!

As for build quality, the unibody Macbooks are really nice, but don't forget Thinkpad T and X series. Two completely different design philosophies, but both of them are the best in the industry as far as I'm concerned. But hey, I'm just one voice 🙂
 
slugg said:
My point is that you're losing so much for that extra inch shaved off the screen size. I agree, smaller laptops are nice to have (I'm on a 12 inch right now), but if you want a gaming laptop, there won't be too much of a difference in portability between 14 and 15 inches. I think the performance-to-dollar ratio of a 15 inch outweighs the portability advantage of a 14 inch.

12 or 13 inch gaming laptop? Then I think it's worth the price premium. I have yet to see one, though!

As for build quality, the unibody Macbooks are really nice, but don't forget Thinkpad T and X series. Two completely different design philosophies, but both of them are the best in the industry as far as I'm concerned. But hey, I'm just one voice 🙂
Click to expand...

Comparing 14" 16:9 and 15.4" 16:10 you might have a point, but the current 15.6" 16:9 laptops are huge. With this laptop I can fit a mouse on my bamboo Lapdesk. WIth a 15.6 that might be completely unrealistic.

I think you're exaggerating the price premium. What's the best graphics card you can get for $800-900 in a 15.6"? Maybe something 20&#37; faster but not a drastic upgrade.
 
IlllI said:
or for less, could get this one http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1791107
Click to expand...

The 260M is about 2x as powerful as the 230M. With the 240M = 330M, the performance delta drops to about 70-80&#37;. (http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTS-260M.20055.0.html, http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-240M.17654.0.html, http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-230M.17646.0.html, http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/275571-33-260m-230m).

Several things that could close the performance gap:

1. Resolution. If you like gaming at native, 1920x1080 > 1366x786 eliminates over half of the performance advantage (very roughly, and depends on the game).
2. Overclocking. A 20% overclock on the 230M is easily doable (http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1469810). It might be difficult to do the equivalent on 260M not because of headroom but because of heat issues (http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=409771, http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=436998).
3. Turning off extraneous game features.

Just things to consider. For desktop replacement gaming, the 230M is still unsatisfactory.
 
Last edited:
Throckmorton said:
The 330M will probably be about the same performance and the 230M is only 10&#37; slower at the most. I scored something like 5600 in 3DMark06, with a slower CPU too.

There are some downsides to the Asus-- brown casing, Atheros wifi. Looks like a decent option.
Click to expand...

Battery life ... if I wanted this kind of battery life, I would get this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16834115675) which actually has a 240M, not a 130M.

Can you give real life battery life figures for your laptop during various activities? And specify whether you have the normal or extended battery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top