Toshiba vs HP vs Lenovo Laptops

Discussion in 'Digital Darkroom' started by szrimaging, Nov 22, 2010.

  1. I am in desperate need of upgrading my laptop. Currently I am running an older HP workstation class laptop, unsure of the exact specs other than an Nvidia Quadra video card, 17 inch screen, 3GB RAM and 120GB HD. The laptop is about 4 years old.
    I am moving to laptop only for my workspace, and would love to continue use a larger one (i.e. 17 inch screen). Currently I only do photo-processing, but I should be moving into the realm of small video (1080P at 2 to 5 minutes in length with minimal processing.
    I have my eyes on both a Lenovo and HP units with quad-core Intel i7 processors and dual hard drives. But, how does Toshiba compare in quality in their current products. Everyone I know, myself included, has had the screen die on theirs in two years. But, I haven't seen anyone with a newer one to compare notes on that one.
    And, for the most part, the unit will be placed on a desk and just sit there. My netbook meets the needs for most of my day to day mobility needs.
  2. Um,
    And, for the most part, the unit will be placed on a desk and just sit there.​
    Then why are you buying a laptop for this function? No matter what system--Windows, Linux, Mac--you will get much more for the same money, even including a monitor if you don't have one, with a machine made for the desktop. More hard disk, more memory, faster processor (not to worry so much about heat), easier to attach peripherals, and so on and on. Even the all-in-one solutions (the iMac or its imitators in other systems) will give more bang for the buck.
    Let your netbook serve when it will, but don't get a laptop unless that is really what you NEED. I love my laptop, but I wouldn't want to do extensive post-processing on it. It's great in the field, but is inferior on the desktop to even some of my ancient desktop computers that I have relegated to rote tasks like scanning and downloading.
  3. Go with Dell
  4. I think JDM's got it right. If you don't need the laptop for travel a desktop is a far better choice in every respect possible. Much, much more bang for the buck, much better display possibilities, faster, ........... I use a laptop for travel but it stays in the bag when home, absolutely hate it for image processing.
  5. Garrison, I have had too many Dells fail....
    JDM, beleive it or not, after spending many many days trying to justify it, I can't justify the space of a desktop. I even considered an all-in-one unit, then realized bang for the buck wasn't there at all. There are instances where I will still need to move it and be nimble (i.e. video/photo processing on location or nearby coffee shop). As for storage, after years of flipping from desktop to laptop, I have ended up with the pain in the butt that is getting all of my data off of the internal drives on the desktop to transfer from one machine to another.
    In fact, I have spent the last year solely working off my HP laptop and it has been great. The desktop was just way too slow and offered no advantages beyond internal storage. But after a year of completely laptop based work, I couldn't come up with a reason to buy a desktop again. All photos have been moved to external storage and eventually a NAS. And with the power of today's laptops, it just seems silly to buy a laptop and desktop and have that extra clutter.
  6. Zach, toshiba and hp are two of the worst imo. Only the toughbook i'd consider. Perhaps do
    some more research? My best friend has ordered 23 dells in 5 years and only had one bad
    apple and that was nvidia's gpu problem.
  7. My vote would be Dell or Lenovo. I've purchased three Toshibas for business, and they're less than okay. The battery life is non existent, and I've had a lot of unexplained driver problems. Dells are rock solid, as are the Lenovo's. Also had bad juju with Sony, FWIW. And the HP I'm on right now is a PITA. It is always missing some software component or driver, and I get to go fish around to figure out how to fix it each time.
  8. Garrison, this is part of my research....
    Like I said, too many Dells have failed. I have seen probably 4 or 5 of their laptops go down in some bizarre ways.
    This all said, I looked at the failure rates of companies online, and Toshiba came up as the best, and Lenovo and HP were the last (based on 2009 services per unit sold and reported). But then I find another chart that has satisfaction listings and Lenovo is second (Apple being first) and HP somewhere in the middle, and Dell was pretty close to last place. Don't remember where Toshiba faired. Thus, I am beginning to think I can find a chart that lists any company as the best.
  9. Your expeirence with dell is contrary with most others. And your research seems odd as well. I'd like to read your links if
    possible as that just doesn't make sense to me as Lenovo is regarded as a great build but a bit slow. The only thing
    toshiba has going for it is their toughbooks otherwise everything else is box store junk made by a plethora of different
    manufacturers that put toshiba's name on it.
  10. Michael, is that an XP, Vista or Win7 based HP? Just wondering if the OS made a difference or if it really was just HP's problem with how they handle their additions to the OS.
  11. Take some advice from someone with a 34 year career in IT, and the first person in Australia to sell an IBM AT in the 1980s.
    I have always had at least 5 computers at home. There are 5 adults in my family and we have had all the brands. Laptops and desktops.
    As applications became more and more complex, so did good old Windows. But the biggest problem that Microsoft and the Intel brigade had to silve was to make PCs network well. You see Windows....right up to W7 have to be tricked into thinking that remote devices are in fact locally attached. They are also single tasking. This creates potential for software bugs and viruses as most of this networking code is a add on to the core code. Thats why Windows can become unstable.
    Two years ago. my second son bought an iMac. We now have 6 in the house and two with 30' monitors. They never crash, they don't catch viruses and they live to be on a The Internet.. Why is that? Because the underlying code is Unix. Unix was written as a networked operating system from the beginning. Add to that its superior ability to handle graphics without add ons or costly cards, and you have a stable, network happy platform that likes imaging software.
    Got the message? Get a MacBook Pro and you will wonder why you didn't make the switch a long time ago.
  12. MacBook Pro is easily twice the price. The value isn't there.
    I have yet to have a Win7 or XP machine become unstable. The only reason that Mac is more stable than Windows boils down to the closed system architecture and only supporting a handful of devices versus the very open Windows and their handling of devices. And Macs are graphic superior? Maybe back in the day where they had onboard graphics chips and IBM/Compats had nothing. But now they are both built with 99% the same architecture, and 100% the same architecture on the graphics front. The only reason I could come up with for buying Mac is if you wanted Mac specific software. That said, I love the Adobe suite, and it runs pretty much the same on both systems.
    I will however grant you the Unix might be a better core to base an OS off of.
    Currently in the house we have 2 XP and 3 Win7 machines, and the only issues we have with networking were a bad wireless card (resolved) and a mis-behaving router (last consumer level Linksys I buy.....).
  13. Zach,
    If you never move your system from a workstation perspective a laptop is a very poor choice. I consider most laptop displays borderline unusable for photography work, and laptops are MUCH slower than a desktop at an equivalent price level. I would strong suggest you look at getting a desktop. On the upshot desktops have a longer service life than laptops because they are much more reliable.
    Windows 7 is now the best desktop operating system on the market. I use it on all my computers, and could not be happier with it. Security online falls on common sense of the user. Windows computers are not "more vulnerable" than Macs, just more targeted.
  14. Ryan,
    I guess I should clairify, I do move it, just not as much as the netbook. I only take the large laptop into the field when I absolutely need it, or am on an extended trip where I need photo/video processing. Otherwise, the netbook pulls that duty.
    As far as the price vs power argument, an i7 desktop is about $200 less than an i7 laptop. Add back in the price of the monitor, and your desktop is losing its advantage quick.
    That said, an i7 desktop chip should be faster than it's mobile brothers and have more cores. Not to mention faster all around bus speeds on the desktop should be faster along with the north and south bridges. And faster RAM to boot.
    But, is it kind of like owning a Ferrari and never taking it to the track? Sure, it can go wicked fast, but when will it ever be allowed to go that fast?
  15. I have worked with Toshiba and HP laptops and Dell PC's. All have performed well. I know good and bad stories for all of them. So I think you should primarily focus on what you need to get your work done well.
    Best for editing is probably still a good PC in combination with a decent monitor. However, I can understand you prefer a laptop. My experiences is that it is hard to find a decent laptop for photo editing because the screen of most laptops isn't made for it. Companies will advertise for a high resolution screen, sometimes they inform you about that the screen is illuminated with LED and has a high refreshing rate, but that is all. They do not tell you color accuracy, dynamic range, or if black is shown as black or just a shade of gray. Hence I would advice you to go to shops and compare which has the best screen. For video sound is important and unfortunately this is also a weak point of most laptops, hence, another reason to go to a shop to compare. Of course you may also want plenty of memory, a decent video card and processor.
    Good luck finding the one that suites your purposes,
  16. Leonard, you are right, I probably should take a day (have to drive 1.5 hours to get to a Best Buy or anything that might have all the brands) and compare. I guess I didn't think about it much, but the monitor on my current HP is actually really good. A little bit dim compared to a standalone, but much nicer looking than even some highly rated monitors.
  17. If you don't move it .. I suggest a custom built PC and a really nice screen.
    I have a Lenovo v reliable but I have always had the ultraportables, the screen is not up to big LCDs and you don't have to compare side by side. Not sure how much better the others are thou.
    For laptops I vote for Lenovo. I had 5 laptops all used, 4 are Lenovo. Tosh was quite good as well on the 486 I had not as standardised as Lenovo. I mean Lenovo has other stuff like drain holes underneath if you spilt liquid, detects motion the hard drive will park up, spilt resistant keyboard.
  18. Of the three manufacturers you mentioned, Toshiba will have the edge in reliability. But as windows PCs they all use the same components sourced from the same bulk manufacturers...memory, disk drives, keyboards, LCD screens... its a moot point.
    IBM recognised that they could not be bothered competing in a market where the gross profit is less than 10%. Thats why they sold their entire PC business to China...hence Lenovo.
    HP can't make up their mind if they want to go back to being a big systems and services vendor, or stay where they have never made a profit since the Compaq takeover in 1997. Most of their good engineeing and systems people left at that time and they have struggled from crisis to crisis.
    Dell is hunting around for someone to buy them. They have an edge in pricing due to an excellent fulfillment system, but again very small profits.
    Toshiba also struggle to be profitable but they at least try to back their brand by making more of their own components than the others.
    The sands are shifting in the PC world with the market in western countries not growing and with Apple taking a bigger chunk of market share everytime figures are released. It all started when Apple decided to compete on price and they worked with Microsoft to produce a Mac version of Office that was as good as the Windows version. The PC brigade lost the argument on price competitiveness and software compatibility overnight.
    To be honest, I'm glad to be off the Windows platform. It was not an easy decision, but when my son explained to me why the Apple alternative was better for his work...advertising imaging and graphics, and actually showed me, it brought back memories of when I was VP Sales at Sun in Australia for a while and we had Scott McNealy evangelising Unix. The iMacs of today are what Sun could have had in the market had it not been for McNealy being stubborn in sticking to Solaris and their own chip. They should have backed Apple and be a technology partner, but he had blinkers on.
  19. Windows is still vastly superior in software depth. However, file compatibility (where the Office argument really holds water) is a wash.
    Mac still costs twice the price unless you throw up top of the line workstation class machines vs MBP. But, that said, I think the workstation class laptops (remember the Quadra graphics cards are in those and not even offered in Macs) beat the MBPs. As I did a bit of research, I can only find the MBP being mid-pack in any category, especially screens.
    Still, budget is about $1400, which kills any hope of a MBP. The best screens are supposed to be the Lenovo ones on the W700 (often being quoted as better than most desktop screens), however, these are also out of the budget. Perhaps it is better to hold off until summer so I can sink maybe 2k into the laptop and get one of the W700 machines.
  20. As far as the price vs power argument, an i7 desktop is about $200 less than an i7 laptop. Add back in the price of the monitor, and your desktop is losing its advantage quick.​
    Zach, they're not the same i7 cpu. In terms of performance, the desktop i7 is vastly superior to the mobile i7 cpu found in laptops. Laptops normally come with 5400 rpm drives, desktops do not. However, I do put in 7200rpm drives into laptops to bump up performance but you take a hit on battery life. I usually put them in when re-building the system as I nuke any Dell/HP/ spyware bloatware and other "30 day" trials.
    Of the three manufacturers you mentioned, Toshiba will have the edge in reliability.
    IBM recognised that they could not be bothered competing in a market where the gross profit is less than 10%. Thats why they sold their entire PC business to China...
    HP can't make up their mind if they want to go back to being a big systems and services vendor, or stay where they have never made a profit...
    Dell is hunting around for someone to buy them.​
    I couldn't read past the Dell statement.
  21. Dell is not on your list? Having excellent experiences with Dell desktops I bough a laptop a year and a half ago. Not a low end model either as it cost over a grand. Now, I can live with it, but, it sucks. It is cheaply built, clearly Dell has gone cheap, I assume to be more price competitive. Mine had the dreaded jumping cursor (Google jumping cursor). Tried all recommendations. Finally after a year, a software fix, sort of fixed it. My kids both have MacBook Pros. Even though more expensive they are well worth the extra expense. The Mac trackpad is far superior.
    I am not trying to convert a PC user to a Mac user, nor start another PC vs. Mac war. Simply stating that this crap Dell laptop has cured me from any future Dell purchases. I am not sure what brand I would go with should I purchase a PC, but there is little doubt that I made a mistake by not spending a few hundred dollars more for a Mac. Certainly there is no guarantee a Mac will be problem free.
  22. Hi Zach
    I bought a new Lenovo last year. I'm happy with the performance running Photohsop and all my other apps, but I don't think the screen is the best available. It's quite angle sensitive (more then other laptops in the same pricerange), which really has an impact in photo editing.
  23. Dell Studio XPS.
  24. When I said Dell was hunting around for someone to buy them, I meant the company, not the product.
  25. Can you qualify that? I find that interesting as Dell is the largest computer company that has done 46 billion year to date.
  26. Ron, which Lenovo did you get?
    The three screens I saw through random internet chatter (so trust at your own risk) were the rgbled that Dell is using, the screen off the W700 and the dream screen that HP developed with Dreamworks (marketing buzz, I'm sure).
  27. I'm in the same boat and am looking for a high powered, reasonably priced laptop to sit on a desk and work with my external monitor. I don't want a desktop as if I move they're hard to lug around, laptops have far lower power consumption and if designed well perform excellently. So far the HP Envy 14 seems to fit the bill using an i5 or i7 processor.
  28. I second Shadforth's recommendation. For one large reason. When Nvidia had is GPU problem. Apple worked out a a deal with Nvidia to accept responsibility for the bad chipsets it sold them. HP didn't do this although HP's machines have the same issues. Our daughter's MBP after 3 years of use but failing due to the Chipset problem, was repaired at no charge. HP is not willing to accept this issue as a warranty problem. As a result my mothers high end HP laptop is useless.
    BTW I find the display on MBP to be as good, if not better than the HP's (when I could see it).
  29. When Nvidia had is GPU problem. Apple worked out a a deal with Nvidia to accept responsibility for the bad chipsets it sold them. HP didn't do this although HP's machines have the same issues. Our daughter's MBP after 3 years of use but failing due to the Chipset problem, was repaired at no charge.​
    That's not exactly what what happened.
    Months prior to that, Dell was the first to address the issue that summer while it was dealing with warranty and returns on this chipset problem. It finally forced nVidia to admit it (nearly crushing stock prices) that August, while Apple was still avoiding warranty and repairs on the issue all the way until October. It was that Oct when they forced nVidia to deal with the mess and finally started treating their customers with a bit of respect. If you follow the Mac forums, there was scores of irate threads over this as Apple not only refused to acknowledge the issue before hand while Dell and nVidia had, they continued to sell them! We had confused customers posting and trying to understand why Dell pulled theirs months earlier and giving 100% refunds, while Apple customer service was playing dumb about the issue. It was astonishing to read new posts in those threads from new owners that blindly trusted Apple, came home and found out they had a problem, googled it, and felt ripped off that they were knowingly sold a MBP with problems.
    A year later, the 27" iMac was released and they had flickering monitor issues. Apple did the same thing; for five months, they continued to sell while there was a high failure rate. There's a thread with 30,000 entries. I think it made a world record.
    Every single person I know with a MBP has had to replace the $200 battery sooner than they expected. A few have had them bulge and get hot and cause concerns.
  30. Yes, you're right Brad. I shouldn't have bought into the troll post. My apologies to everyone. I'll finish my coffee next time
    before (over) reacting.
  31. Zach, bit late to the party here, but I'm assuming you're looking at laptops of the class that have 17" screens, quad i7's, high end Radeon chips and all sell for about $1500? Everybody makes one and spec wise they're nearly identical. Strong point is always power and weak points are always size, weight and battery life. Shadforth's right that the Mac is the best (less weight and more battery life than the rest, you get your tech support in person and, well, look, it's like taking a Hasselblad over a Bronica - both are quite capable but the fit and finish of the Blad make it the one to get if you're willing to spend).
    But you're right that in 17" it doesn't fit your budget. I have a recommended laptops section on my web site that I update occasionally, choosing my favorite from the current 17" models, but honestly they're all mostly the same. Find the one you think feels best to you and comes with a good warranty, reference your reliability research (those reports aren't steering you wrong) and just do it. Nobody else posting here knows more about your needs that you do.
  32. Andrew, I have decided to wait until I can get another one of the same class as I have now. Should run about 2500 to 3500 (maybe less if I can find one refurb again). Also, I have had really good luck with the Nvidia Quadra cards, so I think I am sticking with those. Might be overbuying a bit, but in the end it should be worth it. The current laptop is a 17" HP with 3GB DDR2 Ram and a Core 2 Duo (dual core). No issues with CS4 and I highly doubt any with CS5. Video might be the only spot where it take a hit right now.
  33. Can't fault your judgment, but the Quadro issue... I don't think you said what software you use. What are you running that needs workstation card features? My concern would be that you'd end up overpaying when the features are unlikely to do anything for you (unless you happen to also be a 3D animation artist) and that the Quadro laptop options are lagging behind the other laptop GPUs.
    I see now that you mention video editing. If you happen to be Premiere CS5 user (which is one of the few apps anybody actually uses that are CUDA enabled) consider the Asus G73JW-XN1. It's a bit big and heavy but it's a 17" 1920x1080 with a 740QM, 8GB, a 1.5GB Geforce 460 and USB3 for $1430. That's going on my recommendations site next time I update the laptops page.
  34. Shadforth's right that the Mac is the best​
    What does "best" mean?
    I think Zach's right. They're twice the price and the value isn't there. I do like the GPU switching for battery life and sound on MBP is best that I've heard. But spending that much on a laptop and not having blu-ray, USB3, full 1080p, bluetooth, makes them far from "best" for me. I'd look at the Sony Z.
  35. Garrison, we can talk about these features all day and I totally agree about the need for high res screens (the 17" MBP has more than 1080P resolution and all the Mac models have Bluetooth) but a legit CPU and a legit video card with the power saving switching feature in an unusually thin package with an unusually large trackpad and 8-9 hours rated battery life, with 15" or 17" high res nonglare screens, instant wake from sleep, unusually good build quality and tech support in person instead of calling somebody in India - even if I didn't care about running OSX, how am I supposed to get that from anybody but Apple? We're on a web site where people buy Leicas, or choose a D3 because a D700 feels "flimsy", without needing to account strictly for value, so I figure I can say the Mac is the best and get away with it.
  36. Andrew, currently I am just running Photoshop but will be adding in both Blender for 3D and an unknown as of yet program for video (my video needs are pretty limited at this point). The biggest reasons I hear for the Quadro cards is reliability, stability, and consistency. Having not had another laptop that I have calibrated on a regular basis, I can't 100% tell you this is true or not. But, by the time you get to machines like the W701, all that is usually offered is the Quadro cards.
    I am, however, open to looking at the high end "entertainment/gamer" lines to see how they compare. It is quite possible that for video and photo work you don't need the highest caliber screen since your final output is rarely testing the full capability of those monitors. I may be overthinking things in saying I need to keep a workstation class machine.
    What I need right now is some kind of test chart I can load onto a thumb drive and take to the store with me. Pull up the jpg on all the different machines and look to see how it compares on all the screens.
  37. Okay, I think I see now. You've got two independent variables: "workstationness" of the video card, and quality of the LCD screen. Quadros are Geforce GPU with some professional features (that are almost exclusively for 3D app use) enabled - you can identify the closest Geforce card and for anything but that limited number of uses, the Quadro and Geforce are identical. A Quadro card would outperform a Geforce or Radeon in Blender, if the GPU that's the basis of the Quadro were in the same league as the Geforce or Radeon GPU. So for example, from Wikipedia, a Quadro FX 3800M is a G92M GPU with 128 shader cores at 675MHz. That's an improvement over a Geforce 9800M GTX, which is quite good, but it's 2 years old and a Radeon 5850 or 5870 or a Geforce 460 would be a couple notches above but less expensive. So my advice would be to look at higher end Radeons and Geforces (concentrate on Geforces if you see yourself using Premiere CS5 in the future).
    Monitor quality is separate (a Quadro does not output more accurate color than a Radeon or Geforce) but it's hard to judge in the store because you can't tell whether a monitor is going to display accurately until you use a hardware calibrator on it, so displaying images on the floor models won't give you what you need. Unless the store's going to let you plug in a calibrator, install software and calibrate each screen you can't get anything definitive - best you can do is read up on web sites. Sorry I can't be more helpful on that.
    Hope this helps.
  38. Yep. It does. The Blender use will probably be pretty light at this point, so I am now thinking of going with a non-workstation class and still might grab an external monitor (the old one recently bit the dust). Thinking a core i5 with 8GB RAM would be peppy enough (I don't mind getting a cup of coffee while the video renders, since it will all be on my own time). Might also mean I can grab a 15" since I would be using an external monitor.
    I really think I am overthinking my needs. 90% of the work I do at home is photography and programming...
  39. Asus has a couple of 15.6" models with quad i7, 1920x1080 screen and a decent Geforce card for under $1500.
  40. New Sandy Bridge laptops are expected soon in the new year
  41. Might be worth waiting for. I think I am waiting until February at the earliest to buy the next laptop.
    I went to a PC sales/repair place in the nearest larger "town" and talked to them on reliability. His opinion was that Lenovo was the best company on the market followed by Asus and Acer. HP was good until they had all the issues with the Nvidia stuff. They do not handle Apple products, so no opinion on them was made.
  42. Then that would definitely be worth considering - Intel, said that their policy is that any new CPU line must have a substantial performance per energy use efficiency improvement over the previous generation, so presumably if notebooks based on the new CPUs are available then you can expect a bump in speed, battery life or both.
  43. I agree with your sales repair person and in that order. In my experience, Lenovo has always had better build quality and done so by being a little more expensive and a little slower as others in the same $ range. If you don't wish to consider Dell, I'd look at Asus next.
  44. Well, I've narrowed it down to three Lenovos. They are all the Ideapad Y560, but now I can't decide the exact spec.
    One is a core i5 (460M) with a 500GB HD and 32 GB SSD (guessing one of the hybrid drives) and 4GB RAM and BluRay ($1099). Option two is a core i7 (740QM) with 640GB (5400RPM), 6GB RAM and bluRay ($1199). Option three is a core i7 (740QM) with 500GB (not sure the speed), 4GB RAM, and DVD ($999). Option four could be a Core i5 (460M) with 6GB RAM, 500GB HD and DVD ($899).
    The first two units are the latest editions of the IdeaPad, and I think they have upgraded the screen with each version (or at least the previous ones were upgraded over the originals). I can't decide on which one to get. Kind of leaning towards option one if a Core i5 is ok, or option three if I want an i7. Not too worried about a BluRay Drive (although it would be nice since all my newer movies are on BluRay). All four have a 1GB Radeon graphics card.
    The other option is waiting until Feb/March for the i& Sandy Bridge to hit.
  45. For $1500, I'd jump on this personally.

    Intel® Core™ i7-740QM (1.73GHz, 8 threads, turbo boost up to 2.93GHz, 6M cache)

    12GB Shared Dual Channel DDR3 Memory

    1.0TB (2 x 500GB 7200 RPM HDD)

    NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 445M 3GB graphics
  46. Nein, going Lenovo. Their systems just feel good and quality. Dells always feel cheap to me. No offense (I know you keep trying to sell me on the Dells). I also get 24 months no interest through a specific store (although it should be paid off in 6), and they don't stock Dell.
  47. I agree. Their build quality is great. But I'd put up with that Dell for the bang-for-buck ratio :)
  48. You guys are talking about different classes of laptop - a sensible midsize vs. a much larger one that costs 50% more. Let's see, though - the Dell, my complaints would be size/weight, build quality and screen resolution (1600x900 in a 17.3" screen is low res). With the Lenovo, again screen resolution - 1366x768 in 15.6" is low res. Maybe it's available with more. Is it an Intel video card? For me that would be a dealbreaker - you want ATI (AKA AMD) or nVidia, with real (dedicated, discrete, onboard) memory instead of shared (or HyperMemory or TurboCache or whatever they're calling it these days) memory. If it's one of the models with the Radeon 5000-series GPU that should do fine.
  49. ATI 5350 in the Lenovos with 1GB dedicated. Trust me, I know a thing or two about hardware. Just haven't kept up on the latest and greatest.
    I guess my biggest issue is not knowing if the RapidDrive technology that powers the SSD would make the PC faster for editing than the faster Proc. If it doesn't, I could order the i7 with the 500GB for $100 less.
  50. Is the 500gb hdd a 5400? For $60 you can install a 7200rpm drive now. I've done that for the sake of battery life.
  51. Screw that, for $110 I could have a hybrid drive, so 7200RPM with 4GB SSD. I have a feeling though that the two i7 ones use a 7200RPM to begin with. I'll have to double check though.
  52. that's what I thought as well but I gave up trying to figure out the driver/controller thing and if the speeds of the ssd drive would in fact be reached or utilized once inside. I don't produce on my laptop so I played it safe

Share This Page