Thick Laptops are faster than slim ones?

[MrVon]

I've seen Very thick Dell and Hitachi laptops, but no idea if they actually got more juice than slim ones?

Theoretically if its bigger then they probably fit more stuff in it, e.g. faster motherboard/cpu.

My main concern is to buy Laptiop that is close to desktop by performance. Its for house use only i just like to be mobile if needed.

My other concern for ultra thin laptops is cooling are thin laptops have sufficient cooling to be on 24/7 under constant heavy load?

Below are just example images to give idea what i talking about (this mostly military and police laptops), i speaking of regular laptops.

OR

VS

 

[Sheninat0r]

The two "thick" laptops you linked to are that way because they are for use in very active environments where durability trumps performance. The Dell Adamo, on the other hand, was engineered to be a Windows MacBook Air killer - exceptionally thin and light, but weak.

If you want a thick, beefy laptop take a look at the Clevo X7200. An i7-980X (yes, desktop processor) and dual Fermi should make it beefy enough, no?

Generally speaking though, a higher-performing laptop will have to be thicker, so you are quite correct - your examples were just a bit off.

 

[boran]

It surprises me that the Clevo even has a battery. Those desktop replacements often skip that too.
Anyways, keep in mind that a high performance laptop has to be cooled and that heat has to go somewhere.
Consider getting a desktop + cheap laptop for on the move.

 

[Blain]

Thick Laptops are faster than slim ones?

no

 

[sandorski]

Behold the Power!

 

[Blain]

Check out this Compaq "Portable".
A company I used to work for back in the late 80's produced the plastic case parts and screen for this unit.
If bigger = higher performance, this "portable" should have been a rocket.

 

[corkyg]

"Thick" is primarily for ruggedness. And, with more internal space, it is p'ossible that better cooling would permit a faster CPU. But, that is not a rule - just a possibility. Remember, . . . all generalizations are false . . . including this one.

 

[MisterDonut]

Unless you work on-the-go, I'd go with a desktop + small laptop. Something with Optimus like the ASUS UL series makes for a great portable machine. Of course, this is in reference to Nvidia Optimus and not Apple Optimus (<- HAHA).

 

[DaveSimmons]

And a desktop will be much thicker than any of those laptops -- so it's bound to be fast!

 

[MisterDonut]

@sandorski, how much for that? I'll trade you for a copy of Win95.

 

[mfenn]

And a desktop will be much thicker than any of those laptops -- so it's bound to be fast!

So you're telling me that my company-issued i5 Macbook Pro is faster than the old Dell P4 that came with the office? I've been doing it wrong for the past few months!

 

[MisterDonut]

AFAIK, the MBP is not faster than any P4 system. Took about 5 minutes to open WC3 on a P4....still can't get it to open in a Mac...

 

[MJinZ]

The two "thick" laptops you linked to are that way because they are for use in very active environments where durability trumps performance. The Dell Adamo, on the other hand, was engineered to be a Windows MacBook Air killer - exceptionally thin and light, but weak.

If you want a thick, beefy laptop take a look at the Clevo X7200. An i7-980X (yes, desktop processor) and dual Fermi should make it beefy enough, no?

Generally speaking though, a higher-performing laptop will have to be thicker, so you are quite correct - your examples were just a bit off.

It's a gigantic failure, that's what the Dell Adamo really is.

For monstrous engineering, see Sony Z series. Core i7 Quad Core and dedicated graphics in a thin, light 13".

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...0151&langId=-1&categoryId=8198552921644570897

 

[sandorski]

@sandorski, how much for that? I'll trade you for a copy of Win95.

No idea, just a pic I got from Google Images. I saw some IRL back in the 80's with Single Side 8"(IIRC) Floppy Drives.

 

[mfenn]

AFAIK, the MBP is not faster than any P4 system. Took about 5 minutes to open WC3 on a P4....still can't get it to open in a Mac...

Lol, wut?

 

[TheStu]

AFAIK, the MBP is not faster than any P4 system. Took about 5 minutes to open WC3 on a P4....still can't get it to open in a Mac...

Then you're doing it wrong, Warcraft III, much like many, many other (almost all save Warcraft 1 and Diablo 1 I think) were made dual OS, Windows and Mac OS (9 for older, X for newer)\


Edit: Mfenn beat me to the punch.

 

[zerogear]

 

[zerogear]

It's a gigantic failure, that's what the Dell Adamo really is.

For monstrous engineering, see Sony Z series. Core i7 Quad Core and dedicated graphics in a thin, light 13".

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921644570897

Nah, Sony Vaio Z are all dual core with 4 threads. Even engineering couldn't stuff a quad into that sleek body. :]

 

[MJinZ]

Nah, Sony Vaio Z are all dual core with 4 threads. Even engineering couldn't stuff a quad into that sleek body. :]

Oh you're right, I'm thinking of the HP Envy 14.

The actual chip and socket for the i7 720qm is probably the same as the dual cores, so it's just matter of heat at this point I'm guessing.