Hi all,
I'm in the market for a new laptop. I want something really really portable (at first i was looking at netbooks, but ultimately ruled them out on performance grounds) because i've found myself disinclined to take previous laptops i've owned anywhere with me because they're just too big and heavy. My last laptop was 15.6", and imo that's too large to slip into a bag and take with you when you go out for a coffee or something, or to use on a plane/at an airport on your knee/etc.
This wont be my main machine, so it doesn't have to be good at everything. I just want something fast for general computer usage (maybe a bit of photoshop work) so the most important thing is a powerful cpu and ideally an SSD and a decent amount of memory. Graphics aren't so important, because my main pc is an i7/SLi gaming rig. It would however, be nice to hook it up to my steam account to play indie titles like revenge of the titans (possible with integrated graphics or not?).
The two machines i've narrowed it down to are the Alienware M11x and the new Samsung Series 9 900X3A. The alienware is 11.6 inches screen size and the samsung is 13.3, but both are similar sizes in terms of physical area. The Alienware is a little bit smaller, but a bit thicker and a bit heavier. Both are small and light enough as makes no difference though, imo.
So it comes down to performance, and there are a couple of things puzzling me. I was leaning towards the alienware, because it's quite a bit cheaper (not when specced out with the ridiculous £505 SSD option however), and because according to results on PassMark (cpubenchmark.net) the i7 processor available as an option in the alienware is faster than the sandybridge i5 in the samsung:
Intel Core i5-2537M @ 1.40GHz (samsung) - 977
Intel Core i7 640UM @ 1.20GHz (alienware) - 1552
On that basis i was thinking the alienware is the better option. Kitted out with the cpu upgrade and memory to bring it up to the same level as the samsung, it's still less than a grand, whereas the samsung is £1300. However, I'm a little concerned at the pcmark vantage results posted for each laptop on trusted reviews. They reviewed an older version of the alienware with a core 2 duo, but with the SSD option installed, back in april last year. This processor has a passmark score of 978, so more or less identical to the samsung. However, the pcmark vantage scores are as follows:
Samsung: 8149
Alienware: 4626
Both have an SSD installed and use processors with similar passmark scores, so why the HUGE difference? I'm starting to fear that passmark doesn't tell the whole story, and i shouldn't use it in isolation to judge which processor is faster. I've found some pcmark vantage scores for the new R2 Alienware with the i7 processor installed, and it gets up to about 5,500, but that's with a 500gb hd not the ssd. I'm struggling to find pcmark vantage scores for an R2 alienware with the SSD and i7 options both installed.
So that's my main question really - is there more to the story than the passmark scores reveal when it comes to processor performance? Or is there some other factor beyond the SSD which is boosting the samsungs score? Is the memory performance on sandbridge miles better than the core i7 chipset in the alienware or something like that?
And finally, i've heard it said that alienware design their laptops so that when you take the back plate off you can get at the hd and the battery for easy upgrade/replacement. Does that mean that if i buy a new alienware laptop i can take the backplate off and upgrade to an SSD myself (far cheaper) without voiding the warranty?
Cheers all!
I'm in the market for a new laptop. I want something really really portable (at first i was looking at netbooks, but ultimately ruled them out on performance grounds) because i've found myself disinclined to take previous laptops i've owned anywhere with me because they're just too big and heavy. My last laptop was 15.6", and imo that's too large to slip into a bag and take with you when you go out for a coffee or something, or to use on a plane/at an airport on your knee/etc.
This wont be my main machine, so it doesn't have to be good at everything. I just want something fast for general computer usage (maybe a bit of photoshop work) so the most important thing is a powerful cpu and ideally an SSD and a decent amount of memory. Graphics aren't so important, because my main pc is an i7/SLi gaming rig. It would however, be nice to hook it up to my steam account to play indie titles like revenge of the titans (possible with integrated graphics or not?).
The two machines i've narrowed it down to are the Alienware M11x and the new Samsung Series 9 900X3A. The alienware is 11.6 inches screen size and the samsung is 13.3, but both are similar sizes in terms of physical area. The Alienware is a little bit smaller, but a bit thicker and a bit heavier. Both are small and light enough as makes no difference though, imo.
So it comes down to performance, and there are a couple of things puzzling me. I was leaning towards the alienware, because it's quite a bit cheaper (not when specced out with the ridiculous £505 SSD option however), and because according to results on PassMark (cpubenchmark.net) the i7 processor available as an option in the alienware is faster than the sandybridge i5 in the samsung:
Intel Core i5-2537M @ 1.40GHz (samsung) - 977
Intel Core i7 640UM @ 1.20GHz (alienware) - 1552
On that basis i was thinking the alienware is the better option. Kitted out with the cpu upgrade and memory to bring it up to the same level as the samsung, it's still less than a grand, whereas the samsung is £1300. However, I'm a little concerned at the pcmark vantage results posted for each laptop on trusted reviews. They reviewed an older version of the alienware with a core 2 duo, but with the SSD option installed, back in april last year. This processor has a passmark score of 978, so more or less identical to the samsung. However, the pcmark vantage scores are as follows:
Samsung: 8149
Alienware: 4626
Both have an SSD installed and use processors with similar passmark scores, so why the HUGE difference? I'm starting to fear that passmark doesn't tell the whole story, and i shouldn't use it in isolation to judge which processor is faster. I've found some pcmark vantage scores for the new R2 Alienware with the i7 processor installed, and it gets up to about 5,500, but that's with a 500gb hd not the ssd. I'm struggling to find pcmark vantage scores for an R2 alienware with the SSD and i7 options both installed.
So that's my main question really - is there more to the story than the passmark scores reveal when it comes to processor performance? Or is there some other factor beyond the SSD which is boosting the samsungs score? Is the memory performance on sandbridge miles better than the core i7 chipset in the alienware or something like that?
And finally, i've heard it said that alienware design their laptops so that when you take the back plate off you can get at the hd and the battery for easy upgrade/replacement. Does that mean that if i buy a new alienware laptop i can take the backplate off and upgrade to an SSD myself (far cheaper) without voiding the warranty?
Cheers all!
