Asus U35JC/U45JC

My feeling is if you are a gamer, then you likely don't need the portability as much so get the U35JC. If you are not, there is no reason to go 1 lb heavier to get the U35JC when you can get the R700 series toshiba at 3.2lbs. I mean, it will all come down to what do you need more? Do you need the light weight laptop to carry around with you or do you watch alot of movies, game and need those nvidia graphics? For me, its for sure portability (and wireless display btw on the R705) that does it for me.

 

Well, given that the chassis is identical to the UL30VT, people expected it to weigh in at 3.7lbs. But I've been wondering since the start: isn't the cooling system different for the i3 (as compared to that for the SU7300)? I remember asking a sales rep in Markham, ON (when I was visiting family last month) about the U30JC, which I was interested in buying. He said that compared to the UL series, the U30JC was thicker not only due to the optical drive, but because of the copper heatsink system used to cool the CPU. Makes sense, right?

 

Is there a chance that Asus' numbers aren't COMPLETELY accurate? I know that sounds ridiculous, but Asus says the U45JC is 4.6lbs. GenTechPC did a video review of this laptop and said it weighed in a 4.4lbs. Asus also says the U35JC is 4.2lbs while a user on here weighed it at 3.99. It could be a stretch, but the fact that both weights are off by .2 is a little fishy.

 

Still evaluating my options.

The gamer in me is still intrigued with the U35jc with its dedicated graphics card and Optimus.

The banker in me loves the light weight, portability, and internal optical drive of the Toshiba models (and they're both still lighter AND thinner than the U35jc).

The pragmatist in me is considering waiting for ASUS to release a new laptop by the end of this year that is lighter and thinner than the U35jc AND comes with an internal optical drive.

I mean, if Toshiba can do it, then surely ASUS can as well, right?

For me, it's partly psychological. I was really happy to have found an ASUS laptop, like the U35jc, with all its functionality and weighing only 3.75 lbs. I view the 4 lb weight limit as a defining threshold of sorts ( a little like running a mile in under 4 minutes).

And it's partly on principle. If Toshiba can make a laptop that weighs only 3.2 lbs, is lighter and thinner than the ASUS U35jc, and can pack in an internal optical drive, then what exactly is ASUS' R&D department doing exactly? Isn't ASUS supposed to be a superior laptop manufacturer than Toshiba? You wouldn't exactly know if you looked only at these 2 models in comparison.

Granted, the U35jc has a dedicated graphics card and Optimus. I still have to believe that this factor can't account for the U35jc weighing 1 lb. more than the Toshiba 700/705.

Let me put it this way: if Toshiba had added a graphics card and Optimus to its 3.2 lb. 700/705 laptops, do you think it would increase the weight to 4.2 lbs?

I think not.

PS: When someone releases a laptop with a dedicated graphics card, Optimus, an internal optical drive, weighs less than 4 lbs, and costs under $900 USD, I will be the first person in line.

 

Do you know offhand if the 700 also has the Intel wireless display? I'm just to busy at the moment to look it up. Thanks.

 

Thicker, I can understand. But does that copper heatsink system really weigh 0.5 lbs more?

I'm still perplexed as to how ASUS could report an incorrect weight like that. Weighing a laptop is not rocket science. If they want, I can come show them how to use a digital scale, write it down on paper, and then post the correct information for all to see.

 

As I said to you in the PM (and GenTech's video review of the U45Jc is a great example: 4.4 lbs digital scale vs ASUS' spec of 4.6 lbs), since GenTech, Xotic & J&R continue to list the U35Jc at 3.74 lbs, it is quite possible that ASUS' listing is incorrect.

And as I said, even if it WAS 4.18 lbs, that makes it just over 7 oz heavier than the UL30Vt. WHo throws out a notebook he/she wants because it weighed 7 oz more? That is a very small amount of weight.
__________________________

And Chanda Bear, I think your logic makes perfect sense. They are using passive copper heat sinks to cool these i-processors. so that could well be affecting the thickness.

 

Only the R705 has it.

 

Cooling both the i-series CPU and a discrete graphics card like the nV 310M with passive cooper cooling (which saves on battery & makes for a quieter notebook) is no small feat.

The presence of the 310M along with a second graphics chip on the CPU makes for plenty of heat. That requires thickness to allow for more air for cooling and more cooper on and around it to give passive cooling.

7-8 oz is not a lot of weight.

If it matters to you, then get the Tosh R700. Or find a switchable graphics system under 4 lbs (which the UL30Vt is and the U35Jc may well be) like the Sony Z ... though it'll cost considerably more than the $819 GenTech is asking!

ASUS can report an incorrect weight because they are ever listing a large number of models with a large number of variations between countries of those same models. A change in battery can easily account for 7 oz difference.

Plus they are humans and make mistakes.

And bankergolfer, to ask questions about the R700 and read what real users of the Toshiba Protégé R700 are saying, go to THIS thread for Toshiba R700 Owners & those interested in things R700.

Only actual users can tell you how a laptop really is in use (heat on bottom, noise, screen, speed, streaming video or video out, etc)

 

Like I already said, I understand why the U35jc is thicker.

What I don't understand is why the U35jc's cooling system would account for its weighing 1 lb more than the Toshiba 700 when its only incremental difference is its dedicated GPU and Optimus (not to mention that it doesn't have an internal optical drive, which the 700 does have).

As I already mentioned, the laptop that I get will be under $900 USD. The Sony Z is closer to $1800 USD.

Yes, humans can and do make mistakes. That's why companies, especially large ones like ASUS, have quality contol mechanisms in place to prevent human errors like this from making it to the consumers for consumption. It's how the whole process of Six Sigma came into being. It's the statistical science of reducing errors to a mathematical improbability.

Misreporting a laptop's weight is inexcusable in my book. Unlike desktops, consumers generally buy laptop's for their relative portability. As such, the 2 characteristics that comprise that attribute are weight and physical dimensions.

Thank you for the link to the Toshiba 700 discussion.

 

I'm a little wary of Directdial now after reading this

I think I'm going to go with J&R...they seem to be cheaper than XoticPC. J&R ships with UPS Worldwide Express - will I get banged by brokerage fees if I ship to Canada?

 

Thank you for answering my question.

 

I would tend to think its actaully 4.2 lbs. The reason is because they orignally had it at 3.7lbs and then it went to 4.2 after they fixed it. Do you really think they would a weight mistake in the listing twice? I would tend to think not. I think it was a marketing ploy all along to get ppl hyped up for it, and now people just have a bitter feeling of dissapointment. 4.2lbs may not be so bad, but the mental aspect of advertising a 3.7 and then knowing you are actaully going to buy a 4.2 while all along thinking in the back of your mind wishing it was the advertised 3.7 u were slugging round all day

 

yes, you will. I would recommend choosing USPS but thats form my research as i do not have any real expeirence with shipping

 

I posted my question in the wrong thread.

 

But if no one told you the laptop was 4.2 lb and you carried it all day thinking it was 3.7 lb i doubt you'd notice the difference. It's pretty hard to pick up on a 0.5lb weight difference unless you were holding the UL30VT in one hand and the U35JC in the other? Even then you can probably only tell one was slightly heavier and not exactly .5lb heavier

What's that saying? Ignorance is bliss?

But i do really hope that ASUS is wrong, im more inclined to believe the user who already weighed it digitally @ 3.99lb +/- measurement error.

 

I'm rather astonished you're accusing ASUS of an intentional lie as a marketing ploy.

 

Ahh yes but now that you know, it's quite tough now isn't it? thats how we humans operate. We always do the woulda, coulda, shoulda and what ifs. and i think i would notice the difference. After getting the 3.2 R700 and lifting my XPS m1330 at about 4.7, it seems like worlds apart. So the asus u35jc would be somewhere in between...ya sure thats not terrible but the r700 has put a new standard on light weight and anything above that or above 4 for that matter i would consider..well heavier.

 

I think you'll get the answer to your R700/705 keyboard question more quickly over at the R700 thread. Do any of the posters here own a Toshiba R700? ... Well, it seems Mikeysela does!!!!!

 

I'm really not accusing, its something all companies do, it just seems unfair it was done this drastically. HD are always advertised bigger than they are, max speeds on cars are always displayed higher than can be reached, and the list goes on, thats what marketing is all about. But when its a 0.5lb difference on an expected 3.7 machine on a subject matter such as portability, i tend to take that personally. I could have pre ordered it at that weight thinking i was getting a 3.7 machine only to find out its 4.2 cuz i didnt go back to check the asus website in time before my shipment went through? excuse me but thats unforgivable and im really happy it didnt come to that.

 

After moving from my 15" Dell Vostro brick (over 6 lbs), my U30Jc at 4.8 lbs feels like an aluminum-clad feather. I carry it around lots and don't feel it is that heavy for me.

But your R700, at 3.2 lbs, is much lighter, you're right. .... Perhaps the next notebook I buy 4 yrs from now will weigh that!

 

Hey man here's hoping. That problem is new standards are always implemented. If you use a 3.2 lb notebook, itll be damn hard for you to go up from then on. If you used your 6lb brick and then went to a 4.8 yea sure, ull love the feeling. but wait until you go from that to a 3.2 or even less, that 4.8 asus will feel like a dump truck..

 

UPS Worldwide Express includes brokerage - it's UPS Ground that doesn't. Worldwide Express will likely be about $130US for shipping though.

 

I hope in 4 years, there will be an Asus UL**XYZ that weighs <1 lb with enthusiast graphics and 24 hr battery life on an 8 core processor. How's that for performance and portability. One can dream right? Although, I do vaguely recall reading an article a new months ago about development into light powered circuitry that would be a leap over current silicon technologies, if it was ever made to work that is. So you never know

 

I know. I thought I was in the Toshiba thread.

ASUS should hire me to report their future laptop models' weights! I'll get them wrong, err.. right.

 

Agreed.

Businesses don't call it "intentionally lying" though. They call it "aspirational thinking".

PS. Great generals never retreat in combat. They "advance towards the rear".

 

Probably so, but my 10" ASUS netbook is pretty light.

On the weight change ... I can't buy the idea that ASUS would intentionally misreport the weight at first (for any reason, incl a marketing ploy), at least that's what I hear you saying. That's not marketing.

And we still don't have any idea that 4.2 lbs is actually the weight. I vote for "wait & see" before we pronounce judgment.

 

Yea but..remind me again..netbooks can open 2 web pages nowadays without any hiccups?

 

I agree. We have 3.74, 3.99, and 4.2 weight estimates. I will be very happy if it truly is less than 4lbs which is what that one member weighed it at, but it will most likely be the 4.2. Heres hoping! I'm pretty sure ill get it regardless.

 

I am all for waiting and seeing. Its not intentional doing to screw ppl over, i just personally think they copied some numbers from asus UL30vt specs in terms of weight and dimensions to excite people regarding the new laptop. Not sure there is anything all that wrong with that, but when i now see a new advertised 1.9kg weight..it kinda makes me wonder, why cant they just post numbers that are accurate and truthful first time around? Sure , mistakes happen, thats why humands inveted something like proofreading, etc. For some jobs, miscalculations mean alot more.

 

oh and btw..if there is proof that the u33jc is 4.5lbs..there is no way the u35jc is 3.7..at best 4lbs. the u33jc doesnt have thatmuch more to cause that significant weight increase. i guess consturction and a thicker chassis, but dont believe that would account for such a big increase in weight

 

GenTech weighed the U45JC at 4.4lbs. The U45JC also has a .7" bigger screen and an optical drive. You say at best 4lbs. Like I said one guy weighed in at 3.99lbs. I am hoping for <4lbs.

 

that would be my guess. but like i said, the previous number was 1.7kg (3.7) and was corrected to a 1.9(4.2lbs). The first number is suspicioulsy identical and copied version of an asus ul30vt numbers, where as the second number looks like it might be an actual measurment.

 

ASUS U35Jc-A1 13.3" Notebook PC - Silver in PC Notebook Computers at JR.com

If you look below J&R says 4.0lbs with battery for the weight. Their description says 3.74, but maybe they forgot to update that.

That's 2 quotes for 4.0lb weight.

 

This is starting to feel like a weight weenie thread on a cycling forum

I've handled the U45JC and it feels the same as my UL80VT. Given that they use basically the same chassis, the only part that may cause a noticible difference in weight would be the improvements to the battery, changes in the material on the lid and possibly changes in the heatsink/fan system.

The same can be said of the U35JC and UL30VT. There will be a weight difference, but if you are using the same size battery, you won't notice it.

If you look at the specs listed by Asus, U35JC is 4.18lbs with an 8 cell battery and UL30VT is 3.3lbs with a 4 cell battery. Want a light U35JC, just buy a 4 cell battery

The reason we're seeing 3 different weights for a notebook is because you can use a 4 cell, 6 cell or 8 cell battery.

 

I believe you may be right.

If so, then ASUS is quoting the laptop's battery life usage with an 8 cell battery but displaying the weight with a 4 or 6 cell battery.

Stupid at best; disappointing at worst.

 

Look at this link:

Laptop Buyer's Guide: 14-inch and Smaller - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

If an Anandtech reviewer isn't verifying the weight of the U35jc, then who can we trust?

Note that the reviewer states that the U35jc weighs 3.74 lbs WITH its 8-cell 84 Wh battery).

He apparently just took the specs that ASUS gave him at face value without bothering to confirm his sources.

Unbelievable.

 

In all honestly what is the likelyhood of me pre-ordering or back ordering this computer form any online store and receiving by the start of august. I'm really considering ordering it today, but I live in Canada and will definately need the laptop for the first couple of days. I was thinking of the UL30vt-a1 until I saw this laptop, but i still need a laptop quick. I normally use the laptop for windows stuff, movies/videos, over 800 songs of music, and some gaming. Any advice?

 

If you mean start of August 2010, then you're likelihood is 0%.

If you mean start of August 2011, then you're likelihood is 100%.

I really like answering easy questions. It's like hitting that red "easy" button from Staples.

 

Actually, Asus lists the U35jc at 1.9kg/4.18lbs for the U35jc with an 8-cell battery.

 

Okay everyone, GenTech just "weighed-in" on the U35Jc weight question:

From Ken Lee at GenTechPC:

• The weight information is provided by Asus North America to all resellers.
  
  I think 3.74lbs should be right. I checked the other guy's post in Taiwan whose U35JC weight is 1.8KG which is 3.97lbs.
  
  Also his U35JC came with an i5 CPU. We know the i3 is soldered on the mainboard, so it must be few ounces lighter than the i5 CPU on the removable CPU socket.
  
  http://attach.mobile01.com/attach/201007/mobile01-bbbe9aa49d5fde6e4f0c385132d547e1.jpg
  
  Also Taiwan is very humid and maybe the moisture adds few more ounces.
  
  Do you think that make sense?
  
  Ken
  __________________
  Ken Lee

Sorry, his photo link doesn't work. I've asked him to post one that works!

 

1. I think Ken Lee is awesome. So I listen when he speaks.

2. So if Ken is right, does that mean ASUS put up erroneous information on their website regarding the U35jc's weight?

Why can't ASUS get the simple matter of a laptop's weight correct?

 

There are several reasons Toshiba was able to fit an optical drive into their R705 and R700 models, the most important being the fact that Toshiba has the technology. 2-3 Years ago Toshiba created their 7mm optical drive so they could fit it onto their R500. Toshiba has the technology, but Asus does not. Toshiba also used magnesium alloy for the chassis with honeycomb enforcement. To get that same strength Asus used plastic/aluminum, which are both heavier than magnesium alloy. Toshiba's speakers are tinnier than those of the U35, implying they might be a smaller size, and like Quatro said you also have to factor in the copper heatsink.

All these are reasons the R700/705 are lighter than the U35Jc.

 

Very interesting information. Thanks.

So which would you rate as the better laptop manufacturer, all things considered: ASUS or Toshiba? And why?

 

The answer depends on how you define "better". I've used ultraportables such as the Sony z505 series, regular Dell, Fujitsu and Toshiba notebooks, several generations of Thinkpads, and several generations of Asus notebooks. All varying in size from 10" to 17" and thinkness from under ~0.5" to very thick.

If you think "better" means the most portable notebook (thinnest/lightest), then Toshiba and Fujitsu (and possibly Sony) are probably the best

If "better" means solid construction, handle it however you want, then the Thinkpad line probably suits you, but you pay the weight/price penalty.

For the "I must look cool and price and performance doesn't matter" crowd, then you've got Apple and Sony for the most part. The z505 was one thin and pretty notebook, just didn't last very long under user.

Asus is more of a "Jack of all trades" type of manufacturer. They have a notebook in every category, but you can always find someone who makes something thinner, faster, "better", ...etc, if you wish to pay more.

If I could have any notebook(s) I want right now, I'd pick a Thinkpad T410s and Toshiba Libretto W100. Both are better than my UL80VT in many categories, but are also priced much much higher.

 

In my opinion it depends on what you are looking for.

Acer: cheap, powerful
Asus: long battery life, thin and light/ultraportable, fits every budget
Apple: OS X, good battery life, stylish, excellent build quality
Alienware: gaming, desktop replacement
Clevo: gaming/Business
Compaq: cheap
Dell: loads of customizable options, fits most budgets
HP: stylish, fits every budget
Lenovo: business, excellent build quality
Toshiba: good build quality
Sony: stylish, good build quality
Sager: gaming
Panasonic: tough,


Out of all of the above, two laptop makers caught my eyes: Asus and Toshiba. At first I was looking for a netbook, so it became a battle between the EEE 1018P and the NB305. Afterwards though, as my budget grew, it became a clash between the UL30A and the T235 (Intel). Eventually I was caught between choosing from the R705-P25 or the UL30JT. That is when my eyes set on the U35 and U45. I needed good battery life (7+ web surfing over wifi) so right now I have my sights set on the U35 and U45, because of their awesome balance of power, portability, and battery life.

 

I find that ASUS generally has a premium for their notebooks. I find that their notebook specs to be a little bit more expensive than what I could find in a similar or more powerfully spec'd machine. But, ASUS are well reputed for having one of the best build quality in the industry backed up by the best standard warranty (2 yr global + 1 year accidental).

As for Toshiba, my personal experience with toshiba consumer grade laptops are not good. I have 2 friends whose toshiba laptop died on them in less than a year. However, The protege line is higher end and from what i hear, offers good build quality.

I do like the fact that the R705 has an expresscard slot for vidock possibilities that would make it a better gaming machine than the U35JC but the setup would easily be twice the cost of the U35JC if not more. From a budget standpoint, the U35JC is a winner.

If you have the money and prefer portability over performance, than R700/R705 is the way to go.

 

Hey friends. Ken just pm'ed me that review to the U35Jc that he was trying to link to before, though which photo, I don't know.

HERE is the review.

It's in Chinese so you'll need Google Translate and sorry if this one's been posted before.

BTW, Ken's point is that this reviewed U35 has an i5-430M which he thinks has a heat sink & socket whereas the i3, he thinks, will be soldered in, making the laptop lighter than the i5 version.

 

Thanks Ken&Quatro for the link +Rep

I really hope what Ken said is true. I wonder why the i3 is soldered on when the i5 isn't. But if it means i get a more lightweight machine im okay with it since the U35JC is not meant to be fully user upgradeable anyways, looking at their placement of removable casing.

 

There is a pic of weighting U35JC and it's indicating 1.8Kg.

Now my only problem is when I can get this~!!!