Dell Studio XPS 1340/1640 now available for purchase on Dell's site !!!

The 9500M GS is the equivalent of the 8600M GT and offers similar performance.

 

It's beautiful and size wize, perfect. However, I need a Blu Ray optical drive and I doubt this will have any such thing, if it even has an optical drive. Thanks for the feedback though.

 

Where have you been all these years? It'll be at least 4-6months before we'll even see a base model available in Canada. Get used to it. That's the way most American manufacturer sees Canada. We're a second tier market for them. We get the left over bin.

 

Exactly

LOL you really think a 16:9 screen is gonna make your Blu-Ray look better on a laptop?

Ok so at 1600x900 on a 16.4", such as on a Sony FW, it's still lower resolution than my 1680x1050 on my 15.4" screen. So what I get bigger pixels instead of more real estate. It's a fail.

 

First of all go read all the posts in this thread then come back and talk to me, secondly I read up till my last post yesterday inbetween there I might have missed it, but read the title it says " Dell Studio XPS 1340/1640 now available for purchase on Dell's site !!!".

 

Looks like if you add the laptop to your cart, they include free shipping now, something they hadn't done earlier

 

the title can say anything you want, but they are not yet OFFICIALLY available. As for Canada, I hope 2 weeks after US.

 

man I just remembered the ATi only card, which isn't compatible with AVID technology. Ugh I hope they add an NVIDIA option if not I'll have to pass.

 

Except it's not 9500M GS, it's 9500M. Which is disappointing.

 

dint someone who ordered say that on the email it says 9500m GS??????

 

Which means what exactly?

 

Looks OK. I'd like to see another display option included like 1440×1080 and a meatier graphics option on the 1640. The glossy structure parts reminds me a lot of the old Macbook, I have a black one next to me and don't really like its glossy look that much; definitely prefer the matte look of the M1530.

 

Which means, it's not as good as 9500M GS. It is not powerful enough to run decent games like 9500M GS would.

 

I hope that's the case, even though on their website it has it as 9500M.

 

I actually asked the Dell chat rep he said they are available in Canada tomorrow, but do take into account that the dell rep maybe wrong.

 

Depends on what you mean by "look better". If you mean fit the screen better, I would have to say, um..., yes.

 

So you have less letterbox, big deal. But you give up all kinds of real estate so that on the occasion you watch a movie on your laptop, you have smaller black bars. Makes no sense imo.

 

Battery life on that 1640 should not be good I have to wait for a review.

6 CELL battery. and no 9 or 8 cell option.

I will be shocked if they get over 2 hours.

 

you know they're not officially announce dyet, perhaps they'll have more configurations once it is announced.

 

Here this is exactly what I am talking about. Since many on here seem to be drinking the kool-aid like good little sheep maybe you should wake up for a minute and see the light.

Most of your computer needs are based on a top down format. Documents, images, websites, email, software... it's all designed for top down reading. Any web designer will tell you that web pages are designed with "above the fold" in mind. Meaning content you see without having to scroll.

Now with 16:9 screens 90% of your computer needs are being given the finger. Why? Not because consumers want 16:9 screens. Not because we spend more time watching movies on laptops than computer related tasks. No not even because at first it looks kinda slick and cool. It is all about CUTTING COSTS. We are being shafted of our precious screen real estate so screen manufacturers can up their margins. That's it. End of story. All this BS of "it's the future" and "Blu-Ray" is nothing but useless (oh I'm so tech savvy) propaganda that sadly, many people here are all too willing to eat up like a bag of Doritos.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2328932,00.asp

 

Sadly, watching movies will proly be what I do most on whatever I get. That and web surfing. I know spending this much jack on what will essentially be a protable blu ray player and internet browser is crazy but I've got some money burning a hole in my pocket so here I am.
Therefore, I am not "drinking the cool-aid" but simply looking to optimize my movie watching experience. If I have to scroll a lil' more while web surfing, so be it.

 

I don't mind if it is 16:10 or 16:9, but, as long as you get enough monitor size and pixels, do the black bars really hurt that bad?

I also watch Japanese comic on my computer, and, you know, they are vertical lol

 

^^ See what I mean?

 

ATI Mobility RADEON® M86XT how does that one rank?

 

When you consider the fact that you are already watching on a 13" screen, why have bigger black bars than you need? I'm not saying they're the end of the world but if you have the option the choice seems obvious.

No, I don't. Not for me at least. I'm not saying 16:9 is ideal for everybody but for my application, it is perfect.
Anyway, we are coming dangerously close to hijacking this thread, if we have'nt already so I propose a truce.

btw, nice sig mod

 

Seems like you are the only one here making the most noise about the aspect ratio. You don't like it -- don't buy it, that simple!

 

Dang I really want to know what Canadian pricing will be what do you guys think it will be? Will it be the conversion rate of the American or the same (like the other dell Laptops)? One of the main reasons why I want to get it is the 16:9 aspect ratio screen in the future almost all the laptops out there will be like that.

 

Stop it already, who knows? It is not even official on the US site.

 

Sorry it is just that this laptop is so awesome! It is exactly what I wanted now I want to buy it and they won't let me! ARGHHHHH!

 

Since you're so clever Thund3rball, explain how 16:9 screens are (in your words) "giving 90% of computer tasks the middle finger". Your paragraph made no sense. How does cutting costs give regular tasks the middle finger?
For the last time, we are NOT losing screen space. Every 16:9 variant is larger than it's 16:10 counterpart, which more than makes up for the lack of a couple of pixels.

13.1in -- 13.4in
15.4 -- 15.6in or 16.4in
17.1in -- 18.4in

And by the way, have you ever used a 16:9 laptop? It's not a gimmick, it's just another resolution.

 

I have a 17" Inspiron 9300...It's the Studio XPS 1640 a little bit shorter in width?? The thing is that I'm a photographer and I have a Laptop Camera backpack and my lappy its too big and almost dont fit on it.

a 16" laptops should be less width am I right???

 

16.4in laptops will have the same width as a 15.4in but will be longer horizontally. Yes, it will be smaller, by 0.7in.

 

Thanks...so that will be perfect...and also with the edge to edge rgbled screen it the best for my photo editing and light gaming and playing movies. =)

 

Happy I bought the lg p310, I expected much more form this laptops, blueray, more resolution and sli or at least a better card. They're best thing is the design and Dell's support. But still great laptops.

 

Are those available in the states yet?

edit: found em' on the lg site. Looks like no Blu Ray on these either.

 

I won't. But others should know that it is not a good thing that our laptops are losing screen real estate while getting larger/wider. o.0

I would buy a larger laptop simply because I want a bigger screen with higher resolution. This practice of 16.4" laptops with 16:9 screens is in direct contrast to that and makes no sense for consumers.

OK I well since you didn't bother clicking on the link I provided to illuminate you on how the screen manufacturers are dictating that their needs are more important than the computer users who buy their products here we go.

The machine is wider, making most people think they are getting a "larger" screen. Well the screen is larger (i.e. wider), but sadly the number of pixels occupying it are fewer than it's 15.4" counterpart.

15.4" laptops dominate notebook sales. Clearly there is nothing wrong with 15.4" laptops. They are the perfect compromise of size/performance. But anything larger is too large for traveling. (Try and open a 16.4" notebook on an airplane or crowded train/bus whatever... lol).

But now the screen manufacturers come along and say we want to up our margins so we are cutting costs by reducing the size of the screens to save money. But if we spin it as 16.4" it sounds like customers are getting bigger screens, when really we are selling them smaller ones.

^^ That should be fairly clear to you even you now. But if not here's more.

Did that do it for you? NO! Ok...

15.4" + 16:10 = 1280x800, 1680x1050, 1920x1200
16.4" + 16:9 = 1366x768, 1600x900 (if it's available), 1920x1080

Notice anything smartypants? Ya that's right the numbers on the top (in green) are LARGER than the numbers on the bottom (in red) meaning (broken record here) you are getting LESS SCREEN REAL ESTATE (i.e. fewer pixels and a terribly narrow vertical view, in a seemingly larger machine.)

Feel free to click the link. Reading is good for ya!
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2328932,00.asp

And yes I have used a 16:9 laptop. A Sony VAIO FW 190 16.4" (1600x900).

 

Simple enough, I don't care what aspect ratio it is but I want at least 900 vertical pixels coz I have 1440x900 on my 17" Dell now.

They better offer 1600x900 since 1920x1080 is too expensive for me.

Btw from reading the news on this site, omg I said look like it has no subwoofer but now I know that it has 5.1 omg omg.

Plus DDR3 RAM and 7200 RPM HD by default, I can't wait to see it on my local Dell's site.

3670 seems to be quite well but having a 3xxx nowadays still sounds not as good as a 4xxx tho. And I actually still prefer a GeForce because I am used to that.

Hopefully the heat is not that bad.

 

It sounds good now because it was just announced.

But some laptops are already shipping with Mobile

ATI HD 4850 and ATI HD 4870 mobile versions, here we get an ATI 3670 class,

I will wait for Core i7 and the mobile 4850 and 4870's, those should have DDR4 or DDR5 RAM on them.

I mean the wait won't be that long DELL always lags behind.


or you can go and get one from another manufactuer.


Core i7 32nm and 40nm GPU's on a laptop should really be amazing. Very low watt usage and heat output.

Q3 and Q4 2009 will be nice for laptops.

 

Better edit your sig.

 

See the NBR review http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4764

 

According to that review, the Studio XPS M1640 sounds like a worthy successor to the M1530.

 

Is there anything like that review for the 1340?

 

that review looks pretty good that ATI 3670 with 512MB DDR3 ram is killing me.

and 4 GB of DDR3 ram out of the box.

plus a $200 gift card for buying one.

 

how does that m86x or HD3670 fare when it comes to gaming? I want to be able to do some gaming, not at full settings, but at least medium, medium low. Can this thing run crysis, COD4 and Empire Total War ok? I saw in the review that it scored a 4,855 2006 3DMark (2.4GHz Intel P8600, ATI Mobility RADEON HD 3670 512MB), a better mark than some laptops with the 9600M like Hp's HDX, but what the hell does this all mean..i mean im confused with people saying that the 9600M is better, but then i see these scores and it tells me otherwise, and i went to the mobile video card sticky here in the forums, but the HD3670 is not ranked in there!! SOme1 please clarify!!!! BAsicly want i am asking is, can this vid card run games decently (i know its not a gaming laptop!!)?

(BtW i dont want an alienware of the Asus G50 b/c they are too bulky and ugly looking in my opinion, so i dont want a response telling me to look for one of those laptops.)

 

So look wise, what do you think is better looking, to me the 1340 and 1640 is stylish but compared to the 1330 and 1530, the studio xps looks kinda........ bland

comments

 

Looks like from the review, the 3670 was under estimated. It seems to beat the 9600 and looks like a pretty nice card after all.

 

You're mistaken, no laptops right now are shipping with any 400０ series cards yet.

 

Golden! :laugh:

 

Uh. 1600 by 900 is the 16:9 variant of 1400 by 900. Do you notice any massive difference there huh? It hasn't got anything to do with 1650 by 1050.

1600 by 900 is WXGA++, not WSXGA++. 1400 by 900 is WXGA+ and 1650 by 1050 is WSXGA+. Notice the relationship?
There is a 16:9 variant for 1650 by 1050, but no vendors are using it.

Look, the shift from 4:3 to 16:10 reduced screen real estate as it was like going from a square to a rectangle. Now 16:10 to 16:9 is more like the rectangle but even longer.

 

anyone who does there research, would see this is a bit overpriced... and i'm also slightly disappointed with the graphics card and i wish the screen was a lil bit bigger, i thought the standard for 16 inch laptops was 16.4, not 16.0; but i can overlook that i guess. will wait for a coupon...