New laptop... decisions!

tomkbucks

tomkbucks

Messages
877
Name
thomas
Edit My Images
Yes
ok 2 very different bits of Kit but i just cant make my mind up ! ive currently got an IBM x60 which is just to slow for lightroom..

The machine will be my only editing machine

do i buy a 'one stop shop' laptop looking at the 17" dell XPS L702x i7 2.2 @ £650 or spend a bit more money on a smaller but much better put together machine a powerbook 13" (the 15" is way to expensive ) although this is only an i5 2.3 will it actually feel any slower to use though ?

Am i mad trying to think about using only a 13" screen for editing ? i do have a 22" monitor to plug it in to but i know i will do most of my fiddling in the evening while sat on the sofa , this is why the dell is appealing !

Any advice would be great please thanks !
 
We found 17" laptop a little too bulky, so we have changed for a 15" full HD screen (Dell 15" XPS). Whilst smaller, you have much more screen estate. It's the perfect combo for us on the sofa/travelling.

Where have you seen the 702x for £650. With the 2.2G i7 it comes to £1040 (OK, you can knock 15% off that but it's still not £650). As to processors, I'd go (and did) quad core over the dual core i5s any day.
 
del referb store , the 15" could be an idea, just i feel the 13" MBP would be a much better machine , perhaps not quite as fast but in terms of portable use, build quality (and that im an apple fan... ) actually yes having a look at prices a XPS L502x i7 is around £600 so much better value, what are peoples thoughts ?
 
Last edited:
the dell is actually only 600g heavier if portability is what you consider important. resolution on the 13" mbp tops out at 1280x800.

id go with the dell personally, i think the dual core would struggle with 5dmk2 RAW files.
 
Dell XPS are huge and bulky. I have a Dell 15" Precision and it is heavy and bulky and not even as big as an XPS. Even my 17" Macbook Pro is large enough as it is but luckily it is thin.....and very fast in LR and just in general.

If I had to do it over again I would get a 15" and use an exteranl monitor. 15" wide screen gives you a good amount of desktop space to look at pictures. I still have a Dell 24" external monitor at home with my 17" and use it instead.

The key to speed today (processors are not making up any ground in speed these days), is to get a fast hard drive. Solid state is the way to go. It is very, very fast and you will notice it compared to a disk HD.

I would get a dual-core if it was i7 as long as it was the same price or cheaper without hesitation. I've had quads for work of various types. Quad gets you nothing 90-95% of the time when using a computer unless the app takes advantage. Solid state and 64bit with a lot of ram will do you more good. I would not worry about quad so much and just concentrate on i7 if it is available and at a reasonable cost.

If it were me, I would easily take the i7, a solid state drive as my A drive with a B disk hard drive internally for space (if possible) a 15" matte screen with fairly high resolution.

The other thing I found with laptops is I have so much other stuff I want to store that if I had to do it over again I would have a desktop and a smaller laptop for the portable stuff. At the time I was in a situation where I could only have one and opted for the 17" as my all in one with a 500g HD. If I was in that situation again I would still go with a 15".

mike
 
Last edited:
thanks all for the advice , will a quad core really make much difference ? in terms of spec the dell is much higher than the MBP from the referb store i can get a 2.0 i7Quad for £600 or a 2.7 duel core for the same - but which would be quicker ?

delivered, the MPB is only 13 and £300 more,

ive got an SSD disc to put in it either way :)
 
15" XPS take a little work to get at the HDD. And you only have a single drive bay in the 15" machines (not sure of 17" Dells). Quad core vs Dual core: both Lightroom and Photoshop can use all the cores, but only when actually processing (obviously).
 
Quad is def a step in the right direction.

Think i would prefer a small laptop for out and about and a good, powerful machine at home/work
 
the 17" have 2 bays but id agreen both the 15" is cheaper - and also more 'usable' without being too small so i think im set on a 15" dell , i 'want' the MPB but perhaps the slower duel core i5 and the 13" screen really does not make it worth paying a premium for :(
 
If LR can take advantage of the extra cores then yes you will see a significant difference if it does not it might not be that different at all.

Also make sure the i7 in the Dell is the newer Sandy bridge variety, they are significantly faster than the previous generation so a 2.0GHz non sandy i7 might not be all that much faster than the 2.3GHz Sandy i5.

Can you not find a refurbished 15" on the Mac store, it will give you a higher resolution, especially if you can find a 1680x configuration there although even last gen 15" macbooks are way over the 600 odd of the Dell.
 
they are going to be way over budget - ideal budget is the £600 - 650 bracket BUT would stretch to £900 ish should i go the mac way (as it will hold its value better)
 
For the same price you won't be hurting yourself with Quad core and the improvement will come into play with an application that will use 4 processors at the same time.

Macs run faster on similar hardware for most general use than Windows. I currently have a 2.5Ghz dual-core processor (pre-uni-body) with 4 gigs of ram and it is still faster than the faster machines we have at work, even the ones without the added security software. That being said, Windows 7 is a great improvement in all sorts of areas for Windows users so I wouldn't steer anyone away from it. If you are more familiar with Windows and your current apps are Windows then I would steer you towards Windows. It should work well (fast and efficient) for a long time, especially on an SSD. Keep in mind that dual i5's on a Mac are not necessarily slower than quad-i7's on Windows. Mac OSx is fast and efficient and it would depend on what application you are using and whether it will use quad-core. Editing VIDEO, quad-i7's. Working on pictures, I think dual-i5's would be no slouch, especially on a Mac. Working on serious photoshop multi-layered changes for an ad agency, quad-i7's.

If you are interested in making a change to something different, you would most likely be pleasantly surprised with a Mac but you really need to be fed up with Windows to make that kind of change in my opinion. I know I was and do not regret the change. That said, I use Windows for work and it is generally problem free so I can't complain.

I think the Windows box you spec'ed is what you will want to concentrate on. It should run well. Then again, if you are ready for a change in a better direction (in my opinion), get a Mac. Overall it is a fantastic machine to use.
 
Last edited:
texfoto said:
For the same price you won't be hurting yourself with Quad core and the improvement will come into play with an application that will use 4 processors at the same time.
Click to expand...
That's quad core, dual thread, so you have 8 cores to play with on compute intensive tasks ;). The Sandy Bridge dual core i5s are also hyperthreaded too...
 
texfoto said:
Macs run faster on similar hardware for most general use than Windows. I currently have a 2.5Ghz dual-core processor (pre-uni-body) with 4 gigs of ram and it is still faster than the fastest machines we have at work, even the ones without the added security software.
Click to expand...

thats a bit of a pointless comparison without telling us what spec those machines are ;)
 
But they are mate. Look at the hardware in them ver cost.

A good PC will beat a Mac anyday. What people like about Macs is the OS. I have tried a Mac but it wasn't for me. Each to thier own i guess.
 
ok so putting the cpu's i5 mac Vs i7 PC to one side as i dont want this to be a mac vs pc thread as i can answer that question - macs are better :) ha but im not going to be too fussy as its lightroom which matters - which is the same on both anyway ! what logo i see when i boot up does not bother me.

How realistic is it to use a 13" screen as your main screen on lightroom ? its it just going to be too frustrating ? if so the 15" dell is the only option...
 
Make sure the resolution is higher because it does not matter if you do get a bigger screen with a similar resolution to the 13". Plenty of cheaper laptops have huge screens with horribly low resolutions - Macs were guilty of that for years using very low res panels on £2000 15" Powerbooks.

So to go back to the beginning what res is that 17" / 15" Dell?
 
tomkbucks said:
How realistic is it to use a 13" screen as your main screen on lightroom ? its it just going to be too frustrating ? if so the 15" dell is the only option...
Click to expand...
I don't think it's screen size per-se that matters, more the number of pixels you have on that display (assuming you can resolve them!). The 13" MBP is 1280x800 (4:3 aspect ratio), a standard 15.6" PC is 1366 x 768 (16:9 aspect ratio) so about equivalent IMHO. The 15" MBP is 1440 x 900, the 17" 1920 x 1200. My L502x is 1920 x 1080 so pretty much equivalent screen real estate to the 17" MBP for editing tasks (they are different aspect ratio screens hence the different number of pixels vertically)
 
The 15" MBP can be equipped with a 1680x(something that I cant remember) screen though the default res is 1440x900. Shame you cant push the 13" to the 1440
 
vrapan said:
The 15" MBP can be equipped with a 1680x(something that I cant remember) screen though the default res is 1440x900. Shame you cant push the 13" to the 1440
Click to expand...
Yes. And that comes out at 2x the cost of my Full HD Dell machine (once it's configured up similarly....)
 
hum my problem is i want my cake - and to eat it lol i need a desktop replacment thats less than £900 i agree that the 17" is going to be too large to be sensible , so the 15 is a good medium , both these machines are 'dells xps range' and ill just have to wait till something good comes up at the referb store , my mind tells me i 'want' a Mac but the 13" MBP is the only thing in budget - i think the i5 and the 13" screen is just going to be slower / to small to use :(
 
tomkbucks said:
i need a desktop replacment thats less than £900
Click to expand...
Dell L502x with full HD screen.... We have one and love it (and I also have an overclocked i7-2600K to compare it against). You just have to get over the fact it doesn't have a graphic Apple on the lid ;)
 
PS. The MBP 15" is 2.54kg (from the web site). I've just put my L502x on our kitchen digital scales and it weighs 2.86kg.
 
should add 15" dell is 1366x768 but there is an option for a 1080p screen but ive never seen one of those crop up on the referb store... MPB 13" is 1280x800 the 15" is way over budget :(
 
tomkbucks said:
should add 15" dell is 1366x768 but there is an option for a 1080p screen but ive never seen one of those crop up on the referb store...
Click to expand...
And that's why I said just bite the bullet and buy it direct. I got mine (complete with 8G mem/750G 7200RPM HDD/full HD screen/better wi-fi/backlit keyboard) for £930. They're offering an extra 5% discount over when I bought mine now too...
 
tomkbucks said:
should add 15" dell is 1366x768 but there is an option for a 1080p screen but ive never seen one of those crop up on the referb store... MPB 13" is 1280x800 the 15" is way over budget :(
Click to expand...

So realistically you get the same screen real estate between the two of them, though the extra pixels on the wide side of things can be a bit more important than the extra you get on the Mac.

I think you should be looking for a higher res laptop to be honest if you are planning on doing any photo work on it. Neither the Dell nor the MBP have enough pixels for photo work and I'd doubt that the 1440 res 15" would be good enough. Maybe you should push your budget for a 1680 res Windows laptop.

As a side not I have Aperture on my MPB 13" and though I only fiddle very little with my pictures on it when I use it it is nearly always plugged in to my 1920x1080 Dell.
 
id wait for one at the referb store... it comes out to £999 at the moment
 
tomkbucks said:
id wait for one at the referb store... it comes out to £999 at the moment
Click to expand...
Take 15% off that. If you look at the page: http://www.dell.com/uk/p/performance-deals?~ck=anav

You'll see there's a line that says: "Save an additional 15% off all XPS systems over £649 by using the coupon code CGJ1CJ721GVXFC at checkout!"

Make sure you have configured the right processor - it starts with an i5 - the quad i7 costs £40 more. The screen gets some really good reviews BTW....
 
I'd persuade you to go with a Mac but at 13" I'm going to have to suggest a Dell 15". The Dell is going to be much easier to work on at 15". XPS are good systems and with Windows 7 it should work well.
 
Plus, carrying around an expensive Mac you had better get it insured!
 
still comes out at £969 to spec a quad core i7 and HD screen - far to much money :(

will have to keep an eye on the referb store - such a shame the 15" powerbooks is nearly twice the price ! thats why i would have been happy with the 13" but the size of screen is going to be too small :(

arad85 said:
Take 15% off that. If you look at the page: http://www.dell.com/uk/p/performance-deals?~ck=anav

You'll see there's a line that says: "Save an additional 15% off all XPS systems over £649 by using the coupon code CGJ1CJ721GVXFC at checkout!"

Make sure you have configured the right processor - it starts with an i5 - the quad i7 costs £40 more. The screen gets some really good reviews BTW....
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top