A6JC or A8JM or something else?

I'm getting a laptop, but I've got a few choices that I need to narrow down. I'm looking for something that's decently fast (I'm spoiled with my 2.4Ghz Opteron (oc/d), 2GB, 7800GT machine), but I'm going to run Linux on it, so I won't be doing much gaming.

I really like the A8JM, but I'm wondering if the A6JC would be good enough. How does the build quality compare? I guess what I really need to do is to see what prices the A8JM goes for. I saw one for $1650 pre-order, and since the A6JC is $1600 there I would just buy the A8JM. But I looked at another store and they have the A6JC for $1450, so it's possible that the first store is a bit more expensive in general.

Is there perhaps another laptop I should be looking at? Screen is also somewhat important (again, spoiled by a 20" WS).

Thanks for any advice

 

The price mis-match could be due to the fact the two resellers might outfit the ensemble with more memory, harddrive etc. Even though its an ensemble, it can be upgraded with stuff like that.

I say go for the A8JM. Better video card.

 

Oddly enough, the cheaper one is exactly the same but also with a 100GB drive vs 80GB.

 

yea id vote for the A8J you get the 7600, and it has a little more compact form factor. I just hope the screen lives up to my expectations and yours in this case...

i would really like to know who installs the best screens for their lappys... cuz that is becomming the most important feature to me as well... maybe lenovo?

 

Pretty much Lenovo for matte(They use IPS, aka FlexView), and Fujitsu for glossy(Low resolution, but uses the highest nits in the industry, 350nits compared to the 300 average)

 

Actually, I'm now thinking of the Z70VA (custom components) due to the sharp design and the 1680x1050 screen.

Any thoughts? It only has an X700, but I understand that ATI now has drivers for Linux and being on Linux I won't be able to play too many games.

 

Does anybody know what the brightnesses are (in nits) for the various screens Asus uses?

 

I'm not an expert, but my officemate is and insists that the ATI driver issue for linux is no longer a problem. I'd be interested in knowing how true that is as well.

 

from what i hear, they solved the ati problem for xX00 series, but the x1X00 series gpus are still questionable.

 

Most screens nowadays are either 250nits or 300nits. They don't release the infomation about it however, usually because they don't know - since they don't make the LCD panels, and Samsung, LG, Fujitsu are the top LCD panel manufacturers.

 

I say just wait for the A8.. your back will thank you. You waited this far and it's almost here, so whats a few more days

 

they released new drivers for the ati x1X00 series of gpus. i wonder if that fixed all the problems. if so, you might want to consider the s96j. its resolution leaves something to be desired (wxga), but it comes with the more powerful x1600 (some say that the performance increase is about 30-40% from the x700).

 

To be honest, I'm really thinking that the Z70VA will be a good fit. I can customize it with

P-M 740/1.73Ghz
1GB PC4200
80GB 7200rpm HDD
DVD+-RW module
Intel 2915 wireless card

For just a bit less than the A8JM. Considering the better looks (IMO) and the much better screen I think it's worth it.

BTW, there seem to be two SKUs for the base Z70VA model, but they are different prices. Specs seem the same. Can anyone confirm any differences?

90ND5GD41000000L20
90ND5G141000000L20

 

go for it.. it certainly is one of the best looking built-ons from last year, and probably won't have any competition (in terms of looks) this year. the x700 is still a good card.

 

Quite true, although the lead time from the X1K gpus (desktop) being released and linux drivers being made available was over 6 months, which caused a lot of complaints. That being said, ATI seems committed to monthly driver updates, versus 5-6 releases a year by big green.

My preference for nVidia under linux is due to personal (possibly outdated) experience... the last time I tried ATI's linux drivers was a long, painful and frustrating experience. The extremely lacklustre performance did not impress either. I would love to hear that things have gotten better since then, since there are many more core duo notebooks available (at least in Aus.) with ATI gpus than nVidia.

nVidia's linux drivers also offer more parity with their Windows counterparts, to the tune of 90%+ of their WinXP performance. There's no point opting for the faster gpu if the available linux drivers only offer ~50+ of the hardware's potential performance.

 

I'm wondering if there would be a marked difference from going from 14" 1280x800 to 15.4" at 1680x1050.

I don't like large icons, but my eyes can't take teeny text either.

If someone could compare to say 17" CRT at 1024x768 or 20" LCD at 1680x1050 that would make the comparison much easier.

 

Given the choice between the two, I'd go with the WSXGA screen. If the text is too small, just up the DPI setting in WinXP.

I'm currently running 1280x1024 and would find a vertical res of 800 too cramped.

 

Lucky you.

Im running 1024x768 and I hate it. I program a lot and multitask a lot and so I am always ALT-TABing between windows since I can only view 1 at a time.

Programming also sucks @ 1024x768. Im basically looking at 1280x800 and wondering if that will be any better