Y50 Thread

Then, USB drive.

 

If it comes down to it, I probably will, because this laptop is looking like the best option available. But when traveling, you want as few peripheral items as possible. In my opinion, disc drives don't significantly change the weight of a laptop and I would prefer an integrated solution.

EDIT: Sorry, I wasn't sure if you meant USB Disc drive or thumb drive. I assumed you meant disc.

 

By usb drive, most likely, he is saying a usb thumbdrive. It has become so cheap nowadays there is really no reason to use a disc over it.

 

I still buy CD albums in these days and age. Internet is not always reliable in my country, the only place where Internet connection is reliable is in my home. You see, I wouldn't even consider buying a laptop if I could stay in my current home, I'd just use my desktop instead. I don't need Internet all the time but I'm moving out later and discs have proven itself again as an important being to me.

 

No matter how cheap USB thumb drives are, they are not nearly as disposable. You don't buy a thumb drive and then give it away to a friend.

But let's not let this become a pointless debate in which is better: a laptop with or without an optical drive. I say tomato, you say to-mah-to. It would be just nice if the Y50 could be released already and put all this bickering about phantom specs to an end. I think we can all agree on that.

 

You can lend your usb to a friend and let him copy the data down to his HD, which is much easier than discs. Storage devices are never meant to be disposable.

Regardless, it is your choice of choosing a laptop with optical drive or not. To me, it's just pointless and takes up the space that could be otherwise used for better heating solutions. The easiest solution is to get an external one and they are pretty cheap and portable these days.

 

btw guys I just saw the internal cooling design for the X1 Carbon, anyone think they might use some of that design (fans/intakes etc.) on the y50 considering it's flagship model for Ideapad?

 

In my country the price for lenovo y510p SLI GT755m is exactly 1033€.... not everyone lives in the US you know


For those of you saying an external optical drive means more weight....at most it means 50 grams more(the weight of the cable and the plastic casing) because the weight of the actual drive itself would have been added to the laptop anyway if it was integrated.

This way you just have the option to leave that weight at home whenever you don't need it instead of carrying it with you all the time.

 

Golly! I never thought of that! Gee whiz, thanks for this great solution!

 

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not

 

Are you being sarcastic?
Because it's obvious that he was.

 

You guys! We need to calm down..! The wait is getting to us! Turning on ourselves is just what they want!
Now back to interesting topics please

Sent from my LT25i using Tapatalk

 

In my own opinion, having an optical drive on a laptop is like having a floppy drive on a desktop. It's all good if you use it just for yourself, but not everyone uses the technology anymore and it might not be convenient to them when you have to exchange files.

Almost every electronic device now uses usb. From PCs, smartphones, ps3, xbox, TVs, heck even Bluray players (which are meant to read CDs) have usb ports. You will have to adapt soon whether you like it or not.

As for it being disposable, we have a bunch of $2 1gb flash drives from walmart. My brother uses it to submit contents to his teacher and it doesnt matter if he gets it back or not.

 

There really are no more interesting topics. Every scrap of info about this laptop must have been discussed ten times over.

There are only so many things that can be discussed before this laptop is actually released.

For the most part the topics of conversation on this thread right now are limited to people who are too "busy" to read the whole thread and post questions that have already been answered in the past + the people who answer them.

 

Agreed. Or argue about opinions and preferences.

I'm just waiting for the first person who will come bearing good news: "They've finally released it!" (or at least put up the official spec sheet).

 

After more than 4 years of using my dell xps 15 with crappy gt 525m (which nowadays don't even run games properly except very low settings), I think its time for me to upgrade. I think i will wait for another year.

I really want a 4k laptop with gtx 880m or gtx 880m sli because I do a heavy gaming, after effects, watch movies and also want to experience 4k. I don't want to upgrade again for about 6-8 years. I really would have gone for this but i am not only because of gtx 860m. If they would have given gtx 880m, no doubt i would have gone for this.

So i will wait for another year!

 

Nothing would future proof for 6-8 year. The need to upgrade is becoming more and more frequent.

 

I am afraid you are very unrealistic expecting 880M in a laptop under 1 inch thickness.

IMO you'll have to wait a lot more than 1 year for technology to progress that far.

Your best bet would be if Alienware or one of the other gaming oriented brands will release something with 4k but that will DEFINETLY not be 1 inch or under in thickness due to the massive heatsinks/coolers it would have to acomodate in order to cool an 880m

That depends alot on the end users expectations. Personally I believe that the 860m will have enough power to fulfill my gaming needs for arround 4 years .

Mind you, I am aware that that will mean turning the eye candy down to a bare minimum after the first 2 years and of course no expectations of 4k gaming.

I don't see why an 880 m could not be used in the same maner for an even longer period of time.

If you want ultra settings however no laptop videocard will last you past the first 1-1.5 years.

 

Sorry. I forgot to mention. I really don't care much about thickness. I just need a 4k laptop with gtx 880m or sli. Also atleast I will be able to play at high or med settings with gtx 880m even after more than 4 years which in your case gtx 860m might have to more lower the settings.

 

You are not going to get high fps on ultra settings with dual gtx 880m at 4k resolution. At least a gtx 780ti SLI. To put into perspective, The 880m is an equivalent of a gtx 770.

 

He didn't say he wants to play in 4k.

 

"I really want a 4k laptop with gtx 880m or gtx 880m sli because I do a heavy gaming, after effects, watch movies and also want to experience 4k. "

 

I just want the slim slim factor and the 4k resolution.

 

From that sentence i understand that he wants 4k .

And he wants the 880m because he is a heavy gamer

 

I never said i want to play games in 4k. I said i want to experience 4k.

 

There is no real use of 4k but gaming. There are very few 4k movies, and it seems that programs doesnt scale well...

 

There are very few movies because 4k is just introduced...if the future of movies/media was not 4k why do you think that they would make 4k TV screens

Obviously the intention is to make 4k the new FullHD.

Besides...we all know 16:9 is not an ideal aspect ratio for gaming...that's just further proof that 4k was created for media in the first place.

Also the fact that 99% of current gen GPU's struggle with 4k can be counted as an argument for the main use of 4k right now being media playback.

 

Then what is the ideal aspect ratio for gaming?

 

Arguably both 4:3 or 16:10 are better options for gaming.

Widescreen(16:9) was specifically designed with movies in mind and it kinda got stuck as the standard for laptops nowadays....the main reason being that there are way more people using laptops for media content(youtube, movies etc) than for gaming.

 

How would the Y50 handle 4k gaming with its GTX 860m? Would it get decent frame rates for games or will it be way to unplayable?

 

Short answer...not well.

Long answer... noooooooooooot well. )

The only way you could expect to realistically play games in 4k would be to turn everything down to low.

Luckily 4k perfectly scales down to both FullHD and HD wich makes it ideal for gaming asswell as high def media playback.
(1920 ×1080)x4 = 3840×2160
(1280x720)x9 = 3840x2160

 

that made no sense whatsoever. Your other programs are going to run at its own resolution, not 4k.

 

My bad, I should've said "I totally can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not" to make myself clear

 

exactly, I don't think any program as their own native res on 4k by default as of today

 

What "other program"?

You can game perfectly well in 1080p(because 1 full HD pixel can perfectly be represented by 2x2 4k pixels ) or 720p(because 1 HD pixel can be perfectly represented by 3x3 4k pixels)

When you game on any other resolution than native res on an lcd then you get a blurred image...UNLESS the ratio between resolutions is an integer.

That's why 1080p and 720p will look good(2160:1080=2 & 2160:720=3) while 1600x900 will look very bad.(2160:900=2.4)

 

Bottom line the 860M is acceptable for this notebook. Just scale down the games to 1080p. At 15.6" 1080p is still pretty dense.

 

If you want to play BF4 on ultra in 4k, you need desktop 780 SLI at least to make it playable. People now who are gaming in 4k are running 4 titans. To make it more clear, the closest desktop card to 860M is the 750Ti, which has somewhat higher performance than the 860M.

 

I'd have to disagree once again. Upscaling 2K to 4K won't look as detailed as native 4K and it won't look as sharp as pixelated 2K.

Pixelated 2K:



Upscaled 2K:



Native 4K:



But to be fair, you'd probably never notice it on a 15.6" display. At most, you might see a little blur or haloing around high contrast edges and lines which might pass for a bit of bad antialiasing but only if you're actively looking for it. On a 28" or 32" 4K PC monitor the 2K to 4K upscale would be a lot more jarring.

 

I did a bit of research since the last time we discussed this matter and believe I know where our previous differences arose. We where refering to bluriness as results of different factors.

What I was aiming at with my previous post(and our previous unsetlled discussion) is that you will not have to deal with blurriness/jagged lines of the sort that would happen when upscaling 720p to 1080p wich happens because basically there is no visually or phisically acurate way for the upscaling alghorithm to enhance an image that is composed of 2x2 pixels in the space of 3x3 pixels(this is the actual surface area of the screen that coresponds) and as a result it will create a poor jagged/blurry image.

When you upscale fullHD to 4k however the alghorithm has to deal with upscaling 2x2 to 4x4 wich produces a very nice image. Any resulting blurriness will be only a softening of the edges created by the bilinear filtering.(thia being the kind that you where refering to and found disturbing)

I fully agree with you and believe that the pictures you posted give an accurate(if slightly exagerated because of the low resolution) description of the truth

I never meant that fullhd upscaled to 4k will look as good as native 4k...that would clearly be impossible.

So the only difference between the 2 of us is that i like image no. 2 more and you like image no.1 more.

I hope that we can both agree that you can succesfully game in fullHD on a 4K screen especially one of 15.6"

P.S. I know the article those pictures are coming from and it also says image no.2 looks better than image no.1

 

Connected to chat
Please wait while we connect with you with a Lenovo Chat Representative.
You have been connected to ^Syed.sajjad Sajjad.
TopKek :
Whats up?
^Syed.sajjad :
Thank you for contacting Lenovo Sales Chat. My name is Sajjad and my Rep ID is 2900716281. Happy to help you today.
^Syed.sajjad :
Hello, how are you today?
TopKek :
Yo, I be looking for the y50
TopKek :
When will that foo be out
^Syed.sajjad :
It will be releasing next Month first week.
TopKek :
Aww yeah thanks my n
^Syed.sajjad :
You are welcome.
^Syed.sajjad :
Is there anything else that I may assist you with Lenovo products today?
TopKek :
nah man its all good but what it is is what it be you know ya hear?

 

I'd have to disagree with #2 looking better than #1. Sure, the images are magnified 200% so any differences will be exaggerated. But what you have to realize is that #1 is identical to 2K on a native 2K screen while #2 is a slightly blurrier version of that due to the scaling algorithm. My point has always been that the filtering will soften the upscaled image compared to one of the same unscaled resolution running natively. I don't know what you may have misconstrued out of that which caused you to attack me in the past...

Anyway, it's personal preference, but in my eyes any softening of the image, however slight, is a hit on fidelity. That's also why I generally hate things like FXAA and especially TXAA with a passion.

2K is referring to the approximate number of horizontal pixels, which in the case of Full HD is 1920. It's just the commonly accepted term. Same reason that 3840x2160 is 4K and 2560x1440/1600 is 2.5K. FHD can't be 1K because it needs to be a square root of 4K due to length and height both being decreased by a factor of 2.

 

Why haven't I tried that before LOL

 

^Wouldn't be the first time I confused an Indian person for a brother.

 

1. I didn't misconstrue anything...Htwingnut and Cloudfire together with the other guys in the previous thread where refering to the same thing I was....wich is different than what you where reffering to...that's the reason my posts received all those likes.

The only person that was talking on the same point as you was Mr Koala but he also liked the upscaled version of 2k more than the pixelated/sharp one.

2.Many people actually like/love FXAA...i'm one of them

3.You're right about 2k being the proper name for fullHD...my bad.

 

Do you guys think that games like starcraft 2 might be playable at 4K? I sort of convinced myself that it should be very playable at medium/high due to the game being very CPU focused and the 860M being roughly equal to a 480 (desktop) which is complete overkill at 1080P/ultra.

 

FYI, the 860m is literally just a few MHz behind the desktop gtx 750ti, so.... No. Either way, the CPU on this is not great enough for this. You may be able to play something like half life 1 at 4k, but not Starcraft 2.

 

Like I said before, the 860M is an underclocked 750Ti which is enough to handle modern games on ultra in 1080P, but to go 4k you are gonna need something a lot better. If you get 860M SLI, you might be able to handle sc2 on medium in 4k, but a single card is way out of the question unless you are playing a much less demanding game

 

If a Mac with a 750M can manage this, there's hope that an 860M can get Ultra in SC2 at 4K. At the very least medium or high should be good. The 860M is much faster and the game should also run better in Windows. Seems doable to me.

http://youtu.be/qwm_4h7CQaU

 

Just so there aren't any doubts here is the article from wich the pictures you posted are coming from.

http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/upscaled-1080P-vs-4K

Basically the very article that you used your examples from, disagrees with your point of view:

" Although not all algorithms yield the same quality, interpolation generally improves otherwise low resolution images"

This is the very point of these algorithms ...to provide you with a better image and I believe that 90% of the population will view it as an improvement and NOT as a disadvantage as you do.

 

There is no absolute right or wrong. The sharper image is just my preference. 1080p on 15.6" is of high enough resolution (it's what I'm using right now) that ideally I wouldn't want the interpolation and the additional softness it brings. But others may feel differently; that's fine.

BTW 80% of all statistics are made up on the spot.