Official Sony VAIO Z vs. SR Thread. [+screen comparisons inside]

I see for Z's description on the sonystyle site that it has 100% color saturation..thanks to LED display...

however, why doesnt the SR have 100% advertised? is the difference between the screens not just that the Z has a protective coating? (duraview)

thanks

 

I don't have the answer... but I saw the SR screen today. It's really nice.

 

sweet!! how was the overall laptop itself? how was the keyboard..ect..

 

Overall, I liked it a lot. The SR was very tempting... I had to remind myself that I decided on getting a larger screened laptop (like the FW). But if not for that, the SR would be on my short list.

I can't comment much on the keyboard, since I'm not used to that type. But the screen... wow. Beautiful. Bright, sharp, black blacks.... nice.

I gotta stop. Can't... start... thinking... about... the... S... R...

 

Sony Duraview (from the Z webpage):

"A brilliant display makes those long hours and heavy workloads a little easier to endure. The VAIO Z features XBRITE-DuraView™ LCD technology, an amazing LCD technology from Sony. Not only does it provide incredible picture quality with 100% color saturation and a brighter display thanks to an LED backlight, it also features a special hard coating on the LCD that helps protect against the scratching and wear that is common to frequent day-in, day-out use and travel."

 

Yea exactly. "Thanks to a LED backlight"...which the SR has.

 

What? The Duraview is the combo of LED screen and a hard coating that protects the screen, which the SR doesn't have.

 

No but he's talking about the Z's color saturation thing, not the coating; he's implying that the only thing different is the coating.
I know what you mean, that there's no difference, but I think it's also a screen quality thing too.

 

Start watching http://club.vaio.sony.co.uk/clubvaio/gb/en/vaio10/flash.jsp from minute 79,35. It shows that the Z actually has got a new (improved) LCD screen, that's probably the main reason for the difference. Moreover you'll see that the Z got some 'improved anti-reflecting coating' that makes the screen less reflective.

 

Its funny how he has to look at the piece of paper to see what vaio means XD

 

There's a good chance the SR uses the exact same panel as the SZ. The Z screen is completely new.

Differences between the SR and Z screen:

-16:10 on the SR, 16:9 on the Z

-50-60% NTSC Gamut on SR, 100% NTSC Gamut on Z

-Standard glossy screen on SR, improved anti-reflective layer (matte-like) and scratch resistance on the Z

-Lastly, the Z screen is more flexible than previous screens. The club VAIO video shows this at around the 81:50 mark.

One thing to note from video about the Z screen - anyone notice the high black level on the Z? In the video the dark scenes from the movie the two notebooks are playing, the SZ screen gives an almost black level, while the Z gives a purple haze. This is at mark 80:40 to 80:55.

 

I think so too.

 

I should also mention that the Z screen's 'more flexible' feature may be a drawback instead of an advantage. Most LCD's utilize a glass substrate, hence they are not very flexible. In fact, the guy in the VAIO video breaks the SZ screen right before the 81:50 mark. For the Z to allow for a more flexible display, I would think they would have to move away from a glass substrate to some polymer. From a light transmittance standpoint, glass is superior to plastic polymers.

EDIT: Now this makes sense. The guy in the video claims the Z screen is more flexible AND lighter. This is a strong indication the Z screen does not use a classic glass substrate.

 

As long as the flexibility doesn't sacrifice brightness/color quality, it can only be good for durability (less chance to crack the screen), and from what I've seen in the videos (and according to most people who've seen it in person), the Z screen is far superior to the SZ screen in color quality, deep blacks, and brightness. So I don't think the flexibility is anything to worry about.

 

So, as some of you may know, i initially ordered a CTO'd Z590 with blu-ray and etc.. but i was a little disappointed with the gaming performance.. so i decided to order the SR, hoping it would give me a better cost benefit..

well.. judging by the screen, initially was utterly disappointed with the SR's screen.. and realized i wasnt going to keep it right away..
here are some pics of both screens
bear in mind i took the pictures with a Sony Ericsson K800 as i do not have a camera with me

















i will post some other pictures later when i set the saturation to max on the SR.. it did improve a lot, but it had a negative side effect to it, it cause the "white" not to look that white anymore



Build:
Both have pretty solid build, nice construction, nothing to complain about, and YES, the SR DOES have a significant amount of flex compared to the Z, but i dont think thats a major issue. One big problem with the SR is that the battery is loose, i ordered the extended battery and so far, in power saver mode @ 38% charge, i still have 1h 47 min left with wi-fi on..


feel free to make any suggestions on how to better compare these two..

but so far, i am more inclined on keeping the Z

 

Could you comment on fan noise please?

 

SR's screen set to Maximum saturation:














as you can see, with the saturation set to high, the white becomes somewhat distorted

 

fan noise on both machines are barely noticeable, but the fan on the Z has a "higher pitch noise" compared to the SR.. but i wouldnt worry about the fan noise that much

btw, i got clean install with the SR and the initial number of running processes is 66

 

Thanks so much for posting the pics. The SR with ECO screen is pale in comparison with Z with Duraview screen.

 

Needless to say, the Z looks much better on these pictures.

Are you going to do some in-game benchmarks?

 

not sure if im gonna have time.. maybe ill try during the weekend.. but im probably just going to leave it in the box..
the SR's screen was a huge disappointment to me

 

Yeah I can understand. Z looks way better.

 

wow..let's compare two totally different priced laptops and see what happens! WOW..an increase in quality in the more expensive one! who would have thought!

STOP WITH THE Z VS SR CRAP PEOPLE. THE Z IS BETTER. IT COSTS MORE. IT'S MEANT TO BE "BETTER."

"Oh dear z or SR halp halp"

BUY WHAT YOU CAN AFFORD. It's like asking "should i buy the upgraded car or stock car? hmm...which is better?" DUH.

Seriously people, this is starting to get annoying. No need for pics. No need for anything. THE Z IS NOT ECO SCREEN. THE SR IS. The XBRIGHT dura view is obviously better than ECO.

Hmm... which is going to be better? Economy or First class??? huh..maybe pics will halp??

/rant.

 

well.. i am getting a Z590 for 2200 and i payed 2000 (thx to the 50% of discounts) so, they are basically in the same price range to me..

but i do agree its unfair to compare both, and im not bashing the SR, i loved the build and quality of it.. but i was just put off a little by its screen =\
but if the Z didnt exist, i would pick the SR over any other 13.3" laptop in the market

 

I'll put on the stewardess outfit for ten seconds just to hand you a chill pill and a spoonful of sugar.

They are different, yes. Some people still appreciate the comparisons. I'm +1-ing the post, personally. I really appreciated it.

I think you are taking things a little too personal/intense. You made your choice. Let others make theirs. If they need to compare/contrast the two machines, who cares?

And for me, the prices aren't that different ... I can afford both with configurations I am very happy with, but they have different trade offs. For me, I think the Z is right. I have a friend who has been listening to me talk about them ... she'd hands down get a SR given the choice and a $3k budget. Just because you could afford a Z doesn't instantly make it the better choice for a person. And my friend helps illustrate that "better" is subjective, like oh so many things in life ... or we wouldn't have this forum and we'd all carry the same **** thing.

 

oh so the SR is on ECO. no wonder the brightness is slightly dimm than the Z.
i post before about the XBRITE-ECO screen, guess this explains about the "ECO" thingy

thanks for posting up and your effort!

 

How is the gaming difference between the 2? (I wouldnt expect much difference)

What is your estimated battery life for both laptops on standard and extended battery?

How is the SR screen compared to the SZ?

 

havent tried gaming on the SR
but on the Z, i got average 30 FPS on TF2, cant remember what i got for bf2

estimated battery for the Z on stamina, almost 5 hours with wi-fi on.. not sure, never used up all the battery

and honestly, ive never owned a SZ, so I can't really remember how bright/dark the screen was..

 

Guys, please refer to my ATI 3470 SR Gaming thread for info on TF2 and BF2 on the SR....

Duke, props for the rant, haha

 

thebigpants got 40 fps on TF2 with 1280x800, (recommended settings) High everything, Low Textures, No AA average 40fps
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=295866

That confirms that for pure gaming HD3470 is better than the 9300M.

 

But Z's resolution is 1600x900. If StrongerThanAll gamed on that resolution then scores cannot be compared in that fashion. Or ?

 

True if he was using 1600*900. I assumed Stronger used 1366*768.

 

Different LCD screens & different graphics cards + its default software color profiles mean that they are not an "equal" comparison. So I think all of us shouldn't look too much into the massive difference of the screens of the Z & the SR that are shown in the pics.

 

LOL. I wonder if I should fly first class or just rent a private jet

 

hm.. i cant really say what the average was..
like, if you're in the map with no one on screen, i get over 50.. but when istart seeing people it goes to around 40, but then, when people start shooting, (i mean a LOT of people, it goes down to 5 sometimes)..

but im gonna try tf2 on the SR later, when i have time

 

Thanks for the picture. I enjoy looking at the SR and Z side by side...(why does the Z have to be sooo expensive). Oh and did you elevate the SR? The SR and Z size shouldn't be that different but on your pic, the SR seem to either be elevated or a inch thicker on the back. Anymore picture are welcome.

Oh and could you tell me how you did a clean install on your SR? I haven't received mine yet, but I want to get an idea beforehand. thanks.

 

Wow, the size difference is somewhat noticeable between the SR and the Z. It's kind of surprising.

I already thought the screen on this thing was small, that screen on the Z is very... well, stubby came to mind. Mostly since it's a lot shorter but wider.... Much wider.



Yes, I do see the screen comparison now, there is definitely a difference. Let us put it this way, anyone with a Z has the best laptop screen out there.

There's pretty much no comparison to the SR, seeing as it is also a different screen type.

Justwondering- I think that Stronger had ordered an extended battery (I remember he said this somewhere?), and it lifts up the laptop's hinge height to account for the extra cells, instead of sticking out of the back of the laptop.

 

yes, the the SR has the extended battery

 

can anyone suggest me a nice gaming benchmark tool?

i was looking at the Crysis WARHEAD Benchmark Tool BETA
from Guru3d.

cause its kind of hard to compare both laptops with varying in game situations (especially when playing online)

 

One question: When you benchmarked Z, have you done that on native Z's resolution (1600x900) or on 1280x800, like you did on SR ?

 

i love my sr. absolutely, the screen isnt the best, but it does the job. i barely paid over a grand for it though, and for the price its the best laptop going.

fan noise is barely audible. as far as heat goes, only quadrant of the bottom gets warm. the opposite half is COLD. yes, COLD, no heat there at all, no even spread, nothing. its amazing, i love it.

its fast, its light weight, its sexy, i love it.

sure id love a z too, they are better, but cost a lot more and id rather have the cash in my pocket than a screen thats better. id rather put that money towards my new big screen, ya know?

 

i benchmarked for both 1600x900
for 1600x900 was barely playable, you could start the round and everything, but once the shooting started, fps went down..

with the 16:10 (cant remember which), it was lot more playable, the way i described in the previous post

 

Hi all,
Before you go criticizing, I HAVE searched for this info, and decided that his was the best place to ask, even if it may be somewhere on this forum.

In 2 weeks I will purchase a top of the line (w/o solid state) z or a top of the line sr. To me, the deciding factor is gaming, although I will only be playing BF2 (hence me not buying a gaming notebook). Which has better 3dmark06 score?

I would obviously want the Z scored under 1280x800, to make it even with the SR.

Are there any alternatives with higher scores you may know of? I havent found any so far (these new sonys are obviously newer by far) but maybe you've seen another 12.1-14.1(wide) nb with better graphics performance that I may want to consider?

Thanks
Zhenya

 

The SR gaming thread has an average of the scores that people have gotten in 3dmark06. I personally got about 2041 in 3dMark06, but I haven't upgraded my CCC yet. Some have gotten more, but I think it depends on the specs varying with each SR. I think that was just at the default 3dmark resolution setting though.

Russian- the only things I've seen that have just the same kinds of cards are the IdeaPad U330, that new HP DV3500, and the new Asus laptops that will come out. I might be missing a couple of other ones, but it will take time for new laptop models to come out, as Montevina is still pretty new.

I dunno, the screen in my SR is amazing. I think it is one of the best screens I've looked at that wasn't one of those older ones or anything like that. My picture doesn't look faded or washed out really. I have a retail SR version though, and it was one of the first production SR models sold.

 

Wow, thanks for the comparison. Didn't know the SR looked that much bigger.

 

but you have to look at it side by side compared to the Z..

using the SR for over a week now and it seems fine, but i know that when my Z arrives, i will be blown away again.

 

btw, i was looking at my pictures on my SR, and it doesnt look bad, but i guess thats because the color reproduction on the SR isnt that good to show the contrasts between the two

 

True..... but have you turned up the color saturation and adjusted it to not look too bright and scary?

Mine really doesn't seem washed out at all.

I'm not sure, but I have a different screen than the CTO SRs. Some reviews have said the SR screen is faded or washed out looking, and some have said it was quite great. I'll try taking a picture of it (I might be able to take it with three different cameras) though and posting it.

Oh right, I got to play around with a new Toshiba 14" laptop my aunt picked up until she gets her NR back from Sony. I can't remember the model right now.

OH MY GOD DOES THE SCREEN LOOK ABYSMAL on it. It looked really faded and washed out. It was an AMD/ATI type of system, but yeah.

I still like my SR better than that Toshiba, which has multimedia settings and the Harmon Kardon speakers.

 

screen quality like fan noise is highly subjective.

I seriously doubt you have a different SR screen that everybody else.

 

Dadoes- Have you ever heard of people having the same laptop and having a different kind of screen?

Look at the T400, people have gotten either LG or Samsung screens, if I am not mistaken.

I don't think or know if Sony makes their own screens, but they do come out differently in each process cycle. It kinda makes it different from all screens.

Yes, I still have an Xbrite-ECO. I'm not saying it is different, just maybe a different make of the same kind of screen. Hence the reviews that say it is either washed out/faded looking or absolutely brilliant.