Is this specs good enought????? please help

I use my laptop primary to online, surf web and watch movie Do you think the spec of this laptop suit my need and worth it? Thanks in advantage

VGN-FW390 ( price $ 1170 be4 tax )

* Microsoft® Windows Vista® Home Premium 64-bit
* 2 GB DDR2-SDRAM (DDR2-800, 1GBx2)
* LCD 16.4" (XBRITE-FullHD™
* 250 GB SATA Hard Disk Drive [5400 rpm]
* ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 3650 with 512MB vRAM
* Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P8600 (2.40GHz)
* WLAN (802.11a/b/g/n) with integrated Bluetooth® technology
* Blu-ray Disc™ Read Only Drive

 

64 bit Vista + 2GB of memory + 5400 rpm + PS =

32 bit Vista + 4GB + 7200rpm + PS =

Seriously though I would either get a single 2GB stick of memory and add another 2GB stick yourself or just order 4GB from Sony. The next biggest improvement would be to get a 7200 rpm hard drive or ditch the 64 bit and go for 32bit. You can replace the hard drive yourself but it is more complicated since all software including the operating system has to be reloaded.

 

yes the 7200rpm makes a huge difference, and the 4gb of ram.

 

but do i really need that? like I told you I use my laptop primary to online, surf web, watch movie

 

You don't need the HD or memory improvements just for web/email/movies. I still wouldn't use 64 bit Vista with only 2GB.

Didn't you have Photoshop CS2 in your post? Why did you edit that out? Makes me look like I'm off my brain medication. Photoshop does run much better with larger amounts of memory and a faster hard disk.

 

you don't really need all that stuff if you don't want it, but it makes those tasks much faster and enjoyable

 

Well my two year and haft old Acer Aspire laptop can run CS2 pretty well so I figure this one could do a good job 2. Therefore I edited it. Sorry about that guys

 

If you were to put XP 32bit + 2GB + PS you'll find it will be quite a bit more responsive than 2GB with Vista 64bit.

It does depend on the size of the files, the number of history states, and the type of work you do. If you have a 4mpx camera and do little more than cropping then photoshop itself is over-kill. On the other hand if you are dealing with large HDR, panoramas, or composite images than the additional memory and harddisk capacity could be critical.

Vista 64 with only 2GB will be a drag on your system though. 64 bit is slower, not faster than 32bit with less than 4GB.

Doug

 

its very helpful, Doug. Thanks a lot. What about the Processor, Is 2.00Ghz is good enough? please help me out, what is the good specs for under $1000

 

Online, web surfing and movies - overkill^10

It is technically overkill, but if you are willing to pay that much - definitely a good investment as its futureproof.
(Yes, overkill now, but 2 months and suddenly you need all the power)

It would be enough for you - but the suggestions to improvements would increase performance.

 

Your current first post lists 2,4GHz - enough for some reasonably heavy photo editing too.

(My SZ has 2,5GHz at lower FSB)

 

2.0GHz + is good for photshop. The processor you listed should be more than enough. You also have a very nice gpu there which will speed up the new version of photoshop when it's released(if it hasn't been already?)

 

Photoshop Elements 7 and CS4 ? These are out.

(I have Elements 6 and thrown 29 10Megapixel pics at my SZ and said "make a panorama"... (on the Intel card...))

 

Photoshop usually ends up memory and then disk bound so the processor is not the critical element. I'd think the the 2.4 Ghz option is the most cost effective but I'd increase memory before processor speed. Faster would be a matter of diminishing returns and you don't save much going slower.

I wouldn't hold my breath for GPU usage being much of a performance boost --> it's pretty much fizzled already. On the other hand if Adobe spent some time increasing the multithreading potential it could use some of the CPU resources that are already there. Background saves/opens would probably give me back 5 or 6 hours per week.

Doug says as he waits for a 10GB file to load into CS3........