Processor/Graphics performance comparison??

I hav an option of choosing one out of two configs-

-T6400, 2.0ghz, 4 gb ram, ATI HD4530 512mb, 32 bit vista and
-T6500, 2.1ghz, 4 gb ram, ATI HD4570 512mb, 64 bit vista..

Though I wud assume that the latter configuration would obviously have better performance,,,can someone tell me how much diff wud it exactly be?

 

Well, for starters, the one with 32bit Vista won't even be able to address the full 4GB of RAM.

 

yea...exactly...so i guess there shud be considerable amt of diff between the two configs right?

 

Second for sure.

As mentioned, you'll have probably around an extra GB of RAM, and then a bit better CPU, and then a noticeably better GPU. All in all, I think you'd notice a performance difference in loading applications, doing intensive multi-tasking, and gaming.

 

yup...thanks...the prob is that i prefer the laptop with the first config...but i guess ill have to make a compromise for the sake of performance..

 

Its hard to tell you without price difference and the other parts why dont you post each computers full specs

 

well both r the same price for me....
the first config is for the HP Dv6, the second's for the Dell studio 1555....
The studio additionally has the 7200rpm 320gb HD while the HP has the 500 gb 5400rpm one...
I prefer the looks and port config of the HP, while the technical specs of the Dell...hence I am wondering whether there is any reason to compromise on specs for the looks supposing the HP is almost equal to the Dell in performance...

 

Well, I personally would go for the Dell, as those Studios seem pretty decent, and I think they look nice, but if you REALLY prefer the looks and layout of the HP, and if you're not doing anything really intensive, you would probably be just about as happy with it as the Dell.

 

For the same price, it's a no brainer for me. Second for sure.

 

I been hearing that those hp's are having major heat problems. Stick with the dell even though the hp has a nicer design.

 

I have noticed every HP laptop I've come in contact with has been hot with normal use.

 

hmmmm...i guess ill be heading the dell's way!!..
but I have heard and read that quite a few dells have minor manufacturing defects when they come out of the box>..is it in any way true??

 

btw...i'm currently using a HP 6530 business with an intel P8400...not hot at all...avgs around 40C-45C and goes to 60C max while playing games...but then it just has a intel 4500HD graphics...i guess heat is more prominent in the higher spec models with better GPU's...
any idea on the heating of the dell?

 

-T6500, 2.1ghz, 4 gb ram, ATI HD4570 512mb, 64 bit vista..
is just better look at the specs they are all better then the other one. Plus 64 bit will allow you to use your whole 4gb of ram.

 

It's happened before, yes. But if it's any comfort, none of the people I know who own Dells (which includes 5 in my own family) have had such problems.

 

ha ha...it depends on ur luck I guess..

 

A guideline for CPUs is that an increase in MHz won't be noticeable to you if the increase is less than 300 MHz.

32 bit Vista will only use 3.5 GB of the 4 GB of RAM, but that shouldn't be a big issue for you. Seen the other way, 64 bit Vista can cause problems because still not every soft- and hardware you can buy is compatible with 64 bit Windows.

What's pretty interesting though is the difference in HDDs. Depending on the particular models, the 7200 RPM disk may speed up general usage of the laptop in a more noticeable way than any other more potent component would, compared to the 500 GB 5400 RPM drive.


Edit:

Well, it can of course happen with basically any electronic device. But the majority of devices is always free of defects when it comes out of the box, otherwise the manufacturer may get into some serious trouble and you will likely hear of it if you do just a tiny bit of research. (See early Xbox 360s)

 

Then again, 64-bit Vista is extremely stable and it's very likely you'd never have any problems with it. 64-bit XP, on the other hand, can cause problems.

 

I wasn't talking about stability but compatibility!

 

All right, that too. I doubt he would run into compatibility problems. But maybe he would want to run software that would render 64-bit problematic. At any rate, it's good to point out.

 

I've had an HP and a Dell, and I have been happiest with a Lenovo. If you want something that will last, get a Lenovo.

 

How old is that Lenovo? The quality of the Thinkpads has gotten worse and worse since Lenovo took over the Thinkpad business from IBM. That's even one of the reasons why I bought a Dell instead.

Anyways, utprabh already scoped it down to two machines, so...
Is there any really good reason that makes you advise to take a Lenovo into account?

 

Compatibility is not an issue with Vista 64. Only a few 16-bit apps have problems, but there is always a way to run it on 64-bit OS.

You can't generalize entire companies like that because each company has good models and bad ones. For example, all three have poor consumer products relative to their business ones. HP Elitebook, Dell Latitude/Precision and Lenovo's X/T/W lines are all roughly in the same ballpark in terms of quality and in the top tier of all notebooks out there (without spending an insane amount of money).

 

Well, then why will Microsoft release a 32 bit Windows 7 if 64 bit is by all means superior. (That's a rhetorical question)

 

Vista and 7 are both built on a 64-bit base (native support), hence why it is superior. 32-bit is being released to cover all the bases. Try installing a 64-bit version of Vista and I doubt you will have many (if any) compatibility issues. Vista 64 SP2 has had a lot of work done on it and it isn't like when it first came out. Don't put Vista or 7 64-bit down if you've never tried it. If there is a compatibility issue, then post it up and I'm sure people will find a solution.

 

People can not find a solution to missing driver support by hardware manufacturers. The only solution would be to write a new driver altogether, which is impractical. While it's unlikely that these problems will occur, if they do, people will likely wish they'd have gone with 32 bit instead.

Despite the 0.5 GB of more RAM and other differences (especially the additional and enhanced security features, as maintaining the security is usually the top priority I wish to achieve), I still advise users to choose 32 bit when in doubt, at least as long as there are people coming to me asking why their hardware / system near software doesn't work, as the need to buy a new operating system and have their system reinstalled in order to make it work is often a slap in their face then.

 

What products would you be referring to and how old are they? Most major companies have updated their product lines to support 64-bit. I haven't had issues with Vista not recognizing devices, though I don't use my system with too much older tech (most of the equipment I use is within 5 years old).

 

Oh dear!!..now i am confused once again.. ...
but isnt it better to choose the 64bit while thinking a year or two down the line? since Ill hv to keep this laptop for atleast 2 if not 3 yrs...maybe compatibility wont be a problem by the end of this yr??

plus i am eligible for the Windows 7 update by dell which I think is 32bit by default?(i am not sure...maybe ill get the 64bit if i choose the 64bit vista)..
I am kinda worried about compatibility since lot of people say it is a problem..but then I aint exactly a big computer geek and I dont use too many softwares..just the usual music, video, games and a few open source softwares to fool around with the laptop perhaps...

 

if the laptop comes with an OEM licence then you only have to get hold of a 64 bit disk to upgrade and use the same code

 

In that case ill be getting the 64 bit version of Windows 7..now wudnt that again have compatibility issues since its a new OS and its 64 bit???