cw, bz, and e series

I am looking for a new laptop for college, as some of you may have seen. after long debate, I have finally realized sony has the best computers for my needs. But from there I am lost. My mother has the fw and loves it, so I know the build quality is great.

So how do the cw, bz, and new e series compare? I know the cw is the thickest, and the bz runs older c2d. But besides that I am lost. How do they rate against each other, what is their target market, and what would best suit me, the college student?

I would be on chrome, aim, itunes, ms office, a little photoshop, streaming videos, and some games. They would not be ultra demanding, (starcraft, theme park games, sims, elder scrolls if at all possible). A long battery life is not required, but it would be nice to be able to work in the common area, or even just go on the sofa or bed for a while without worrying about the battery running out all of a sudden.

Thanks so much for your help

 

I'd say go with the CW. I use it for college and it's perfect. It seems to me that it has the best balance of portability, power, and weight. And it actually looks really good in person. Very professional looking. It seems a little thick at first or in pictures, but it uses that thickness for a kick-*ss cooling system. It's almost silent while editing word documents or using onenote during class. Also when on break I can get some gaming in with the great nVidia graphics. Also, the only thing I can really think of with the FW is that the barrel hinges have become a problem for some people.

 

The CW or E seems to perfect fit depending on which screen size you want.

The BZ is designed for business (bad graphics card).

 

I figured as much for the bz series. Also, with the others containing core i, it would be just silly to not get one of those. Now, which one of those two is better? The cw would have the better cooling system? I am not sure how much I would need the number pad, so the offset keyboard and trackpad may get annoying? Or so it would seem.

So what model would be best? I would most likely be buying from best buy, and I want to spend as little as possible, while still getting a great system. I was thinking a core i3 model, such as:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Sony+-+...lack/9723824.p?id=1218159867748&skuId=9723824

 

The link isn't working, but that's the norm for BB links... but.. Are you referring to the i3 model with the G310m? If so it's a very capable machine!

 

alright. I was not sure if it was just my computer that always had problems. Yes it is the core i3 and g310 model.

That should easily be able to handle everything a college student would need it for, as well as the games I mentioned? I would assume elder scrolls 3: morrowind, would be pushing the most demanding game on my list? and es4 wouldnt play? I wouldnt be surprised.

 

It should be able to handle all that very nicely. I can run Oblivion which is commonly referred to as "shader hell" on high details, water, grass, and draw distance, with HDR, and some other things enabled, and it looks better on my screen than it does on my PS3. And battery life estimation is about 2.5 hrs. That's about all I get.

 

Wow. I can honestly say I never expected to play oblivion with any level of gaming-justification (as in not on low with everything turned off).

But what system do you have? The c2d? So that means a new core i model should be able to do the same as you (even if it is the 2.1ghz)? as well as the improved graphics? So it should run better? But that means even less battery as well. Hmm... this is where the several hour of gaming battery life of the alienware comes in looking good.

 

The M11x does look mighty sweet right now, especially for gaming, because the 335m will be able to handle everything you throw at it at that resolution, like crysis. But yes and no.. Yes it should perform similar to mine, but the i3 would perform slightly better, because it has hyperthreading. It depends on how you look at it, but the SU7300 isn't even as powerful as the last generation C2D T6600, but it gets better battery life.

 

It is a shame alienware went with the su4100/7300. Otherwise it would be perfect. Unless the screen gets too small too quick. Maybe I can see how much a totally base m15x would cost? maybe upgrade to 3-4gb ram, and 250-320 hdd. if I can somehow convince them to go sub 1000, then im set. otherwise ill tell the nice rep that 'the sony I am looking at is similar, and 300 cheaper. I dont have enough money for the alienware instead. if that works, well its a steal.

otherwise, sony all the way. I do love them. and the cw is a beautiful machine.

 

Beautiful, indeed. Actually, it shows me how dirty my patio furniture is.

 

wow, thats beautiful. After a quick debate with a friend with very strong opinions, who originally wanted me to get a a lenovo t400, then an asus ul80vt, now insists the sony cw will be perfect. While I love the sony, i cant help but think the alienware would be great too.

There would be much less battery life, and it would weigh a lot more, but it is also a metal body. but for 1-200 more it has the gt240m, 320gb hdd 7200rpm, and the alienware features. :/

 

True. Powerful card, the GT240m is. It all comes down to what is more important to you... Power or portability?

 

well, if i can play starcraft, sims, and theme park games, then im set. And those are a piece of cake on the gt310m, right? morrowind or oblivion are only delicious icing on said cake.

If i can throttle back on the gpu when mobile, thats fine. then I can blast it when tethered to the wall. Plus, gaming is not even my top priority. But since it is the most demanding aspect, it is good to know my computer can handle everything i would ever need it to.

and it has multi touch? Because I just got nice gestures on my current synaptic trackpad, and I would much rather not give that up.

 

Errr, I am confused. The GT330 is the same as the GT240! They are the same card, except the GT330 has faster clock speeds (should perform a little faster).

 

Oooh. Pwetty! <Meant to be read with Jar Jar Voice>

Seriously, that is a sweet looking machine, and makes me want one even more.

 

Nice pics! Always appreciated.

 

I was talking about the gt310m, not the 330. The graphics card im looking at is on the cheaper model, which I would get.

But I didnt know those two cards are almost the same.

 

If it's in your budget, this Sony Vaio CW offers the best bang for the buck for you.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Sony+-+...p?id=1218159867078&skuId=9723951&st=sony vaio

For $949, you can get an i5-540M CPU, Nvidia GT 330M GPU w/ 512 MB DDR3 RAM, 4 GB DDR3 RAM, 500 GB HDD 5400 rpm, BLU RAY player, IEEE Firewire port. It's at Bestbuy.com

Newegg is selling the exact same config for $170 more ($1120)!

Just to let you know, there seems to be an issue with Windows 7 and battery drain. This issue involves all laptops (not just Sony) and has to do with the BIOS. For some reason, the drain is just more easily seen in Sony laptops like the CW.

 

With slightly enhanced shaders, and since Sony includes GDDR3 memory not cheap DDR2 it runs just slightly better than the last generation GT240.

 

So how does the cw handle oblivion? In another thread someone pointed to several reviews, saying a card weaker than the 310 will not run it at all, but a card weaker than the 330 will run it fine?

 

With Oblivion, if you put the resolution in the game to 1024x768 or 1280x800 and let the nvidia software scale to the screen, you can pretty much Max out all the settings, and have it run pretty good.. But the higher the resolution, the lower the settings have to be. The 310m is a not a bad card at all, but the 330m will mop the floor with it.

 

Well, with the 330, then you have the faster processor. that means more heat and less battery. But also a bigger screen. I was looking at the s and dell 15z (best buy blue label). I love them both, except they have gma x4500. That is just killer. Graphics > backlit keyboard. Ashame.

But with the 310, it is 720p screen res, so i dont need to downscale the game. Even with some settings turned down, I can get stable game play? This is amazing. It is seriously amazing.

how does it compare to the ATI Radeon5470 of the e series? It is between these two models really.

Surprisingly the e is $50 less on the sony website then the cw on bestbuy. The only difference is losing blueray. But Like I have said here and the 'what computer for school' sub-forum, disk drive is hardly important.

What is your all-knowing advise?

 

I'd say the 5470 is going to perform marginally better than the 310m, but still not anywhere near the 330m. There are a lot of things in common between the 310m and the 5470... they both have a 64-bit memory bus, they both likely have GDDR3, they are both made on a 40nm lithography process, and they both have about the same amount of power consumption. So you could expect similar performance, and power characteristics. A great thing about the 5470 is it does support DX11 and shader model 5.0, although it's not really a powerful enough card to fully use DX11 at a respectable resolution and framerate. Between the two the 310m likely has better software support than the ATi, but if I were to have to pick, I'd say go with the model with the best processor... as the graphics are going to be about the same.

LOL!

 

There are few differences. Both would have the core i3-330m. One would have a bigger screen and less battery life. But almost identical. Would more screen be better? They would both have a 16x9 720p resolution.

I would of course wait for reviews and for it to be at best buy, if i go for the e.


and how can you deny being omniscient? any question i have, you have an answer.

 

If one is a 1366x768 resolution screen at 15 inches or larger, you won't be very impressed by it, because the pixels will be the size of rice crispies..lol But 1366x768 at 14 inches or smaller, will be about the norm. Not anything spectacular, but blu-ray's will look pretty good on it.

hahha... I just give my opinion...

 

thats really a shame. If it had 900p or better I would be all over it. 1080 and i would be in absolute heaven. But even with the low 720, i guess I will have to accept. i have 16x10 720p 14". I am really not impressed, but at the same time I sometimes make the text bigger on firefox or office.

So on a 15" 720p, could I not make the firefox/chrome page smaller to accomplish the same thing? And that way games could play natural resolution without overtaxing the gpu?

 

I know, 1440x900 is a great resolution for 15 inch screens... but they're really hard to find.

Yes, and Yes. Actually with the 720p native resolution, the video card wouldn't be taxed as much, playing games at your native resolution.

 

Alright. Because windows is so nice at adjusting the text and size of everything, I am ok with that. And since it allows me to use a slightly lesser videocard without worry, that wins points too.

I guess 720p screen is totally fine with me.

So it is the e, cw, or the dell studio 15z blue label (core i5-430, backlit keyboard, 15", sadly integrated graphics).

Leaning towards the e, mostly because it is bigger, thinner, and the audio jacks are not all the way on the back. that is just foolish to me. unless it is perfect for speaker cable. but in a dorm, headphones probably...