[NEWS] Studio XPS 15 and XPS 17 !!

I'm in the same situation as well. I really want something close to what I have right now, but in a 13-14" form factor. I really hope the XPS 14 comes with the 900p as an option, because everything else it has definitely fits my needs. It would be very disappointing for them to omit the 900p screen in the XPS 14, especially when it's available in the current basic Inspiron 14.

 

^ also if they miss 1080p on XPS-15/17

Also it would be nice to wait till black friday shopping, ie, 26th Nov 2010

 

The problem is, most consumers don't need a high-res squinting screen, but I feel your pain.

 

how GT 445M may be weaker than HD 5730 and HD 5830 when notebookcheck puts GT 445M in class 1 and both these ATI's cards - in class 2?
Comparison of Laptop Graphics Cards - Notebookcheck.net Tech
besides, are you sure that GT 445 with Optimus tech consumes more power than HD 5830 or HD5730 without?

 

He said only the GT 445M would be faster than HD 5730.

 

ah, OK then.
still can't understand why this card -
Technically the HD5830 is a slower clocked HD 5850 without the support for fast GDDR5 graphics memory. Therefore, the 128 bit memory bus in conjunction with DDR3 memory may be a performance bottleneck.
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5830 - Notebookcheck.net Tech
- is 'ideal'.

 

But who here has used Optimus?

If you haven't, just look at the tons of posts that show users of other laptops complaining about Optimus on their GT 335Ms...

Perhaps the drivers have been fixed or whatever, but it is far from perfect.

 

Sadly the only options are a Sony Z which is out of most peoples price range or go with a business spec laptop like that HP Elitebook 8440p but give up features like a backlit keyboard, quality speakers both of which are must have for me. I owned a Latitude E6400 for work and it was a total POS, maybe Dell really is just going downhill. Anyway I am sure I will be happy with my Envy 14.

 

Where are you getting this info? These are the mainstream video cards based on Nvidia's new Fermi hardware. At the high end, this is the fastest hardware out there.

The 425 and 435 are midrange cards that consider power consumption, but so is the 5730. And the 5730 is also year-old hardware. Notebookcheck compares the 435 to the 5730 only because they're both mid-market cards for 15 inch laptops. I don't know why people are assuming the 435 will be a step back. I don't see any reason not to expect the 435 to blow the 5830 out of the water.

 

Well if you haven't lived in a cave for the past months you probably know that desktop Fermi blows compared to the competition in the low / mid-range (except for the GTX 460 / GF104) and its performance / watt again is quite pathetic, and that's the single most important thing to consider on mobile GPUs, which stem from their desktop counterpart.

Benchmarks are already available for the 425M and as expected, it's just bland. The only thing that differentiates the 435M are higher clocks, so it shouldn't be a revolution. They're low-end parts, have crappy bandwidth (GDDR3 memory), and don't even bring significant improvement over their predecessors (330/335M) in dx9/dx10. The 5730 outperforms by a good margin, so you don't even need to compare them side by side with a 5830 which has twice the shader count (but is seriously limited by, again crappy memory bandwidth).

 

Anandtech compares 5650 to 330, and estimates the new cards to roughly double the performance of the 300m series. It's not like the 5730 uses DDR5; it's not like the 5730 was ever a high-end card. The 425 benchmarks close to the 5730, and the 425 is going into notebooks that weigh less than four pounds. Hopefully, the 435 and 445, which are more powerful parts meant for higher notebooks, will blow the 425's numbers out of the water.

The highest-end cards require lots of power. They cost a lot of money and have to go in heavy chassis that accommodate their cooling needs. Outfits like Clevo make systems for people who want this hardware and are willing to pay for it and tolerate the form-factor of these big DTRs.

 

well i want the 1645 back.That design simply rocks!I dont give a sh it about usb 3.I m pretty sure mob 5730 will beat gt 435m easily!Damn dell!

 

You guys don't get it - we are not asking for the highest end cards, such as GT 460M, HD 5850, or even HD 5830...

All we ask for the XPS is something on Equal Terms with the Older HD 5730. And they couldn't even do that - save a GT 445M on XPS 17, which the majority are not as interested in, because we wanted a 14-16 inch laptop. 17.3 is significantly larger and heavier than 15.6.

So that is the problem.

 

Notebookcheck aggregates data from other sources. The only review of a 425-based system the 425 I could find was one from a website called hexus.

HEXUS.net - Review :: Acer Aspire 5745DG 3D notebook review : Page - 1/5

This review is of a real piece of crap from Acer, that's built entirely around charging a price-premium for a 3D gimmick. A very bad laptop built around the 425 outperformed Alienware M11 by about 10%. The M11 which is a very good laptop built around the 335M (which is comparable to the ATI 5650.)

Even though the Acer is a 6 pound 15 inch laptop, the 425 seems to be intended for small, light laptops. The 435 appears to replace the 335, and, with its higher clock-speed, it should mop the floor with the 5730.

Anandtech had much more favorable assessments of the hardware capabilities of the 425 and 435:

NVIDIA 400M: DX11 Top to Bottom Solutions Now Available - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

The lackluster performance in the Acer and other early benchmarks might be driver-related.

 

You are suggesting the performance of GT 435M will either match or obliterate the 5730. But most of us highly doubt this.

Not to mention, AMD GPUs have lower TDP on paper. While this may mean little, real comparisons and readings of temperature between similarly performing Nvidia and AMD GPUs show the advantages of using AMD.

About the power consumption/heat of the new GT400Ms we shall have to see when they come out - based on history though, it does not look good. After all, if "300s replaced 200s" and "400s replaced 300s" and benchmarks/readings showed not much difference in either phase, we can safely assume "400s ~ 200s". Just like how Core 2 Duos were not to be outdone by Core i3/5/7s in actual use, not synthetic benchmarks.

 

Anand is talking about computational power which is basically useless to us gamers. 425M accounts for ~6700pts on 3dmark06, which is nowhere near impressive. ATI 5650/5730 don't score much higher in this benchmark but perform significantly better than some cards with similar scores in games (for instance the 335M).

Your comparison with the M11x is invalid I think as it uses a ULV CPU which has a lot of influence on benchmark / fps depending on the game.

The 445M with GDDR5 should be a good GPU but it's not likely we'll see it in the XPS 15 from what we know so far. And it's not even guaranteed the XPS 17 will have the GDDR5 one.

 

That's true. But without GDDR5 GT 445M would still beat GT 435M.

There's an Asus laptop with 2GB HD 5730. I wonder how will 2GB GT 435M compare.

I think if there is GDDR5 GT 445M I might just have to consider an XPS 17. A large, immobile, hulking metal - dare I say - beast. Maybe I won't need it in class.

 

+1. The 435 is not faster than the 5730. The 445 is, but it's also hotter and sucks more power (5730 is 25W TDP, the 445m is 35W). Even the slower 435 is 32W TDP. No gamer wants a 15" with only a 425/435 in it, and if you're going to move up to 17", the 445 is disappointing (though the 445 would be great in a 15" if it wasn't for the high TDP). These will be classy multimedia machines, but like the Dell employee said, they replace the mid-end Studio. They are not on the same class as the Studio XPS, the old XPS, or the HP Envy. (comment's validity dependent on the actual hardware which as of yet is still speculation)

 

The Envy 17 isn't much larger in size than the XPS16. Maybe the XPS 17 won't be too bad either.

I'm heavily considering the Envy 17 except I've read it has heat issues similar to the XPS16.

I may just wait until Sandy Bridge and hope someones does a GPU refresh and improves the cooling. Envy 17 3D maybe? I really don't want to move to an Asus G73 or an Alienware monstrosity just to be able to play some games while keeping the laptop relatively cool/warm (not HOT).

 

The Evny line always had significantly better performance than the Dell consumer line of laptops (Studio, SXPS, now XPS). That being said, Dell pretty much dominated in the bang-for-your-buck department. Envy's prices make it more of an alternative to Alienware than Dell's other lines.

 

Well, a 900p Envy 14 (now with Beats edition) would've suited me fine. The only questions were the price (I couldn't choose an i5 config) and the GPU (HD 5650).

I even read somewhere that HD 5730's TDP is as low as 24W. Having used a "24W" GT200M series card myself for a long time I can safely say in Nvidia terms 24W is more like 40W. So I really dread the 45W and 32W GT400s.

Don't even make me look at GT 425 and 420M because those make them (the XPSs) the equivalent of some underpowered Asus or Acer laptop, costing me a couple of thousands less in my currency. We pay more because of the superior GPU and HD screen, and backlit keyboard.

Don't even get me started on the worse possible speakers in the world - JBL with Wavesmaxx.

 

What a deluge of speculations and comments...all due to the expectations and hope.. that for once, DELL should do something right...

Let us see what tomorrow brings...(if the launch happens on 21st Oct as expected, i.e.)

... It could be either way... But what can we do but pray, when I only wish for a configuration for which I can pay...ha!

 

Eh. Well we had really really high expectations, but only because of the past muckups.

I own 3 functioning Dell PCs and I wholly intend to buy another - yet this is what Dell presents us with.

For most of us the decisions have been made - because we are 99.9% certain the speculated specs are true. I am merely curious to see what measly config options my countries faction proffers for sale.

 

I'm just not buying that the 425/435, based on the new Fermi architecture and boasting lots more of everything (memory, cores, shaders, etc) is not a significant performance improvement over the two year-old 335 and comparable ATI cards.

If that is true, then the 425 will barely offer any performance bump over the beefed-up integrated graphics on the Sandy Bridge Intel chips. I think there's something wrong with the tests that we've seen, or there's something wrong with the drivers. Notebookcheck aggregates information from some shady external sources.

If the 435 is actually a step-down from the 5730, which was always a middle-class card, even before it was a dated one, then I will be annoyed. But I won't believe the XPS 15 is slower than the Studio XPS 16 until I see reputable benchmarks.

 

Yes, we cannot trust everything from notebookcheck.
But should we trust everything you say then? That the 335 is "2 years old"?

People are speculating that the GT 435M can potentially outperform the HD 5730 "in the future". We don't buy a PC an expect it to improve over time - by which there'll be AMD and new Nvidias available.

In fact, a PC's components have such limited life and value - we want something at least as good as the previous one. Not the other way round. It's like making wooden bullets for a new gun.

 

I'm not saying "in the future." I'm saying the unimpressive benchmarks are from crap computers with crap hardware and god-knows-what kind of software.

I'm expecting better performance from the 4xxMs than we've heard about when these things ship in the Dells.

 

Again you have all the rights to be skeptical but I just don't think there's more to these 425/435m. Fermi is just bad in efficiency and its only good representative on desktop is the gtx 460 (gf104). The rest is just... not overwhelming.

 

Dell has been withholding XPS info for so long that I will be severely disappointed if I do not hear anything in the next 24 hours.

This thread is a testament to Dell's failure.

 

Found something good !

Dell XPS 17 Laptop Details | Dell
Dell XPS 15 Laptop Details | Dell
Dell XPS 14 Laptop Details | Dell

 

Awesome thx

 

Video Card
NVIDIA GT435M GeForce®
NVIDIA GT420M GeForce®

For the XPS 15...... And it is dead ugly.....

Also the 435m is rated below the 5730........ Dell has dropped the ball

 

Good find...looks like I'll be moving to HP It'll be interesting to see what Dell now does with Alienware since the market of the XPS brand has been significantly revised. Doesn't even have the option for blu-ray burning? I'd venture to guess we may see an updateo the Alienware line with SB releases late this year/early next.

 

No mention of display in the tech specs, suggesting it is just HD

 

NICE!

15 will be mine.

 

Notebookcheck says the 435m is roughly equal to the 5730.

Also, I think they're very attractive. Except for the 17, but I just dislike the look of laptops with 10-keys in general.

 

The CPUs aren't listed either.

 

Ouch,

This is kind of a let down. I was truly excited to upgrade my xps m1530, but it looks like I too am jumping ship

 

For the 15 inch:
* 6-cell LI (2.6Ah) standard; Up to 5 hours, 14 minutes of battery life with 6-cell battery
9-cell LI (2.8Ah); Up to 9 hours, 9 minutes of battery life with 9-cell battery

I guess switchable graphics is confirmed, at least?

Either way these laptops are probably going to have serious throttling issues when they first come out (45w GPU? Its performance isn't even that good.), just like most Dell laptops.

 

Duh?

It's already been said before these new Dell pages even leaked it would have Nvidia Optimus. That = switchable graphics.

You can't have switchable graphics with AMD GPUs without AMD CPUs... which aren't really up to the task, yet.

 

Comments on the XPS 15

Good:
Switchable Graphics (as long as they work out the driver problems many have had with Optimus)
Brushed Metal surfaces
USB 3.0
Better speakers than current Studio XPS
Battery life
Exhaust vents to side

Cons:
Thin lid (you may think it looks cool, but I had the Lenovo Y560 with the thin lid, and therefore thinner than standard display panel, and the display quality is horrible. That doesn't necessarily mean this one will be crappy too, but I'm not going to waste my money finding out)
Ugly lid/hinge placement (looks like the laptop's butt is sticking out)
No Back-lit keyboard
No slot-load optical drive
420M is slow, and they will likely charge a hefty premium to upgrade to the 435M, which is still slightly slower than the 5730, and sucks more power.

If they get these out for around the $900 mark, with the 435M, after the standard Dell 'sale', they might capture the mid-end entertainment laptop buyers (like the regular Studio, as the Dell employee stated). They will likely be much more expensive than this though, at least at launch. They will not compete with the Studio XPS 16. Oh well, a lot of wishing for nothing.

 

Uh... What? There's quite a few laptops out there with ATI 5xxx series GPUs and Intel i5 CPUs. They require a physical switch to select which GPU to use (unlike Optimus automatic switching), but they're still switchable graphics. Just because the Studio XPS 16 doesn't have it doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

Wait, there's no backlit keyboard on the XPS 15? That could be a deal-breaker for me...

 

I guess we won't know for sure until you can go and configure one, it may be available as an upgrade, but looking at the pictures it's near identical to the current un-lit Studio keyboard.

 

Wait just a minute. From the Dell site on XPS 15:

"Multimedia buttons: External display, wireless on/off, extended battery life, brightness -, brightness +, backlit keyboard activation, mute, volume -, volume +, rewind, play/pause, forward, touchpad deactivation button"

No, the laptop isn't perfect. It's not very good looking (compared to say a Sony) and I really wish it had a slot-load drive, but the specs are much better. I'd get a Sony if it had a solid state drive and media buttons and I'd get an HP if it had a higher resolution than 1366x768 (I'm talking 15-inch). The Dell is the only one that has all of these things.

(And as a non-gamer, the GPU is not of great concern to me.)

 

Ironic that today Dell and Apple both revealed new laptops. Apple hit a home run, Dell struck out.

 

Wow, Dell took down the pages already.

 

also, TRAY LOADING DRIVES!!?!?!? you must be kidding me...

 

Ok, I didn't see that, I was just judging based on the pics. Also, I don't think it's a poor laptop. Actually, it could be pretty nice, depending on what price it comes out at. It's just not worthy of the name XPS, and it doesn't target the same market that we all hoped it would. They should just have kept the name Studio, this will confuse people at first. It will not attract any gamers or people looking for a high-performance laptop, but for mid-range multimedia it may be great (depending on price and display quality).

 

Assuming that they are in media bays, that would be a big plus for me. I hardly ever use optical media for anything (optical media is obsolete except for copying to hard drive), but I need lots of hard drive space. It's nice not to have to take the whole machine apart to put an optical drive back in for the few times a year you need it. Of course, using an external cable works too, which is what I was going to do if I ended up with a nasty slot-loading drive, but just being able to plug it back in as I do now would be more convenient.

 

More comprehensive look at the new laptops here: Dell XPS resurrected with NVIDIA graphics, HD webcams and JBL audio -- Engadget