That’s a Wrap

And that just about does it for our laptop holiday buyer’s guide. Obviously this is mostly one man’s opinion, and some areas are rather subjective. I’ve also skirted the whole Black Friday madness and largely avoided digging around for door buster sales. I’m sure you can find some great deals on other laptops if you look around, and if you’re not looking for anything more than a typical consumer laptop a lot of the differences start to blur together. Fact is, outside of gaming and certain CPU intensive tasks (tasks which a lot of people still don’t do, e.g. video transcoding), for a lot of users any reasonable laptop made after 2007 is still “fast enough”. That’s where the discussion of build quality comes into play.

I’ve got a Core 2 Duo laptop that’s perfectly fine as far as performance is concerned, but the hinges are wearing out. I have plenty of friends that ran into the exact same problem with Core Duo/Core 2 Duo or Athlon/Turion X2 laptops—blown hinges and cracking plastic cases. Battery life and performance have certainly improved over the years, but if you’re normally plugged in that’s not a major concern. It’s hard for me to imagine something coming along in the next five years (outside of gaming and video editing) where a modern Core i5 or even AMD A6 laptop will prove to be too slow. The HD video revolution was the last major bump in requirements; if all you’re doing is surfing the web and writing email, plus some Office applications, 2004-era hardware can handle it. We’ve hit a plateau, and build quality and display quality are the areas that seem to have the most problems right now as far as laptop longevity is concerned.

5000+ words later and I still feel like there are plenty of other mobile laptops that we could mention. One area I didn’t get into was the difference between business and consumer laptops. I’ve been the head laptop reviewer at AnandTech since 2006, and something that has become very clear to me over the past five years is how much of a gap we frequently see between the business and consumer models. Consumer models typically offer more in the way of graphics performance, often at lower prices, but I’ve got several laptops that have been around for at least three years and the hinges are all feeling very loose. I’ve also used some ThinkPad and Latitude laptops that are even older where the hinges are still doing fine. Plus, nearly all business laptops still give you a matte display; not everyone prefers anti-glare, but I certainly do.

Business and/or school for the next five years: Lenovo ThinkPad T420 for $950

It may seem like a small thing, and if you upgrade laptops every couple of years it probably won’t matter as much, but if you’re looking for a laptop that can last through four years of college I would strongly recommend passing on gaming and consumer laptops and going for a business laptop instead. My top three picks are all similar in terms of size and features: the Lenovo ThinkPad T420 ($950 for the 1600x900 model with the current sale), the Dell Latitude E6420 ($1172 with an i5-2520M, 6GB RAM, 1600x900 premium panel, and Quadro NVS 4200M), and the HP EliteBook 8460p (no sales on this one currently, so you end up paying a lot more compared to the T420 and E6420—around $1800 right now). As long as you get the 1600x900 LCD upgrade (all three laptop offer such a display), I’d be happy with any of these three business laptops. You get a good keyboard, great build quality, and an attractive design; yes, they cost more than consumer models, but that’s because they’ll last a lot longer. I’d recommend going with whichever laptop costs the least, which means right now the ThinkPad T420 would get my vote.

There are some other topics I never quite got to as well, like 3D displays. Let me put this succinctly: fuggedaboutit! Watching a 3D movie at the theater or on a large HDTV is one thing; on a laptop, though? Seriously, what are you going to do: whip out your stylish 3D glasses to watch a movie while you’re on a plane? Sit in the library on campus, again with the glasses? Certainly you’re not going to be playing any 3D games, because you’d really need a GTX 580M just to reach playable frame rates in most titles. But I’m curious: are there any readers that actually like 3D displays on notebooks? Okay, sure, the 120Hz refresh rates would actually be nice, but does anyone want to view 3D content on a notebook? I’ve tried it and was not impressed; if you disagree, please let me know where I’ve gone astray!

There are still a lot of laptops out there that I haven’t had a chance to test. I can tell you that every time I wander through a Walmart, Costco, Target, etc. I’ll take a minute to go bang on some laptops—it drives my wife crazy! What I’ve found is that the consumer laptops stocked by such stores have all been chasing the bottom dollar, and the result is that build quality and display quality are in the dumps. I can’t remember the last time I saw a laptop with a decent display at any of the local stores. Ironically, the tablet revolution is at least getting manufacturers to focus on their displays more, but while we’ve got 1280x752 IPS panels in several tablets (and we’re talking about 2560x1600 tablets in the next couple of years!), we still get shelves full of 1366x768 TN panel laptops. So, my final request this holiday season is for the laptop manufacturers to take a chance and start offering $100 display upgrades on more of your systems. I know I’d happily pay $1000 for a good 1080p 15.6” laptop rather than $850 for a 15.6” 768p display, and I’m not the only one. If you build it, we will come—and our reviews in the next year will continue to praise the companies that get the importance of a display.

Going for Broke: High-End Laptops and Notebooks
Comments Locked

88 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    I never had a chance to see a 780DXR in person, so I just don't know what the overall experience is like. It appears decent if a little gaudy. Finding credible reviews is also a bit difficult -- I can't find any where they actually measure contrast ratio for example. Pricing is reasonable, though I'd rather get an SSD + HDD hybrid like the ASUS. That's pretty much it: if I haven't tested a laptop and haven't been able to at least see it in person (or find a review from a source that I'd trust), I'm hesitant to recommend it without caveats.
  • Penti - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    1600x900 14-inch is fine.

    Still displays like 15" DreamColor on HP use 15W. The technology doesn't scale yet. There are some 12.5" IPS options though. But they might not be the best option for WVA and outdoor readability. IPS is fine but they need to use 3-4W for it to just be a drop in replacement.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, December 5, 2011 - link

    I believe the problem with power on IPS has more to do with the backlighting than the IPS part of the equation. Otherwise, how would iPad and several other tablets manage with IPS? I know in the past RGB LED backlighting used a lot more power than standard WLED backlighting, and I'd assume the high gamut IPS displays in DreamColor are using something similar. Anyway, the fact that IPS can be done in a tablet without losing battery life compared to TN proves it's possible; now we just need a display panel manufacturer to put in the R&D efforts and a laptop manufacturer to use the result.
  • DanNeely - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    I've been looking for a succcessor to my EEE1005PR (10" 1366x768 + 11H battery) for a while, but with the premium netbooks having largely switched to 11.6/12" screens haven't been able to find any that isn't a major regression in at least one area.

    The slightly larger laptops all fall on the wrong side of the fits in my pocket threshold; and for wandering around a conference center not having to either hand carry or use a bag is worth the akward lump problems that come with something that only just fits.

    From the other direction, I loose the 1366x768 screen which is a major letdown 95% of the time (140DPI and 8 point font text in a browser don't mix well at arms length); and I've yet to see a 10" C50/60 with more than 6 hours of battery life. I had 6hrs with my 1st netbook and it just didn't cut it, I'd want 8 hours minimum; preferably 9 or 10 to give more margin once the battery starts getting old.

    The EEE-Pad transformer might fit the bill, but although ARMs gotten considerably faster I think it's CPU performance still falls short of the atom which I found barely fast enough to be tolerable and I'd be paying a very large price premium vs a netbook.
  • Sanz84 - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    Well my friend has an atom equipped laptop and in html5 performance is even behind my phone. I still think that for long battery life the way to go is an arm processor, at least for now.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    I'd suggest Brazos C-60 as a nice compromise. Better performance than Atom in both CPU and GPU departments; I'd expect its GPU to at least match most smartphone/tablet offerings.
  • DanNeely - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    If I could find one with a 10" screen and a suitably long lasting battery I would.

    The only one newegg carries with a 10" screen is the Acer Aspire One AO522-BZ465; I'd be OK with it's screen being 1280x720, but its battery is only rated for 6 hours which isn't long enough. Acer doesn't appear to offer this with a larger battery.

    Searching on google for "10" C60 netbook" only turns up the Toshiba NB550D-10T; which has a 9.5h battery but only a 1024x600 screen. More seriously, it doesn't appear to be available in the US.
  • Meaker10 - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    You recommended a gaming machine to get a quadro 2000M?

    GTX560M = 775/1550/625 192 shaders, 24 ROPs, 192bit GDDR5
    Quadro = 550/1100/900 192 shaders, 16 ROPs, 128bit DDR3

    I'd say a 192bit 555M with DDR3 could well do better.

    I'm sorry but for 1080p gaming 128bit DDR3 is a joke, you have cut the bandwidth by over half.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    It's not as fast as GTX 560M, certainly, but it's right in the mix with the GT 555M. The additional shaders relative to 555M help quite a bit, and memory bandwidth often isn't the limiting factor. Certainly more bandwidth would have been nice, and really I'd like the option to forego Quadro if you're primarily concerned with gaming and never do any professional OpenGL work, but that's sadly not an option on the W520.
  • Meaker10 - Friday, December 2, 2011 - link

    I'd agree with you at 768p or even 900p, but at 1080p you are going to have to seriously cull something to ease that memory bandwidth.

    You can see the difference between the 5570 and 6570, often at 1680x1050 you can get a 40% difference in performance, much more than the 20% increase in shader count can cover.

    That's with a slower chipset at a lower resolution.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now