Computer Science Canada

vote for which laptop i should get (details on page 2)
Author:  Andy [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 4:20 pm ]
Post subject:  vote for which laptop i should get (details on page 2)
i went to hp.com and customized a pretty sweet laptop(except for gpu) and it turned out to be a pretty good deal

Mazer edit (huge link)
click

i was just wonderin how trustworthy hp comps are and wether if i should consider that laptop
Author:  wtd [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:16 pm ]
Post subject: 
Build quality is generally better with Toshiba and IBM laptops. Of course, Apple beats all three (four if you count HP and Compaq latops separately) on that issue, but if you're primarily looking for a gaming a laptop, you probably won't consider that option.
Author:  Dan [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
I have had 2 hp pcs and they both worked fine hardware wize. Only problems i had where with software but i do not think that had anything to do with hp but rather crapy winxp. Ahother thing i noticed about the hp pc is the inside is done up realy nice and all the wires are tide and clean. Athougth i do not know if there laptops are the same way.

If you are going for a gaming laptop then i whould deftanly recomend Alineware if u have the money. Dell also makes a good gaming laptop that is cheaper i think but deftaly dose not look as cool or have the same featuchers.

Personaly i hate IBM laptops and think you whould be better off with anything (espelay thos IBM think pads Evil or Very Mad). Dell is also ok for a normal non gaming laptop, esaply b/c they have realy good wartys on them and will come to your house to fit them when thry break. One thing about that tho is you need that good waarty b/c they are made of plastic and fall apart. I have some good things about Sony and Toshiba for some light wait ones but have never had one so i am uhseur of that and Apple is well.......Apple....
Author:  wtd [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:36 pm ]
Post subject: 
Bah... Dell's lptops aren't even remotely near the top of the pack when it comes to reliability.

Thinkpads, however, are built like tanks. Easily the best x86 laptops on the market, but pricier than Toshiba's offerings, and often not better enough to make up the difference.

But yeah, that Dell will be a really good computer... for a month, maybe two. Assuming it isn't broken when it arrives at your door, of course.
Author:  Dan [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
wtd wrote:
Bah... Dell's lptops aren't even remotely near the top of the pack when it comes to reliability.


I will agera they break alot, but they will fix alomost anything that goses wrong and fast. With my dell they lost money on me buying it b/c they had to replace the mother borad so many times.

wtd wrote:

Thinkpads, however, are built like tanks. Easily the best x86 laptops on the market, but pricier than Toshiba's offerings, and often not better enough to make up the difference.


Unless somting has drasctly chaged in the last few months with thinkpads i think you are wrong about the tanks thing. Every one i know who has had a Thinkpad has had it break in some mager way and not been able to have it repaired. Mostly the probles where with the screen dieing or the hdd crashing and them losing everything. Also the mouses on thos things suck so much, i hated that dum litte dot of a mouse. In adtion to that they are also mostly plasitck cases witch can lead to cracks and bad things and there desging is so boring, but i do not think many poleop care about what it looks like Razz

They are deafatly cheaper then most laptops tho, athougth i think u get what you pay for Confused

Some of the other laptop manfatorers are Panasonic, Acer and Compaq.

Edit: that link you posted dose not seem to take you to the spfieck model of hp notebook, could u tell us witch one u are looking at. Just whondering b/c one of the hp notebook models looks and i think is almost indecatal to the alineware area-51.
Author:  shorthair [ Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:24 pm ]
Post subject: 
www.ibuypower.com , the fastest cheapest and most powerful laptops in north america , and these guys are excellent check out hteir reseller ratings ,


they have a laptop with athalon 64 3000+ and 512 ram with a ati 9700 pro , for only

1399 USD thats under 2000$ dollars , THAST FAST and cheap , i a person in hte family has owned one and it was fabulous there support is top notch

http://www.ibuypower.com/mall/lobby.htm
Author:  Andy [ Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
thx guys, i've prettty much decided to get that hp one. dan i would get an alienware if i had enuff money simply because of the fact that you could upgrade the gpu, but its just a bit outta my price range... my parents said something about around 2500 canadian so that hp one fits pretty well. shorthair, ur site overcharges the upgrade from a64 3000+ to 3400+ like mad.. $220 hp does it for 100 bux but i do like their gpu and their 5400rpm hdd.. o wels
Author:  Andy [ Wed Aug 11, 2004 3:36 pm ]
Post subject: 
woa, now they have the 3700+ cpu....
whats better 60 gig hdd wit a dvd burner or 80 gig without one
o and when they say additional battery, is it gona be inside the laptop?
and is the gpu really that bad? would it be horrible for gaming?
o and since hp and compaq merged, are compaq laptops good too?
Author:  wtd [ Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
dodge_tomahawk wrote:
when they say additional battery, is it gona be inside the laptop?


You're most likely going to have to swap the optical drive for the battery. So in all likelihood, having the extra battery means no CD or DVD drive.

From reading your posts I really think trying to find a laptop that's good for gaming is a bad idea. You could probably build your own gaming PC quite inexpensively, and get a laptop better suited to work/school uses for a similar price, and have machines better suited to each goal.
Author:  Andy [ Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:31 pm ]
Post subject: 
i wouldnt be able to get a pc for another year, so i need something that'll get me through this time... ppl told me that the GeForce4 440 Go is absolute junk... is that true?
Author:  wtd [ Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:39 pm ]
Post subject: 
dodge_tomahawk wrote:
i wouldnt be able to get a pc for another year, so i need something that'll get me through this time... ppl told me that the GeForce4 440 Go is absolute junk... is that true?


Not absolute junk, but it's definitely at the low end of the spectrum.
Author:  rizzix [ Wed Aug 11, 2004 7:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
HP computers.. no idea.. they are probably good.. well the only reason i would recommend them is only cuz they have great opensource support.. their printers are definitly worth it.. highly compatible.. full performance on a mac windows and linux. hence just great!
Author:  Andy [ Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
are compaqs as good as hp? and as for that gpu, i noe its crap but will it be able to run games like doom 3?
Author:  wtd [ Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
dodge_tomahawk wrote:
are compaqs as good as hp? and as for that gpu, i noe its crap but will it be able to run games like doom 3?


Well, there are different levels... run, walk... crawl.
Author:  shorthair [ Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:24 pm ]
Post subject: 
Dude no one else does the 63 BIT laptop , im sure that the only reason hte overcharge is becuse its 64 BIT , you wont get 64 from HP ,
Author:  Dan [ Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:14 am ]
Post subject: 
Why do you whont to pay more for 64 bit when it dose nothing yet?

If you whont this thing for gaming as well as school work, ect. You most likey are going for a windows OS (due to the gaming part) and right now windows dose not use the 64 bits other then the demo beat 64 bit verson of winows witch i whould not recomend using as your main OS. Also very few progames (espltay for windows) are using that 64 bit and almost all of them where made for 32 bit. So unless you just like the saying you have 64 bit to sound cool, there is no realy reason for it yet, unless u are going to go with a 64bit install of linux. But even then alto of the dirvers and software will not soprte 64bit so you will see alomst no adavagte.

Athougth in the coming years 64 bit will probly become more relvent as more and more poleop get them. But i blive that buy this time your computer will be out of date and will be slow comapered to the new ones with or with out a 64bit chip and you will probly be buying a new one around that time any how.

I think the lunch date for M$'s full 64bit os that works (longhorn) is like 2007 or somting far off like that and there are issues with longhorn that whould srace me far far far away from it wther it is 64bit or not.

64 bit sounds cool and could be slightly usefull in the next 3~4 years (athought laptops thend to last 3~4 years) but will cost you more and do litte for your right now.
Author:  Martin [ Fri Aug 13, 2004 1:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
I got my laptop for 1600 cdn.

AMD 64 3000+, Radeon 9600, 512mb ram, 60GB HD.
Author:  wtd [ Fri Aug 13, 2004 2:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Dan, the advantages of the Athlon 64 and Opteron are not limited to the fact that it's a "64-bit chip". The AMD64 platform has numerous architectural improvements over other x86 chips that make it worthwhile.
Author:  Dan [ Fri Aug 13, 2004 5:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
wtd wrote:
Dan, the advantages of the Athlon 64 and Opteron are not limited to the fact that it's a "64-bit chip". The AMD64 platform has numerous architectural improvements over other x86 chips that make it worthwhile.


May be so, but i was pruley talking about the idea of 64-bit and not AMD's chip architecturs. Intell is (i think it is all ready out ataucly) coming out with a 64-bit chip as well and then the AMD architectur whould not apply there.
Author:  wtd [ Fri Aug 13, 2004 6:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hacker Dan wrote:
wtd wrote:
Dan, the advantages of the Athlon 64 and Opteron are not limited to the fact that it's a "64-bit chip". The AMD64 platform has numerous architectural improvements over other x86 chips that make it worthwhile.


May be so, but i was pruley talking about the idea of 64-bit and not AMD's chip architecturs. Intell is (i think it is all ready out ataucly) coming out with a 64-bit chip as well and then the AMD architectur whould not apply there.


Yes, Intel is building a chip that conforms to the same AMD64 instruction set. However that instruction set is only an interface. It does nothing to indicate how well the instruction set is implemented internally.

The AMD chip is still superior internally.

The 64-bit buzzword is less important now than it will be in a few years time. However, it's only a marketing buzzword. The real advances in the two major entry-level 64-bit processors (AMD's AMD64 platform and IBM's PowerPC 970 and 970FX) have more to do with the way the chip is internally structured. Both implement advances that would benefit 32-bit chips as well.
Author:  Andy [ Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:43 am ]
Post subject: 
also ms is releasing a full 64 bit version of xp later this year
Author:  Andy [ Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:50 am ]
Post subject: 
can anyone recommend a better a64 laptop for less than 2k us?
at least 3200+, 12cell battery, 1gig ram 60 gig hdd
Author:  Dan [ Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:52 am ]
Post subject: 
Even if they do actualy get the 64bit verson out this year witch i dout you will still need all your drivers to be 64bit verson and all your software to be to get any real advagte out of it.

Another thing i whould be worited about tho is that if they do not get the xp 64 bit verson out and insted make there next 64bit OS longhorn. From the plans M$ has put forth for what longhorn will be there will be many many many persoal pericay issues. I think there will be alot more new linux users when poleop find out more about M$'s new OS plans.
Author:  Andy [ Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:08 am ]
Post subject: 
there i changed the laptop a bit, it now has a64 3700+ processor.

dan, a64 performs better than p4 even on the 32bit windows xp

click here to check it out
Author:  Dan [ Sat Aug 14, 2004 4:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
Your link dose not work, and one thing you should consider is that AMD dose not have hypertreading. Also i never side that AMD was better or worse then intell, just that the 64 bit part soley was pointless.
Author:  wtd [ Sat Aug 14, 2004 5:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
For the most part the AMD chip doesn't need "Hyper-threading". Hyperthreading primarily compensates for pipeline bubbles that develop due to the exceedingly long pipelines in Intel's Pentium 4 and Xeon processors, and the insufficient branch prediction hardware on the chip.

Essentially what happens is that the CPU lines up a number of instructions to execute in the pipeline. Let's assume a 20 stage pipeline for argument's sake. Each of these instructions is in some stage of execution as they go through the pipeline.

The catch is that programs branch. You might have something like (sort of psuedo-assembly):

code:
mov ax, 3  # ax = 3
mov bx, 4 # bx = 4
cmp ax, bx #compare ax to bx
bgt LabelOne # goto LabelOne if ax is greater than bx
print "hello"
goto End
LabelOne:
print "world"
End:
exit


Now, our hyopthetical CPU comes along and loads a bunch of instructions into the pipeline, including the 'print "hello"' and 'print "world"' instructions. The problem is that the latter is never executed. Thing is, though, the pipelined CPU starts working on it before it knows it's not going to be used, so we have wasted clock cycles. In fact, since just one instruction wasn't needed, we've lost thesame number of cycles as there are stages in the pipeline, since now the CPU has to continue dealing with that unneeded instruction.

AMD's chips have relatively shallow pipelines compared to Intel's chips, though not nearly so shallow as something like Motorola MPC 74xx series processors (also marketed by Apple as the G4) which has between 4 and 7 stages. The shorter pipeline stages mean that hyperthreading is less necessary.

Now, this is not to say that hyperthreading is a bad thing. It's just that it's a solution to a very specific problem that's been solved in other ways in many cases.
Author:  Andy [ Fri Aug 20, 2004 11:22 am ]
Post subject: 
athlon's hypertransport is quite nice 1600 mhz bus
Author:  Andy [ Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:03 pm ]
Post subject: 
ok since links dont work i'll just post the stats so guys, plz pick a laptop for me

1.
- AMD Athlon64 3200 Processor
- PCMCIA Type II Slot, Support CardBus
- 1.0GB SO-DIMM DDR 400 Memory
- 60GB (7200RPM) Ultra ATA Hard Drive
- ATI Radeon 9700 M11 128MB DDR AGP
- DVD-RW All-in-One Drive
- IEEE 802.11g Mini PCI Wireless Lan
- 15.4" WXGA TFT LCD Monitor w/ 1280 x 800 Max Resolution
- 3-in-1 Card Reader Drive (MMC/SD/MS)
- 8 Cell Lithium Ion Battery

2.
- AMD Athlonâ„¢ 64 3400+ Processor
- 512 MB DDR SODIMM (PC 2700) memory
- 80 GB HDD
- ATI® Mobility RADEON™ 9600 with 64 MB Video RAM
- DVD +/- RW Drive
- 6-in-1 Digital Media Manger
- 15.4" Widescreen TFT LCD WXGA (1280 x 800 max. resolution)
- 802.11g Built-in Wireless
- 8 Cell Lithium Ion Battery

3.
- AMD Athlonâ„¢ 64 3700+ Processor
- 1 GB DDR SODIMM (PC 2700) memory
- 80 GB HDD
- 64MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(TM) 4 440 Go +1394 & 5-in-1
- DVD +/- RW Drive
- 15.4" WVA WSXGA+ (1680x1050)
- 802.11g Built-in Wireless
- 12 Cell Lithium Ion Battery

remember, price doesnt matter
Author:  Dan [ Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:24 pm ]
Post subject: 
if price dose not matter why not go with alineware?
Author:  Andy [ Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:36 pm ]
Post subject: 
i meant price doesnt matter within those three systems.. my budget is 2k us
Author:  Dan [ Fri Aug 20, 2004 1:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
oh ic Razz


well if u whont procing power and hdd spcae i whould go with 3 but if you whont graficks with less cpu, hdd, and batery power go with 1.

Persoanly i whould pic 3 tho, b/c you get the best cpu, best hdd, best ram and battery out of the 3 and the only down side is the graficks card.

Athougth i perfure intell for laptops, it seem to me at least that intell has put more thougth in to making cpu's more custimzed for protbale systems then AMD has. But i am shure there will be some one that will disagery with me on this.
Author:  Andy [ Fri Aug 20, 2004 4:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
yea im leaning towards 1 or 3 cuz 3700+ and 3200+ isnt that big of a difference... although the video card is amazing for the first one, and the third one just sux ass. the second one is good, especially if i upgrade the ram ... although 64 is for gpu is a bit low....
Author:  Martin [ Fri Aug 20, 2004 4:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
Depends on what you are going to be doing with it. If you are going to play games, the first one is by far the superior system. If you are going to just be programming, chances are you'd like the third one better.
Author:  Andy [ Sat Aug 21, 2004 12:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
well even if its for programming, the first one will do just fine i think... i dunno... i likve the third one (hp) cuz i can get a nice docking station wit it... im gona get it in the nxt couple of months but it'll be for uni so yea, more gaming than programming since we do very lil programmin in 1st year.. or so i hear
Author:  Martin [ Sat Aug 21, 2004 12:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
One thing about the MX440's....no DX 9 support. Take Half-Life 2 for example. this, in DX 9 becomes this on the MX440.

Here is the full story from gamespot: http://www.gamespot.com/features/6105370/p-2.html
Author:  Andy [ Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
hmmm so there isnt THAT big of a difference.... rite?
Author:  Martin [ Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hah well...the wall textures still look similar Laughing

The MX440 leaves more to the imagination Wink
Author:  Andy [ Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:43 pm ]
Post subject: 
o those two pictures are supposed to be similar??? damn... btw, how big of a difference would i notice between 3200+ and 3700+?
Author:  Martin [ Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yeah, those pictures are of the same thing. The first is with an x800 (directX 9 card, the 9800 is also DX9), and the second with the MX440.

The difference between the two would be noticable, if everything else on the computer was identical (same vid card etc). Since everything is not, you are going to find that the one with the 3200+ actually feels faster than the 3700+, because, at least for graphical apps, the video card is more important than the CPU.

Also, ATI cards are excellent for overclocking, and so are AMD processors.

My laptop has the following specs
AMD Athlon 64 3000+ @ 2.1GHz (default 1.8)
ATI Radeon Mobility 9600 @ (425/230) default (300/200)

That means that my 9600 is almost running as fast as a 9800 pro, desktop version (450 for the 9800 pro).

You would definately get a lot more use out of the one with the 3200+ in it.

Finally, one downside to the first computer is that the drive has only a DVD -R drive, meaning you can only write to one of the two DVD formats (it can read both formats still).
Author:  Martin [ Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
Here's another example of the difference:

this becomes this on the MX440.
Author:  Paul [ Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
which one is the "correct" one? I mean the first one looks like some kinda weird holographic place, the second one looks like a flooded factory of some kind... Confused
Author:  Martin [ Sun Aug 22, 2004 2:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
The first one is the correct one. This is just part of a demonstration video showing off some of the effects that are used in the game, for things like stained glass and water refraction.
Author:  Dan [ Sun Aug 22, 2004 3:35 pm ]
Post subject: 
Overclocking laptops ushely dose not end up good since the cooling systems on laptops can not take as much as the PC ones. esptaly if your laptop all ready gets quite hot.

Just whonder tho Darkness what software did you use to overclock your ATI card, i whont to try somting and i got the same card on one of my comps.
Author:  Andy [ Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:35 am ]
Post subject: 
woa... u can overclock using programs? i thought you have to work wit the hardware/bios...
Author:  Andy [ Mon Aug 23, 2004 9:46 am ]
Post subject: 
actually guys, can u tell me which laptop is better outta these two?

this
or this
Author:  Martin [ Mon Aug 23, 2004 12:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
The first one.

For my CPU, I ran clockgen.
For my video card, I used ATI tool...it comes with the Omega drivers.

And it's perfectly safe. Both the CPU and the video card have hardware heat detectors that turn off the computer if things get too toasty. The other nice thing is that, with powernow, as soon as I unplug my laptop, it drops down to 800MHz and the video card goes to 150/100. Gotta love it.
Author:  Andy [ Tue Aug 24, 2004 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
if all the other stats are the same, which is better? pentium M 755 (2.0 ghz) or Athlon 64 3400+? the laptop will be used for gaming/taking notes
Author:  wtd [ Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
dodge_tomahawk wrote:
if all the other stats are the same, which is better? pentium M 755 (2.0 ghz) or Athlon 64 3400+? the laptop will be used for gaming/taking notes


The Pentium M system is superior. It'll be decent enough for gaming, assuming the video card is ok, and it'll last more than an hour on a battery charge, which'll be nice for taking notes if you have a few classes in a row.

Note: for taking notes, also get an external mic and record the lectures. Heck, you might even consider getting a nice webcam to record the lecture in video.

This is a superb piece of equipment, and could probably be adapted perfectly for that task.
Author:  Martin [ Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
Any way to get it working on a pc?
Author:  wtd [ Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
It's a vanilla Firewire device. Many people use it with Windows. The importantpart is that your laptop have a Firewire port. Sometimes you'll see it listed as "IEEE 1394", even though Apple is letting others use the name without paying royalties.
Author:  Martin [ Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:38 pm ]
Post subject: 
Oh yeah, I know that. I've got firewire Smile

It just listed the requirements as having a mac computer...I've been looking at getting a webcam for quite some time now.
Author:  wtd [ Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
Basically those are the requirements for using it with iChat AV. I've read many stories about getting it to work with Windows. I haven't had any personal experience, though, so I can't say it'll work for you definitively.

If you do use a webcam for recording lectures (which I would have loved to have had back in'98), don't hesitate to shell out some cash. The iSight is $219 Canadian, but that's about the cost of a single textbook.
Author:  Martin [ Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
If you want a really nice laptop, get the emachines m6811.
http://emachines.com/products/products.html?prod=eMachines_M6811

(You'll be able to find it cheaper elsewhere)

Then, with the extra money, take out one of the 256mb SODIMM's and replace it with a 1gb one.

That baby flies, and you'll be able to overclock it like mad.
Author:  Andy [ Wed Aug 25, 2004 1:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
gpu kinda sux...

yo wtd, so your saying that i should go wit an intel M instead? cuz i saw this pretty cool deal. for 2k US, you get pentium M 755(2.0 2 mb cache) 1 gig ram, 60 gig hdd at 7200 rpm radeon 9700 pro 128mb and 5 hr battery life

rite now its either that or an athlon 64 3400+ wit all other stats the same
Author:  wtd [ Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
dodge_tomahawk wrote:
yo wtd, so your saying that i should go wit an intel M instead?


Yes. AMD's a good company, and in general they make better chips than Intel, but you want to use this machine for gaming and academic purposes. The Athlon64 would undoubtedly be a better gaming machine, but the Pentium M will perform adequately, and you'll be able to take notes for more than one lecture without having to recharge the battery.
Author:  Andy [ Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
anyone here know how much more battery power a 60 gig 7200 rpm hdd drain than a 60 gig 5400 rpm hdd for laptop?
Author:  Dan [ Thu Aug 26, 2004 1:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
i think that whould have alot to do with how much you rite to your hard drive and for how long.

the faster one whould get the job done sooner and use up more power doing so but the slower one whould take longer using less power. I think it may even out? Ethere way tho i do not think it whould a big enogth difrence to get the slower one over the faster one, but i do not know alot about how hdds use power.
Author:  Andy [ Thu Aug 26, 2004 1:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
i read in pc world something about a p4 3.2 ghz laptop wit a 7200 rpm hdd chewing up a 2 hr battery in 1 hr...
Author:  Dan [ Thu Aug 26, 2004 2:10 pm ]
Post subject: 
i am gusing that whould be the 3.2ghz part :p

i think the cpu whould matter alot more then the hdd speed.

I have a laptop with prity much that and i can get from 1h to 4h of battery life from one battery depending on how i set the power options and what i do.
Author:  wtd [ Thu Aug 26, 2004 2:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
A 7200RPM drive would be murder for a laptop battery. At that point, if performance is a driving concern, you want a PC in a Shuttle case and an LCD monitor that can be easily toted. Smile
Author:  Andy [ Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:39 am ]
Post subject: 
hmmm.. a friend of mine told me that all 7200 rpm laptop hdds are hitachi travelstars and they are the most battery efficient laptop battery out
Author:  Martin [ Fri Aug 27, 2004 7:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
Think about it like this:

A 4200 rpm drive uses less battery, but takes the longest to get the job done.

A 7200 rpm drive uses more battery, but gets the job done quickly.

I think it mostly balances out.
Author:  wtd [ Fri Aug 27, 2004 7:34 pm ]
Post subject: 
Darkness wrote:
Think about it like this:

A 4200 rpm drive uses less battery, but takes the longest to get the job done.

A 7200 rpm drive uses more battery, but gets the job done quickly.

I think it mostly balances out.


Unless of course you don't need to do things fast. With pretty much everything except really high-end gaming, the performance bottle-neck in the system is the user. The computer ends up waiting on you. In this case it's better to sacrifice a bit of performance for better battery life.
Author:  Martin [ Sat Aug 28, 2004 7:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Fair enough. I would definately recommend getting a 5400+ rpm drive. I definately notice my 4200.
Author:  wtd [ Sat Aug 28, 2004 7:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
Darkness wrote:
Fair enough. I would definately recommend getting a 5400+ rpm drive. I definately notice my 4200.


Oh yeah. 4200RPM is too much sacrifice. Smile

And max out the RAM and the hard drive won't matter nearly as much.
Author:  octopi [ Sat Aug 28, 2004 11:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
I don't know if anyones mentioned it...


but why not get a ferrari?

http://global.acer.com/products/notebook/fr3200.htm

These things look wild in real life.

It's a ferrari!!!!!!!!!
Author:  wtd [ Sat Aug 28, 2004 11:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
octopi wrote:
I don't know if anyones mentioned it...


but why not get a ferrari?

http://global.acer.com/products/notebook/fr3200.htm

These things look wild in real life.

It's a ferrari!!!!!!!!!


Most overrated computer in history.
Author:  octopi [ Sat Aug 28, 2004 11:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
ya, definitly


your not buying the specs your buying to name, and the color, but still the thing looks amazing!

:


You can syndicate this boards posts using the file backend.php or view the topic map using sitemap.php.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy