MGP: New Laptop?

[MGP]

So I officially hate most laptop websites now. You'd think that something as critical as processor speed and battery life would be included in every product description. It amazes me that people buy computers online without knowing even these simple things about what they're buying.

So after spending way too much time trying to find what I was after (I looked at Dell, Fujitsu, Toshiba, Acer, HP/Compaq, NEC, etc), I still have no idea if what I want exists. The only decent sites were Toshiba and Fujitsu, the latter being the easiest to navigate - and they didn't have it. So here's my question:

Does anyone know if there any laptops out there that have the following specs:
Processor Speed >= 3.0Ghz
Memory >= 1 MB
Battery Life (Including Extended/2nd bay batteries): >= 6 hours
Extras: S-Video out, <=15" (preferably smaller), internal wireless card, internal CD-RW/DVD
Price: It depends on what else it has and if it even exists. The closest computers I found were about $1,800. One had a slower processor (2 GHz - Fujitsu) and the other had a short battery life (2 Hrs - Toshiba).

I'd get a gaming computer but it turns out their battery lives suck - the Dell one with the skull is pretty cool - but I'm not ready to spend $5,000 (fully loaded - I checked for fun) on an amazingly fast laptop with only 1 hour of battery life.

Thank you in advance for any suggestions - even if it's just a place to look with decent search filters. (I tried Yahoo, Froogle and Amazon, as well as product comparisons and reviews, all to no avail).

Sincerely,
MGP

[Parker]

I don't think that such a critter exists.

The problem is that you have two mutually exclusive criteria. In order to get the long battery life you want, the system must use the Pentium M processor -- and they only go up to about 2 Ghz.

The laptops that use the full-size P4 (or AMD) CPU's are known as "desktop replacements." It is assumed that they will mostly be used somewhere where they can be plugged in, so battery life isn't a priority.

It can't be - those 3+ Ghz processors draw a lot of juice. In addition, they generate a lot of heat, which means that a good powerful fan is needed -- which draws more juice.

I agree that the laptop manufacturers websites can be frustrating to try and navigate. Sometimes the easiest way to get detailed specs on a particular model is to skip the sales section entirely. Go to the support section and download the operator's manual (usually in .pdf format), which normally contains detailed specifications.

[Magician]

> The problem is that you have two mutually
> exclusive criteria. In order to get the long
> battery life you want, the system must use
> the Pentium M processor -- and they only go
> up to about 2 Ghz.

Yes. I understand that the Pentium M performs quite a bit better than a P4 at the same clock speed though (try Intel or Tom's hardware for more information). So you don't necessarily need 3GHz. A colleague has a Pentium M laptop and is quite impressed with the performance and battery life.

[disadvantageplayer]

the closest i can find is a dell inspiron 5150, all features are upgradeable to the specs you'd like except for maybe battery life, which i think would make it something like 4.5-5.5 hours depending on how hard you're using the thing. supposedly the 12-cell battery can make it 6 hours + but i doubt that it can do that when it's grinding down on the cpu... there are lots of better laptops etc but the inspiron starts at a price where if you actually made those upgrades you'd still be in the price range you're thinking of...

inspiron 5150

[MGP]

Ok - so I found what seems to be a very nice review of the P4 EE, P M, and the AMD Athlon chips at:

GamePC - Mobile CPU Showdown P4 vs. P4EE vs. P-M. vs. Athlon64

Based on the reviews, it seems that the P4 EE and Athlon 3700+ are very comparable in most respects with the advantage being toward the 3700+ for science/math calculations (e.g. my CA).

According to the review, the 3700+ processor runs a little bit cooler than the P4 on average and has better default adjustments based for notebooks. It also seems to be cheaper.

One extra bonus is that it seems you can underclock the processor and get more battery life out of it when you need it, e.g. when traveling:

NotebookReview.com Notebook Forums - Compaq R3000Z

from a site that looks like it has free software:

ClockGen

This to me seems like a good compromise for maximal performance when plugged in and slowing down with a decent battery life when unplugged. Is this too optimistic or should it really work?

The best priced systems I could find were nearly identical systems from Compaq (R3000z) and HP (zv5000z), but apparently they are very heavy. They do have everything I'm looking for though and they're available, even customized, through Costco which has a 6 mo return policy. The Compaq has a switch for the wireless card so that can save even more battery life. The main drawback it seems is that they're very heavy - and I'm used to my tiny little Fujitsu Lifebook P - oh well - I can't have everything

By the way I'm planning on getting 1 GB memory, but is it worth $825 for an upgrade to 2 GB of memory (the system is about $1700 with 1 MB)? Does it really make that much of a difference?

Thank you both very much for your help - now I just have to clear it with the wife - wish me luck !!

Sincerely,
MGP

[MGP]

Thanks for taking the time to find this. I just missed this post as I was typing my other post. I looked at Dell as well, but I just can't bring myself to consider them seriously because of their terrible powercords. My wife has a Dell and the part of the cord that attaches to the computer broke twice - once with the original and a second with a different brand. It costs about $100 each time it breaks and I just can't afford to keep replacing it.

Thanks again,
MGP

[Parker]

> According to the review, the 3700+ processor
> runs a little bit cooler than the P4 on
> average and has better default adjustments
> based for notebooks. It also seems to be
> cheaper.

You don't have to sell this AMD fan on the virtues of Althons. :-)

> One extra bonus is that it seems you can
> underclock the processor and get more
> battery life out of it when you need it,
> e.g. when traveling:

Most laptops can be configured to do this to some extent. Of course, if you plan on using it on battery a lot, and you're going to underclock the processor to save battery life, you may as well save some money and buy a slower CPU.

> NotebookReview.com Notebook Forums - Compaq
> R3000Z from a site that looks like it has
> free software:

> ClockGen This to me seems like a good
> compromise for maximal performance when
> plugged in and slowing down with a decent
> battery life when unplugged. Is this too
> optimistic or should it really work?

It will work. How well is another matter. You're not going to get anything close to the 6 hr you mentioned in your original post.

BTW, most Linux distros come with power management software that will throttle back the CPU, among other things, to conserve battery life when running on battery. Just thought I'd mention that.

> The best priced systems I could find were
> nearly identical systems from Compaq
> (R3000z) and HP (zv5000z), but apparently
> they are very heavy. They do have everything
> I'm looking for though and they're
> available, even customized, through Costco
> which has a 6 mo return policy. The Compaq
> has a switch for the wireless card so that
> can save even more battery life. The main
> drawback it seems is that they're very heavy
> - and I'm used to my tiny little Fujitsu
> Lifebook P - oh well - I can't have
> everything

Yep, big and heavy. These are the "desktop replacement" systems that I mentioned in my earlier post. I would also have concerns about durability, but then, not everyone is as rough on laptops as I am.

BTW, my own idea of an ideal laptop is something like a Toshiba Portege R100 (link below).

> By the way I'm planning on getting 1 GB
> memory, but is it worth $825 for an upgrade
> to 2 GB of memory (the system is about $1700
> with 1 MB)? Does it really make that much of
> a difference?

Absolutely not. These days, 256 MB is a minimum, 512 MB is adequate for most purposes, and 1 GB is more than you really need, even if you like to run several aps at once. 2 GB is overkill and a waste of money.

You can see this yourself. Start every ap you can think of on the system you're using now, then right-click on the taskbar, open the Task Manager, and select the "Performance" tab. You'll probably find that you're not using more than 200 MB or so of memory.

> Thank you both very much for your help - now
> I just have to clear it with the wife - wish
> me luck !!

You're on your own here. :-)

Toshiba Portege R100

[Parker]

> Thanks for taking the time to find this. I
> just missed this post as I was typing my
> other post. I looked at Dell as well, but I
> just can't bring myself to consider them
> seriously because of their terrible
> powercords. My wife has a Dell and the part
> of the cord that attaches to the computer
> broke twice - once with the original and a
> second with a different brand. It costs
> about $100 each time it breaks and I just
> can't afford to keep replacing it.

Now that you mention it, I've had problems with Dell power cords/power supplies.

This is one of the things that I like about Toshibas. They nearly all use a 15 VDC power supply that is pretty much interchangable across product lines, and you can even buy a generic unit at Radio Shack that works just fine (and costs next to nothing).

I've never had any problems with the Toshiba power cords -- except for a bad habit of leaving them in hotel rooms.

[Magician]

> By the way I'm planning on getting 1 GB
> memory, but is it worth $825 for an upgrade
> to 2 GB of memory (the system is about $1700
> with 1 MB)? Does it really make that much of
> a difference?

1GB will be plenty unless you plan to run server applications (web server, database server, etc.). If the machine comes with one memory slot free you could add another gig later on.

> Thank you both very much for your help - now
> I just have to clear it with the wife - wish
> me luck !!

:-)

[Magician]

> Now that you mention it, I've had problems
> with Dell power cords/power supplies.

Dell recently issued a recall on some of their power supplies (link below).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3727852.stm

[MGP]

Thanks Parker and Magician,

> Most laptops can be configured to do this to
> some extent. Of course, if you plan on using
> it on battery a lot, and you're going to
> underclock the processor to save battery
> life, you may as well save some money and
> buy a slower CPU.

> It will work. How well is another matter.
> You're not going to get anything close to
> the 6 hr you mentioned in your original
> post.

> Yep, big and heavy. These are the
> "desktop replacement" systems that
> I mentioned in my earlier post. I would also
> have concerns about durability, but then,
> not everyone is as rough on laptops as I am.

After your initial reply I thought about it a bit and decided I wanted to make the processor the priority. My Fujitsu lasts 8 hrs on it's battery and is great for plane rides. It's also only 10" so it fits easily on the tray table and the kids can play on it and watch a movie for an entire cross-country trip.

My main motivation for wanted to move on is because it's processor is only an 800Mhz Crusoe. It literally takes me over 1 minute (I times it once to emphasize the pain) just to load my CA (a 1.5 MB Excel spreadsheet). It takes about 10s to switch from one application to another if more than 3-4 are running. I tried running sim software and found out it's just too slow. I just can't take the pain much longer!

I'm sure it's going to be a very hard adjustment to the 15.4" 8-11 lbs, but most of the time I use it it's plugged in (at work and on my recliner). I really like the flexibility though for long trips, which are not infrequent - so my compromise will be to use the Fujitsu at those times.

> BTW, most Linux distros come with power
> management software that will throttle back
> the CPU, among other things, to conserve
> battery life when running on battery. Just
> thought I'd mention that.

Thanks, but I'm not ready to take the Linux plunge yet.

> BTW, my own idea of an ideal laptop is
> something like a Toshiba Portege R100 (link
> below).

Thanks for the link - it looks like a nice computer but see above about my processor decision.

> Absolutely not. These days, 256 MB is a
> minimum, 512 MB is adequate for most
> purposes, and 1 GB is more than you really
> need, even if you like to run several aps at
> once. 2 GB is overkill and a waste of money.

> You can see this yourself. Start every ap
> you can think of on the system you're using
> now, then right-click on the taskbar, open
> the Task Manager, and select the
> "Performance" tab. You'll probably
> find that you're not using more than 200 MB
> or so of memory.

I tried that and you're right, but it's weird. When I have a couple of spreadsheets open and 6-7 explorer windows open - Excel won't run any macroes and says "Out of Memory". It's very frustrating because I end up having to reboot when it does that. But I'll stick to just 1 GB then.

Thank you guys for your help.

Sincerely,
MGP

[paranoid android]

> GamePC - Mobile CPU Showdown P4 vs. P4EE
> According to the review, the 3700+ processor
> runs a little bit cooler than the P4 on
> average...

And the P M runs way cooler than both. I'm in the laptop market myself and have come to the conclusion that the P M is the way to go if battery life and running cool are at all important factors in your decision. If they weren't, then I'd examine whether I really needed a laptop at all. Maybe a desktop could do the job (where you get a lot more computing power for the price).

[The Phantom]

My 2 cents: Stick with Thinkpad for reliability, longevity, service, and keyboard feel. Avoid all the other brands.

Further, I can't imageine why any CPU over 1 to 1.5 Mhz is really necessary except mayber for quick-graphics gamers.