Montevina or Nehalem

I am in the market for a Notebook that will have to last me many years, should I go for the Montevina platform or the upcoming Nehalem platform,the Nehalem will consume less power and suposently be quite a bit more powerful. And will montevina support quad cores in the future.

 

Montevina will (think a few have it already) support quad core.....as far as waiting or not......Montevina just came out so if you need it anytime soon you better buy Montevina.....i dont think Nehalem will be out for a while

 

Monte just came out and isnt even shipped year on mosy notebooks. Nehalem will likely not be out for another year (I know i know, its "estimated" for Q4 this year, I just don't buy it, espeically sense Intel will want to milk Montevina for a Lil whileAnd Nehalem isn't nearly the upgrade that you may think it will be at release. It will only be incramentally better upon release.

Remember the golden rule for laptops/technology: "Always buy when you need, there is always something around the corner."

 

Montevina is the platform not the chip. The Montevinas still use penryn. Penryn and Nehalem are the chips so when Nehalem comes out it will be on the montevina platform still. NRB geniuses am I right? Also, I dont think Nehalem is going to be coming out for a while so unless you dont really need a computer right now you would be better off just getting one now.

 

If you can wait, pick up Nehalem when it's released. Otherwise buy a montevina chipset available now.

 

I'll say wait for eyetop.

 

I am using desktop "C2D @2.8ghz with HD4870" PC now, which is connected to my 50" PDP in the living room, but am looking for something more portable, for around the house for browsing the web and playing games, and being able to take it on the road.

 

Check out the these three in this order low to high imo: hp dv5t, dell xps m1530, sager np8660

 

Nehalem processors will not work with montevina, they will only work with the Calpella platform. Calpella is supposed to be out next year (q3 is what i heard from an intel rep a while back).

 

You have a 4870 and you'd prefer to use something else for playing games?

Seriously, I would just buy a cheap IGP laptop for web browsing / taking it places and leave the desktop for games.

The technology is here now (montevina) for a portable laptop with long battery life (25W processors, SSDs, LED screens, 25% smaller motherboards, more efficient wifi chips, hybrid graphics, etc).

 

I also would like to be able just to browse the web and play a game or two without having to use my desktop PC with it's 700W power supply, energy prices are going through the roof these days, plus the portability is what I am mostly looking for.

 

Actually, I don't think you're right. Nehalem will be introduced on the Calpella platform, if I'm not mistaking.

 

Yeah, the Nehalem chipset is going to run on the Calpella platform IIRC.

To the OP, as someone else stated, just go with the golden rule:
"Buy when you need it"

If you can wait(i.e. don't need to purchase now), then do so since technology is always advancing and you'll get something better, but don't keep postponing your purchase because something else is coming because something else is always coming lol

 

Yeah, this is exactly what it comes down to.

 

The problem with laptops is that once you purchased the present technology, you can do very little, if nothing to upgrade it to close the gap and stay mostly up to date (to a certain degree) because the ones that make it, keep changing the 'standards' every 6 months/up to a year, making it impossible to upgrade to anything substantial.

For example ... even though my 5930G came with the newest PM45 chipset ... I cannot put a Quad Core cpu inside because Intel in their 'infinite wisdom' (more like 'infinite stupidity') decided that QC's needed a revised Socket P so the pins (even though the layout is identical) can properly operate (in terms of electricity).

Also ... I noticed that gpu makers keep replacing the 'standards' and that there is no 1 standard everyone abides to. Primarily because it would likely be a financial loss for them.

Now, I'm all for change and everything, but give some of the existing users something to work with at least for a period of time if they have the latest generation of chipsets that doesn't require yet another miniscule 'refresh'.

 

^^^Yeah, I hear what you're saying. A lot of the people who waited for Montevina are griping, and rightfully so, about Calpella's imminent takeover. It does appear that they're being shafted a bit, but that's how technology has been and will continue to be, which is unfortunate for the people who refuse and, as is mostly the case, cannot afford to buy the newest and best technology every time it is introduced.

Intel, AMD, ATI, NVidia, etc. exist solely to provide the type of technology they specialize in. If they were constantly developing, implementing, and/or introducing new technology, then what would they be doing?

 

Yes, but Calpella's imminent takeover is not the problem.
It's this present Montevina issue.
Making a 'refresh' for the existing platform/socket/chipset only a few months after it was released is idiotic to say the least.
Intel wanted to release mobile versions of Quad Cores (and of course refreshes of the Core2Duo's Pxxxx that consume less power) for example on Montevina platform before the said platform even came out.

Don't you think Intel wasted time/money on making socket revisions on existing platform instead of making the cpu's themselves compatible with the platform in question?
I certainly do.
What was the point exactly?
The regular consumers (and those like us who are more tech-savvy but don't have the cash to buy new laptops every 6 months or a year) hardly get a break like this.
I would very much like the ability to upgrade to a QuadCore for example in about 6 months or a year (when prices drop) so I can close the tech gap partially (and increase the rendering speed drastically in Max and other apps that support multiple cores) until I buy a completely new laptop.

Question:
At the rate 'refreshes' of existing technology are made and new technology hits the market, won't the companies responsible for those have to eventually switch to a standard that allows laptops the upgrade-ability that desktops 'enjoy'?
After all, buying new laptops with newest technology is highly expensive and the time/money invested in such rapid changes can easily result in financial losses.
If people can upgrade these parts, then they will increase the rate at which these new technologies sell (at least when the regular consumers are concerned).

 

Well that's that consumer world for you. There's a reason you don't see many upgradeable laptops. It's because the companies have deemed it less profitable at the moment to have laptops be upgradeable and therefore, for people to keep up with the technology.

But in all honesty, do YOU as a consumer NEED the most up to date technology? What are you doing with your machine exactly to need to be constantly at the peak of technology?

I myself used to like to have the most up to date stuff, but I asked myself these questions and saw that I scarcely required all this beefy power.

It's not as if the older technology suddenly stops working as soon as the new one comes out. I know people with P4 machines which are quite tech savy, yet don't care because they know they don't need more power int heir technology. I myself am only now deciding to upgrade my desktop(which is semi-weak by today's standards) due to my university needs.

By the time the technology advances to the point where a consumer really needs to change, they'll probably have enough money to completely change the machine.

 

If you read my post, having the latest tech is not the point ... rather to have the ability to close the gap partially with something slightly better than what we presently have [while not being 'the latest'] if it's needed.

I personally use 3dsMax which needs a lot of cpu power for rendering (and I need a notebook for mobility) while not having money for the 'latest and the greatest' which is already way overpriced as it is.
I don't NEED to stay at the peak, but I could sure use a nice little upgrade for a smaller fee (when prices drop) which will last an extra year and a half or two.

 

Yeah I agree with you that upgrade ability is a good option which would be great to have, but as I said, by the time you reach the point where you NEED to upgrade your technology, chances are either your current tech is about to die(considering an average laptop has a life expectancy of 3-4 years) and you have to replace the whole machine anyways or you'd have enough funds for an entirely new machine.

I do agree with you that the option of upgradeable laptops would be nice, just check how barebone laptops are going in terms of consumer popularity to how companies are probably thinking it won't be much of a profitable factor. In the ideal world, you'd have something like desktops, where notebooks could be sold pre-configured or completely be built from scratch.