Good Laptop Config?

Origin Saint

Origin Saint

Well-Known Member
Hi, I know I've recently posted on here about a decent laptop setup, but my ideas have changed and the situation had altered as well so I thought I'd give the whole thing another go and I came up with a new setup based on myself, my friends and with help from you guys. Btw, thanks to all those who assisted me in anything. Well here's my new config:

> Dell XPS 15
> 2nd Gen. Intel Core i7-2670QM processor (2.20 GHz / 3.10GHz with Turbo)
> NVIDIA GeForce GT 525M 1GB graphics with Optimus
> 15.6" Full HD (1920x1080) Truelife B+RGLED Display w/ 2.0MP HD Webcam
> 6GB Dual Channel DDR3 1333MHz RAM
> 750GB 7200rpm SATA
> WIN 7 Home-Premium 64-bit
> Price ~ $940.72 (with discount savings and including tax and shipping)

Now tell me, is THIS a good setup for me? For anyone new, I will reiterate what I will be using this laptop for:

> Frequent and extensive iTunes playing
> Surfing the web
> Playing YouTube videos
> Playing some light gaming (WoW and RuneScape in low/med quality)
> Recording videos to my laptop through a Dazzle DVC 100
> Editing videos in Windows Movie Maker and saving them in HD
> Typing reports and other misc.

So how well would this setup work for all this? One thing I was concerned about was I didn't quite know or not, but is the Intel i7-2670QM a quad-core processor? Also, is this graphics card OK?
 
Last edited:
I am not sure about the current line, but if it is anywhere near the XPS that the Precision M90/M6600 is based on it will blow you away with the sound quality from the speakers that it has.

Otherwise, everything you listed there will run great on that lappy.
 
Why bother with that kind of resolution and picture quality on only a 15" screen? I'd go for a current gen GT6xxm series card because of the recent drivers and performance increases. Specs look otherwise great for what you indicated, although you could probably get away with a i5 2450 to cut costs a bit more if necessary.
 
The only options I have for graphics cards are the NVIDIA GeForce 525M 1GB with Optimus or the NVIDIA GeForce 540M 2GB with Optimus. And thanks for the CPU option.
 
You could find that cpu, along with current gen version of the gt540 in a lenovo z570 maybe. I sometimes see it on newegg going for around $600-$650. Watched some videos of it used in skyrim, seems to game pretty well i'd say.
 
Well I don't think I want to buy a Lenovo. Plus I don't need to be able to play Skyrim on my computer, I have an Xbox for that. So would it work well enough do you think?
 
Russ88765 said:
Why bother with that kind of resolution and picture quality on only a 15" screen?
Click to expand...

The primary reason isn't for quality. The primary reason is because 15.6" 1366x768 displays such as the stock display in the Dell XPS 15 limit multitasking and productivity by making things onscreen large. The upgraded 1920x1080 display provides a much more multitasking-friendly workspace.

There is also significant quality difference, but it isn't directly related to the pixel density. Most 15.6" 1366x768 displays have poor image quality due to being cheap LCD panels that have low contrast. The other quality difference is specifically related to the Dell XPS 15 in that the 1920x1080 B+RGLED display dell offers in the Dell XPS 15 has a higher color gamut than most displays do, so colors will appear very saturated.
 
I don't particularly know what your issue with 1366*768 displays are, but they are not really that bad. The average user is not going to notice a great deal of difference of multitasking ability on 720p vs 1080p. The change in the amount of data displayed is in 99% of the cases not worth the upgrade cost.

Now this is coming from personal use where I use 1366*768, 1440*900, 1440*1200, and 1920*1200 on a daily basis.

Going on what they are and having some numbers to back it up.
1366*768 on 19" is 82
1440*900 on 14.1" is 120
1440*1200 on 15" is 124
1920*1200 on 17" is 133

and with all of these I never notice a great difference. I probably would not notice it going to your precision from mine even though your DPI is 147 (10% better than mine)
 
wolfeking said:
I don't particularly know what your issue with 1366*768 displays are, but they are not really that bad. The average user is not going to notice a great deal of difference of multitasking ability on 720p vs 1080p. The change in the amount of data displayed is in 99% of the cases not worth the upgrade cost.
Click to expand...

Regarding multitasking ability: 1920x1080 makes it much easier to fit two side-by-side windows than 1366x768 does. This is what I am talking about when I cite multitasking issues.


Regarding quality: Most 15.6" 1366x768 displays have very poor contrast compared to 15.6" 1920x1080 displays. You can confirm this by looking at the display subsection of notebookcheck reviews for multiple laptops that have different types of displays, and you can confirm this by trekking to a retail store that stocks multiple laptops that have the different types of displays and looking at how well each type of display represents images that have darker colors in them.

Also I am curious: Which 15" display do you use that has a resolution of 1440x1200?
 
Last edited:
You still only get 1/2 the screen. You will be able to see a little finer detail, but it is not worth the upgrade. look at the XPS15 for example. Your getting a 41% better display that may show 10% more stuff for $150.

As for contrast, I have not seen a big ass difference between the 1366 and the high quality 1440*900 or 1920*1200 on the dell latitude/precision line. So either they are really bad screens too, or your opinion of poor is really askew.
 
wolfeking said:
You still only get 1/2 the screen. You will be able to see a little finer detail, but it is not worth the upgrade.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you mean by this. And the term detail is irrelevant because you get the same amount of detail when using 100% zoom.

wolfeking said:
look at the XPS15 for example. Your getting a 41% better display that may show 10% more stuff for $150.
Click to expand...
It is able to display 98% more data onscreen at a time, and 41% of that is in the horizontal direction. Because of this 41%, a web browser in a side-by-side configuration is able to display almost the entirety of the width of its content, essentially negating most of the need for horizontal scrolling seen when using a side-by-side configuration of windows on 1366x768 resolution.

wolfeking said:
As for contrast, I have not seen a big ass difference between the 1366 and the high quality 1440*900 or 1920*1200 on the dell latitude/precision line. So either they are really bad screens too, or your opinion of poor is really askew.
Click to expand...
First, your use of the term "big ass" in your argument makes me lose some respect for the validity of what you say. Second, many of the frequent contributors on the NotebookReview forums, including myself, would say otherwise.
 
Last edited:
any way you cut it, 90% of people do not need nor will see the difference between the upgraded screens. $150 just to get 1080p is money wasted.
 
wolfeking said:
any way you cut it, 90% of people do not need nor will see the difference between the upgraded screens. $150 just to get 1080p is money wasted.
Click to expand...

Most people who understand what the difference is will notice it, and the difference between available displays affects daily usage of a computer more significantly than the differences between the options available for most other components.

I also have doubts that you've actually used such displays recently enough or often enough to make an accurate judgement on them.

Again, your use of immature language and passive-aggressive comments really makes me doubt much of what you say.
 
Last edited:
I do use them myself. 1920*1200 on a precision M90. 1440*900 on a Latitude D630. 1366*768 on a 19" dell LCD on the desktop. 1440*1200 on a work laptop built by Fujitsu. I think its a Lifebook C2220.

You made my case wonderfully though. Those who understand it. The same can be said with the AMD/Intel arguments. Not everyone understands it. If we all understood the science behind computers, it would be a better world, but a vast majority of people just turn it on and go to facebook/youtube/p2p sites and have a good time. The ones that do understand it will buy a better monitor, and they will know how to use it. Some will just not care about the resolution. I personally don't care what I get as far as resolution goes as it will show the image. Might I have to scroll down or over, yes. Do I care, no. Is it worth $150 to not have to, also no. We all are not made of money.

And just an FYI, I have shown th epics of my laptops all over this forum before. If need be I will pull them out again and show you too.
 
The bit about quality makes sense to me now. The reason you aren't noticing much of a difference in image quality is because 17" 1920x1200 displays, 15.4" 1440x900 displays, and almost all desktop monitors (including those 1366x768) tend to have very decent contrast. It makes sense not to have any qualms against the quality of these displays.

As for the 1440x1200 lifebook, I have a feeling that the resolution is 1400x1050 or 1600x1200. I am still unsure about the existence of a 1440x1200-resolution display, though if it's 15", 4:3 and has a resolution higher than 1024x768 then it is most likely an IPS display with very good contrast, viewing angles, and overall image quality.

Also, you personally may be fine both with the poor contrast and lesser multitasking space of a 15.6" 1366x768 display versus a 15.6" 1920x1080 display, but like I said the difference between available displays tends to make more of an overall difference for daily usage than the differences between options available for other components. In most cases barring eyesight-related issues, a higher resolution will make a computer easier to use.

wolfeking said:
You made my case wonderfully though. Those who understand it.
Click to expand...
Granted one may have to understand the difference to see the difference itself, but that doesn't make it any less so that the user will be able to multitask better with a higher resolution. With more onscreen space, a user is going to fill it up and will probably be more likely to use two windows at a time due to the fact that it's easier to do so.

Though, I do help people to understand the differences between available resolutions when I recommend higher resolutions and recommend against lower resolutions in my posts by mentioning that lower resolutions "limit multitasking and productivity", so that not only will they get something that will benefit their daily usage, they recognize that it is doing so and why it is doing so.
 
Last edited:
as for the lifebook, I may be wrong on it, I will admit to that, as I have not messed with the resolution on it in months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top