Sr + Ps3 = Z

So, according to my $2,000 budget I could get both a new SR and a PS3 for the price of the Z. I was really leaning towards the Z before realizing this. So my question is, what would you do?

I like the Z for the added durability and reliability. If I got the Z I'd probably become a PC-gamer since I wouldn't be able to afford any sort of console.

On the other hand, if the SR is durable enough to get through 4 years of everyday use without causing me any problems then I could probably just get that AND a PS3! I mean, I haven't heard anything bad about the SR and even though I'd be getting the most basic model available I wouldn't ever need to start up a game on it because I'd have a PS3 sittin at home!

...But the Z looks so cool!

 

Well youd accomplish the same things with both options (games, bluray, internet/other computer stuff). But the Z offers convergence. In other words all of that comes in one tiny little package so you dont need to lug around a sr AND a ps3 to do all of those things. Convenience is one advantage, but the trade off is you probably wouldnt be able to play games that look as good as ps3 games on the Z (only 9300M GS). Personally I like gaming on a console. 13.1" is really small. But its all personal preference

 

I would love to get the Z and be able to connect a high-end graphics card to its Expresscard slot and play games on my HDTV at home. I wouldn't want to buy a huge, heavy 15"+ gaming laptop to lug around, I'd just play graphically intensive games at home and take the very portable Z with me on the go.

I think this is possible right now, but only with mid-range cards since not enough bandwidth is offered. Asus had announced their XG Station but I think its still not available.

The Z has high-end components for gaming except for the videocard so if I can only hook up an external high powered graphics card to it. It would be portable and a gaming powerhouse. Sigh............ I can dream.

 

It really depends on what kind of a gamer you are. If you want to play all the latest and greatest games, don't expect the Z's 9300m to be able to handle them. If you don't mind playing older games like BF2, etc., the Z may be all you'll want.

But if you really want to play the latest games (and you like console gaming), the PS3 is the only way you're going to get what you want. Unfortunately this means you'll have to compromise for your non-gaming needs by getting an SR instead of a Z. It's up to you.

 

Yeah, I think the games for the PS3 are better than for PC as well. I really have to have the same computer last for the entire next three years though and that's where the SR worries me. I'm sure it's a great computer but I need something that will hopefully last 4 years and definitely last 3 years being used every day for hours on end.

Also, I might have a tougher time convincing the wife I need a new computer AND a PS3...

 

Totally a personal choice.

I have a PS3 and love it, so my vote goes to the PS3 and the SR.

 

Well don't go saying the Z can't play anything recent; the 9300m gs would be able to handle crysis; i've seen it, however it'd hafta be at a significantly lower res than the 1600x900, and at the lower/lowest graphical settings; however it'd be pretty smooth.

 

If you play games, SR + PS3 will satisfy you a lot more I believe. I used to have a ps3 and the graphic is just amazing(especially if you hook it up to LCd or a HDTV). Both SR and Z won't differ that much in term of gaming performance. The advantages of Z over SR that I can see are blu-ray drive on a notebook, a little lighter notebook, better/stronger casing, HDMI port, and 1650 X 900 resolution. Those will cost you more than $2000 for that configuration. If Z is also thinner and has a 9600M GT , I would really consider Z over SR.

Personally, I don't see a point of having a 1650 x 900 resolution on such a small laptop. Well it's probably needed if you watch a lot of blu ray movies on the go.

 

gaming on a 13in LCD = sucks

gaming on a 60" HDTV = rules

 

I'd recommend going for the SR and the PS3 (MGS4 bundle).

Neither the SR or Z are really gaming oriented notebooks. You need to realize that there is going to be tradeoffs in this area and adjust your expectations accordingly. With that in mind the slightly more powerful ATI in the SR should server you better than the low end Nvidia in the Z. The only real advantage of the Z is the HDMI port and the option for a higher screen. If you really want Blu-ray in a portable wait until the price drops and upgrade the optical drive on your own.

You'll especially appreciate the PS3 on games that don't have corresponding PC ports. Metal Gear Solid 4 rocks and as a Blu-ray player it's top of the line.

 

I used to play the PS3 on my 22" LCD monitor and the graphic was still amazing. I can't imagine playing on a 60" HDTV .

 

SR and a 360

 

I am not sure the Z looks better than the black SR. But I still have to see the Z in person.

In my opinion the main benefit of Z is the lower weight and thus increased portability. The higher resolution is a nice bonus.

 

This doesn't sound like a real dilemma to me. Real games are made for consoles, not for computers, and DEFINITELY not for 13" laptops. Unless all you want to do is to play old FPS and RTS games, or blow a large chunk of your life on an MMORPG, on a really small screen, you shouldn't even consider the Z only option.

 

There are plenty of really fun games that should run just fine on the Z. BF2, Half Life 2, COD2, to name a few, so don't think that the Z is not at all for gaming.

Of course, a PS3 will allow you to play later games with better graphics (and similarly a high power gaming PC will allow you to play games with even better graphics) - it all depends on what kind of a gamer you are.

Lol. Not always. A lot of people still prefer playing games with a mouse

 

HAHA yeah but whats the point in becoming a PC gamer so you can only play old games? The Z is NOT a gaming machine. Get the PS3.

 

We all know the Z isn't a gaming machine - I'm just saying that it's still capable of playing some really good games.

 

If he get's a PS3 he doesn't even have to. I use my PS3 controller on my Vaio.

 

Um, I think most of y'all are misunderstood on the whole "games are meant for consoles". Okay, how about we look at the age old example, CS, that was one of the most popular games of that time, and psobbily the most popular game ever. Plus, you can play competitively on PC, not so on any consoles. Even now, all first person shooters are MEANT to be played on PC, I don't care what any of you all say, but it's true. If you use an analog stick and lame auto aim in consoles just to aim a gun, that isn't nearly as good as simply using a mouse. Plus, do you see any competitive gaming on PS3?

Platformers, sports games (like madden), and driving games (unless you get a wheel+pedals for PC) are better on consoles, but FPS's and RTS's, which are the only two categories that have competitive gaming, belong on PCs.

Also, PS3 and Xbox360 graphics are already last gen (i think 360 graphics are 2 gens ago actually), with the new influx of ATI 4850 and HD4870, PC gaming definitely has better graphics than any console out right now.

That said, to buy a gaming rig that can run high settings for decent resolutions would cost 800-1000 dollars (Desktop, not laptop), for a decent gaming laptop, looking at around 2000+ dollars, and a gaming rig that can run max resolution max settings, also around 2000+ dollars (the core 2 extrremes themselves run at 900+ dollars).

So stop that BS about gaming=console.

Anyways, it is undeniable that games will be better on a PS3 than a Z though, ultraportable laptop vs. current generation gaming console.... kinda lopsided comparison, no? I'd go with the SR+PS3 (well, I myself would probably go for SR+360, since more good games are on it right now), since the differences between the SR and Z are very little (DDR3 my ass, it isn't that amazing, even most gaming rigs still use DDR2), I'd only get the Z for the high resolution screen right now, but that runs at 2049.99 minimum, which is almost 600 dollars more than the SR base prise, and 750 dollars more than the SR at newegg (which is the equivelent of a 1648.99 dollar CTO SR at sonystyle).

 

I agree with you completely, except for one thing:

The Z maybe be only slightly faster than the SR, but you must be misinformed if you think the all-around difference is "very little". Here are a few differences:

- The Z is carbon fiber, stronger and more durable than the SR
- The Z is 3.31 pounds, the SR is 4.17 pounds. In other words, the SR is 26% heavier than the Z.
- The Z has switchable graphics, which means you can have good gaming performance and good battery life in the same laptop
- The Z has a better screen
- The Z has a better keyboard
- The Z has HDMI
- etc., etc., etc.

 

I wish the SR has HDMI and Blu-ray option or Z has a better graphic card.
I'll need to wait abit before the perfect laptop comes out....

LG P300 has good graphic card and HDMI, but...... it doesnt has an internal optical drive and heating issue while gaming.

 

Eh, on the sonystyle site, it says 4.14 and 3.42 pounds for the SR nad Z respectively (eh, not much a difference, but just pointing out). Which comes out to a 21% weight difference. Not that you could relaly feel the difference between 21% and 26% at such light weights anyways (unless you were side by side comparing).

It's carbon fiber reinforced plastic IIRC. Pure carbon fiber is far to flexible to use as a laptop casing (it's fiber...). Plus, magnesium is plenty sturdy for most needs. Switchable graphics... although its a good idea in theory, I would rather have just one or just the other, especially if you never use the graphics card. It's just extra dead weight (hey, it may only be like another .2 pounds, but every little piece matters, all those little .1s add up to something eventually) and extra money wasted.

I already addressed the better screen, as the 1366x768 one is very similar to the 1200x800 in resolution, I don't see why it is superior. Hence, if I myself, were to buy a Z (if i had that extra 750 bucks + tax to shell out over my newegged SR) I'd get the 1600x900 screen. SInce that is one of the features that the Z has and the SR doesn't that I believe matters (that might just be me though.)

I don't see how the keyboard is better on the Z though, yess, it's an all aluminum keyboard, but what benefits does that have besides being possibly more aesthetically pleasing?

Your HDMI point is valid. (Though I personally will not be hooking up my laptop to a HDTV anyways, but i guess some people might want to).

 

You're correct that the SR is 4.14 not 4.17, but the Z weight values can be misleading. If you look at the official spec sheets for the individual preconfigured Z models, every Z weighs 3.31 pounds except for the Z590, which weighs 4.42 pounds IIRC. It appears that this is due to the dual SSD drives in the Z590, which adds about .1 pounds to it. The main Z page obviously has to say the Z in general weighs 3.4 pounds because some models do actually weigh that much.

And you're wrong about not feeling much difference anyway - read/watch any review from someone who actually compared the two. In every single case they point out how amazingly light the Z feels when compared to the SR. They say the <1 pound difference in weight is surprisingly obvious, and makes a big difference.

Better is better

Extra dead weight? Not only is the Z light enough as it is, but do you know how much a mobile video accelerator chip weighs? Not much, I can assure you

About it being useful only in theory, I disagree. When I'm carrying my laptop around, I'll probably be typing documents, coding, surfing the Internet, and maybe watching a video or two. I definitely won't be playing any games unless I'm plugged into AC and into my nice desktop laser mouse. I think the switchable graphics works perfectly - when I'm plugged in and power consumption doesn't matter, I can play games on my laptop. When I'm portable and power consumption does matter, I can get the maximum battery life possible. I don't need to buy two computers.

I know one thing: I won't be regretting my decision for getting an integrated card when I want to play a game or two, and I won't be regretting my decision for getting a GeForce card when I want better battery life. I'll have the best of both worlds

It's superior because the Z's LCD technology is more advanced than the SR's, and gives better color quality (100% color saturation, unlike the SR), better glare reduction, not to mention the fact that it has a unique scratch resistant coating. You will not find any of these technologies on the SR.

Your questions are so easy to answer . The Z keyboard has a 2.5mm stroke length, while the SR only has a 2.0mm stroke length. Also, there's more spacing between each key on the Z, which "reduces typing errors".


There's really no arguing the fact that the Z is superior to the SR by a considerable margin. The only valid arguments would be those of preference - for example you may not like that the Z's screen is slightly smaller than the SR. But if I'd bought an SR like you, I'm sure I'd be biased towards it too . Don't misunderstand though - I have nothing against the SR - it's a really really nice laptop. It's just that the Z is better in many ways, although obviously it's up to you to decide whether or not you need the extra features and technologies the Z provides, or whether it's worth it to pay the price for them.

 

Wow,you really know your facts about the Z.....

Anyhow, my (possibly weak) counter arguments:

Yes, better is better, but is better worth the money? If you are only buying a car for it's performance abilities, why buy a Ferrari F430 instead of a Corvette z06? Seriously, if you don't ever need the carbon fiber reinforced plastic case, is it still worth the money?

I'm pretty sure that graphics cards are still cards.. not just chips (i may be wrong, since I havn't opened up any laptops, but that's how it is on PC, which I've opened up many of ). Also, the heatsink (and possibly fan) for the graphics card will be the bulk of the weight anyways.

Anyhow, it is useless in theory for the business man that is in his 40s or something, who grew up when the world did not have electronic gaming (maybe pong or pac man). He will never use the card and therefore, it is potentially dead weight (depending on how graphics processing units are set up in laptops) and certainly wasted money.

Linky for the better LCD tech please. I only see the thing about it being more durable against scratches.

Lastly, for the keyboard, i'm ASSUMING the stroke length is how far you depress the key to make it type a letter. Personally, I think I'd prefer a longer stroke length, because I'm more used to a desktop. I find it much easier to use than my dad's old Sony Vaio Z1 (which has a very short stroke length and doesn't have "cookie cutter" keys (the keys arn't cut out from each other like in apple laptops)). I personally find the keyboard to be plenty spacious, and any extra space between keys would probably be in fractions of mms anyways.

 

Yeah, I have a habit of researching things to death before buying

Yeah, that's why I'm also assuming that the Z keyboard will feel slightly better due to it's longer stroke length.

That's what I would think, but apparently it's just a chip, at least on the Z. I take it you missed the thread with photos of the Z's insides:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=274083

On this page from SonyStyle:
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...Id=8198552921644570897&parentCategoryId=16154

Click on the features tab and find the LCD section. Here's what it says:

All the SR page says is that it has amazing saturation, brightness, etc. (which it does), but the Z is special in that it has 100% color saturation.

I think it's worth it, because without using carbon fiber I doubt they'd have been able to make the Z as sturdy and light as it is - carbon fiber's advantage isn't just strength, it's lightness too. And to me, strength and lightness are very important performance abilities

There's no denying that the Z is expensive, and that Sony could have cut some corners to reduce the cost by quite a bit. But this is exactly what makes it so appealing to me - it (barely) fits within my budget, and I know I'll be getting the best of the best, no compromises, no corners cut

But I have to say that the SR's price is still tempting to me. As mentioned in this thread, there are other really nice things I could buy with the money saved by getting a SR instead of a Z. In the end it all comes down to what you want/need, and how much you're willing to pay.

 

Oh, my bad on the keyboard, i switched the letters Z and SR in my quick skim over your writing. So that's my bad, but yeah, I guess the Z keyboard is better with the longer stroke length.

Anyways, which thing is the graphics processing unit in the stripped Z? I'm assuming its the thing next to the VGA port, which also has a thing connecting to a the screen (i wouldn't call it a wire, since its not a wire), its on the top right corner of the laptop. It looks like a tiny little card. Is that it?

What exactly is 100% color saturation and are you sure that other screens don't have it? I find that going into my ATI CCC and selecting AVIVO color and turning the saturation to max is good enough for me, the colors really pop out when using it.

EDIT: Forgot to address your last point. And yes, I would expect two laptops from the same brand of almost the same size (similar to the FZ vs. NR thing) to have one be superior in almost every way (or every way for that matter) while being more expensive.

 

The 100% saturation claimed by Sony I think means that the Z's LCD screen is capable of reproducing 100% of the NTSC standard color range. I guess this means you'd see less color banding and get more brilliant colors, etc. - basically it's a measurement for how well the display can reproduce colors, although the only frame of reference I have is that I remember something about the Sony SZ having ~60% color saturation (not sure if this is correct though).

But no, I'm not entirely certain that the SR doesn't have 100% color saturation too - it's just that Sony doesn't say that it has it anywhere, so I assume it doesn't (which may be false).

You mean the green circuit board at the bottom of this picture?:
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s44/eddieaus/VAIOZ5.jpg

Almost definitely not. That board contains the HDMI, VGA, and Ethernet port. There's barely enough room for those, let alone a heat generating video card chip.

Anyway I think it's clear that there's no "stock" video "cards" in the Z with heat sinks sticking out or anything. The whole board is obviously custom engineered, and all we can do is guess which chip is for the Intel graphics and which is for the GeForce graphics.

 

In the end, people have different opinions about spending their money wisely. It might due to the fact that people have different budget. That's why there are many kind of notebooks. It would be a nightmare if there is only one thing to choose from. Isn't that the beauty of life ?

Sorry for being off topic, but to OP: just get SR+PS3(or even 360 if you are not afraid with the RROD) if you want to play graphic intense games. There are many good titles for PS3 and many are coming out. If you like FPS/strategy or MMORPG games, don't get either SR or Z. You would be better getting Sager/gaming laptop with that money you are about to spend.

*I know some of you might argue with me, but I personally think the graphic on a console(ps3) is better than the graphic on a PC. I have never seen any PC games that blow me away like MGS on a PS3 or the soon to come FF13. It's so much more enjoyable playing on a console than on a PC and I spent only 1/3 of the price of a gaming desktop*

 

I'm pretty sure PCs have better graphics, MGS is a great game because of the gameplay, not because of the graphics (that should be said for every game). I honestly don't think that a360 could run something like crysis at "max settings". THe Xbox360 had great graphics in the generation of the Nvidia 7 series and the ATI X1xxx series (aka, dark ages for ATi lol).

 

Is there an external graphics card which plugs into expresscard slot? what brand?