Read more.35W Intel Ivy Bridge CPU and discrete NVIDIA graphics in an 11.6in laptop.
Read more.35W Intel Ivy Bridge CPU and discrete NVIDIA graphics in an 11.6in laptop.
I'd be very tempted were it not for 1 thing - the cheap nasty display. Useless.
Probably the ugliest notebook I have seen in a while to be honest. Nothing particularly special about it either really.
If they were to sort the design out and the screen then maybe it would be in with a shot.
Home Entertainment =Panasonic Viera 50ST30, Yamaha RX-V671, Playstation 3 and Monitor Audio Silver RX 5.1 Also Samsung Galaxy S 3 and Sony X Series Walkman
My System=Asus P8P67M, Intel 2500k , 8GB Corsair XMS, 128GB Crucial M4 SSD and 500GB Samsung F3, Sapphire Vapour X 7950 3GB, Enermax Liberty 620W, Akasa Eclipse-32,Dell 23" U2311H
Home Server=Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R, Intel E4500 Core2Duo 2.20GHz, CMaster CM690, 400W ENERMAX , Gigabyte HD 2400 XT, Corsair TwinX 2GB DDR2 6400, , 3x Seagate 2TB, 2x 1.5TB WD Green, 3 X Samsung 1TB HDD, 2 X 500GB, Windows Home Server OS
Home Server 2/HTPC - HP N40L with 8GB ram, Windows 7 Pro and 3x 2TB WD Blacks running XBMC
Laptop=Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
I still don't understand why laptop designers go to all the trouble of fitting a nice GPU into a laptop, and then pair it with these rubbish displays - what is the point?
One can either get an ultrabook with a nice display but integrated graphics, or dedicated graphics but a crappy display - where is the logic here??
Yuck, half looks like a machine from the last decade, lid looks like it's good for a 4:3 panel!
It's like putting in a ferrari engine only to fill it up with diesel...
Loving the performance for the pricetag, not so much the display, when tablets have 1080p and higher displays at 10-ish inches, is there really any excuse? Actually resolution isn't the main issue, it's just that IPS would be so much nicer![]()
I'd still buy one though if I hadn't embarked on my current overhaul projects![]()
1440x900 or 1600x900 would even be better, is it so hard? 1920x1080 would be great but I can see how that is on the verge of overkill for a <12" screen that's several feet from your face.
I don't care how ugly it is, I'm ugly and unfashionable too - just please, no more of these awful screens, its 2012, I had 1280x800 in 2005 on a £400 Celeron powered Dell Inspiron.
My retina MBP may have cost a LOT more but it has so much better spec (CPU) faster drive (Samsung SSD) more RAM and doesn't look like a plastic piece of generic tat. Next week iIt'll be interesting to see how much of a premium Apple charge for a 13" retina over the plastic toys the PC guys keep churning out.
Blimey, i'm actually seriously impressed.
First laptop thats a contender to the 11" ultraportable Lenovo's i've had over the past few years.
(Currently an x121e with AMD E-450 APU, only cost me £330 though. and it's low power enough to run fanless 90% of the time with the help of a little program)
This one is double the cost, but damn good value for such specs.
If i were to buy a new laptop now, i'd have a very hard decision to make on this vs a lenovo
Edit: I do agree on the screen res though, but i've yet to see an 11" screen with higher than 1366x768 anywhere, seems an unofficial industry standard![]()
"What's not to like?" - the x768 screen for a start
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)