1645 vs 1647

I'm planning to buy soon a laptop and I hesitate between a MacBook Pro and Dell XPS 16

Regarding the Dell, could you explain the difference between the 1645 and 1647. Which do you recommend? I do not want to end up with problems of temperature and I want something powerful.

Thank you very much!

Jonathan

 

Taking those bolded issues to the extreme...one is a drawback of the 1645 and one is a strength of the 1645.

A question is: what do you consider powerful enough? Does your desire for power outweigh you desire for lower temps?

 

Hi AoshichanX,

Can you give some examples please

 

Off the top of my head, without running a search to refresh my memory or confirm any of the following statements...

Features
1647 .::. dual core ~2.4ghz+ .::. arrandale .::. new chipset .::. vent redesign (?)
1645 .::. quad core ~1.6ghz+ .::. clarkdale (?) .::. older chipset

Problems
1647 .::. no known heat issues (?) .::. 90watt power supply fine, 130watt recommended
1645 .::. heat issues .::. requires 130watt power supply

Recommendation
1647 .::. higher clock speeds make day to day + multimedia tasks more practical, since most apps do no require multiple threads
1645 .::. if heavy usage of multi-threaded applications, then quad core may be the better bet (?)

 

The SXPS 1645 features quad core (Clarksfield) CPU's at the expense of having a 10W higher TDP (which will contribute to an increased temperature). The SXPS 1647 on the other hand features dual core CPU's (Arrandale) and have a slightly lower TDP (35W) which reflects on both temperatures and battery life. You can't easily have good performance, good heat dissipation, and low internal and external temperatures.

Someone else can probably state their internal temperatures on their 1645/1647.

 

Which one both you guys bought?

 

The big thing now is that, in Canada anyway, the 1645 has the 5730 and the 1647 only has the 4750 (or whatever). unless anyone knows when or if the 1647 is getting the 5730, should one such as myself sacrifice the processor for the better gpu or is it better the other way around.

 

I'm ordering a 1645 today. I talked to a sales rep, and he said the 1647 wouldn't be receiving the 5730. He could have just been saying this to get me to buy the 1645 now though.

 

Sounds like BS to me.

Bronsky

 

I'll summarize in order of best to worst in terms of performance for the three choices of 1645, 1647, MacBookPro:

Gaming: 1647 (great), 1645 (good), MBP (OK)
Video/Photo Editing: 1645 (great), 1647(good), MBP (good)
Music, Word Processing, Basic tasks: all 3 (great)

What other Applications you will be using?

 

How 'bout portability/battery life?

 

While Ill agree with most of this, this is not true in the US. The 1645 actually has the more powerful GPU now. As for the heat it actually runs quite cool and VERY quite. I was also able to get over 3 hours of battery life while installing applications and light multitasking and wifi. All in all for the 15.6 market the 1645 is pretty hard to beat with the new GPU.

 

The 1645/1647 are very slim lightweight (even with the 9 cell). The battery life is also good for a 9cell with the new GPU.

 

Is this analogy appropriate? Serena Williams vs. Venus Williams. Minor differences aside, both are awesome.

 

The difference between the CPU's on the 1647 and 1645 when considering TurboBoost is negligible (a difference in clock speed of 0.13GHz). In addition, as already said the GPU on the 1645 is better currently in the U.S.