P8400 ATI 3650 3GB or P8600 GMA4500 4GB

Hi,

Thanks for your help first.

I am considering to buy a Sony Vaio FW290 (self-configurated), 16.4". Within my budget, I can only choose from either one of the following:

P8400 (2.26 GHz)
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 (512MB)
3GB (PC2-6400)

or

P8600 (2.4 GHz)
GMA4500MHD (latest integrated Intel graphic cards)
4GB (PC2-6400)

I do not play any games now, but it is possible that I will play some light games in the future (no games in mind now). I might use this computer for heavy AutoCad rendering (or something like that). I will definitely use it for powerpoint presentations with lots of high resolution photos. I plan in the future to set up a home theatre using this laptop. So, I need the laptop to be able to support HD playback. I don't expect to carry the laptop for daily basis, only travel once in a while to conferences, etc.

I have 64-bit Vista. I have standard (6 cell) battery. I plan to upgrade the RAM to 8GB in the future (perhaps 2 years from now) when the need arise and when the 4GB RAM is cheaper. I have a ECO display.

From the extensive readings from this site and others, I read that:
1) upgrading P8400 to P8600 is a waste, for I should not even able to notice it.
2) most programs now do not use more than 3GB, so there might not be needs for me to have 4GB RAMs for current 2 years.
3) it is a waste to have 512MB for ATI 3650 because it operates at 128-bit.
4) The battery life with ATI (playing blu-ray) is about 1.5 hours, and with GMA, is about 2.5 hours (any comments on this?). If I use the laptop with reduced brightness and just for simple word-processing, I might double the battery life.
5) Intel GMA4500 can BARELY support HD playback (some said OK, but some said there are a lot of problems).

Please kindly give comments/suggestions/advices, based on my situation. (Any of my findings from net search are incorrect?) Especially, if you can comment on the battery life, and whether GMA4500 can handle HD playback, that will be great. And according to my situation, what you will recommend me to do and why:

1) Option A: P8600, GMA, 4GB
2) Option B: P8400, ATI 3650, 3GB
3) Option C: P8400, GMA, 3GB, and save $100

(The cost for P8600 is $50, the cost for 4GB is $50, the cost for ATI is $100)

Thanks again for your kind help.

 

Please do not cross post as it is against the forum rules. I will leave this thread open as it is in the most relevant section.

Johnny T - NBR Moderation Team

 

I'd go with option B for sure. Going from a P8400 to a P8600 is a complete waste, while going from a GMA4500 to an ATI 3650 is a HUGE boost. Sure, it won't utilize the full 512MB because it is a 128-bit card but at any rate, it's miles ahead of the GMA4500. It's nice having a mid range GPU if you're a casual gamer.

As far as RAM goes, going from 3GB to 4GB won't be too significant and plus, RAM is relatively cheap so you can always just buy a 2GB RAM module a few months from now and upgrade your laptop to 4GB. Go with the Sony, I think you'll enjoy it a lot more

 

I am sorry Johnny, I don't know the rules (this is my first post in Notebookreview).

 

I would also get the graphics card since you hinted at the possibility for it in the future.

 

Mr. President, thanks for your comments. This is what i have in mind too. The only affraid is that I do not even use the ATI graphic card but need to pay the price for shorter battery life. Do you know whether GMA4500 can support HD playback, and can support heavy AutoCAD rendering and heavy 2D graphics (videos and high resolution photos). I definitely don't want my presentations to be interrupted and cannot be run smoothly (need a few seconds to load graphic-heavy pages during presentation) with the GMA4500.

Thanks again.

 

PowerPoints are EASY. There will be no hiccups from the GMA X4500HD in those. The AutoCAD would probably Benefit from the ATI card. I would go with the ATI card instantly, I do not even consider laptops that have the GMA 4500... It was designed to play HD videos so it should do that fine. I read a review comparing the GMA X4500HD to the ATI 3200 and it said both played a blu-ray movie just dandy. (I cannot find the article now, it was on laptopmag.com I think, or this site).

My Gateway with a dedicated ATI card gets a little more than 2 hours per charge, wireless on, powersaver mode & screen dimmed all the way. Sony's are normally better with battery life (in my experiences).

Again, like others said, RAM is cheap and you can up it to 4GB for only $20 from Newegg. The processors are very similar.

I'd opt for ATI for sure.

 

I'm not too familiar with CAD but I'd imagine that a GPU like the 3650 would be better suited for it than the GMA4500. There really is no advantage to the GMA4500 besides battery life, and for me personally, I'd take power over battery life because the performance increase you'd see from a 3650 is pretty substantial. I've heard that HD playback is doable on the 4500 but don't expect high quality, lag free playback.

 

Oh and RAM wise...you can spend $25 on newegg.com and swap out the 1GB module with a 2GB module. This way you're getting 4GB, a good GPU, good processor, etc. You're just taking a hit on battery life.

Here's a link to a Kingston 2GB module for $22.99.

 

Hi Nizzy, Isend and Mr. President,

Really thank for your useful insights. I think they really give me the peace of mind to go with the ATI. Perhaps the only information missing is how exactly the battery life longs for Sony FW. But as suggested by Isend, if it is 2.5 hours, I will be happy with it. (If any other readers can comment on this, I am really thankful.)

Mr. President, thanks for the link. I think I will keep it temporary at 3GB and see how it goes. I will upgrade the RAM if the computer runs slowly... And as you pointed out, the RAM is SOOOOO cheap!


Last question: I read a lot of people commenting about the ECO screen is really bad, compared to the FullHD screen. Do you know how ECO screen compared to other laptops (for example, the HP DV5t or Dell Studio). I should not be very picky on screen, and the extra $100 on FullHD might stretch my budget a bit, will you recommend me for the FullHD screen?

Thanks a lot again for your useful help....

 

The HD4500 really isn't a powerful card. If you're doing heavy CAD and rendering work, it might not cut at it a point. There's a reason that actual workstation cards cost nearly twice their gaming counterparts, it's because they really do optimize the work. The HD3650 will handle rendering better than the HD4500 for sure by miles.

As for the screen, I personally don't find the ECO screen that bad, but compared to the FullHD one it really is bad lol But I'd say it is more or less o par with other regular consumer notebooks.

 

Yup the eco screen is just like any other screen. Where as the Full HD is the double lamp screen. Which is quite excellent.

 

The FullHD screen mostly comes in handy for people who are really into eye candy. To some, it might not be something they yearn for as much.

For example, we have both a Blu Ray and HDDvD player(got the latter before Blu Ray won for a really cheap price) and to be perfectly honest, I don't see that huge an improvement over a regular 720p DvD(or at least nothing mind blowing). SO this would be an example where I would be the kind of person who wouldn't mind the "regular" ECO screen.

That being said, if you're gaming and doing CAD work, the extra resolution will probably help

 

Thanks a lot for your explanations, Forever Melody and Johnny. I think I know what I want now. I don't think FullHD is that important, for if I want to do heavy duty AutoCAD, most probably I will just use the workstation at school. Just occasionally, it will be handy to have a laptop at home that may handle my occasion need to work at home. So, I think ECO and ATI 3650 should work for me. And I don't watch movies that much, so probably, my eyes are not spoilt by those fancy screens yet Thanks a lot again.... your explanations help a lot...