Laptop for $2000

[amg2833]

I plan on purchasing a 40/50D within 6 months, and need the best possible laptop I can get for $2000 to process my images. I'll probably be running Lightroom and CS4.

I also need to run a program called Revit as I'm an engineering student. I don't know if anyone knows, but I've linked the system requirements here (http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?siteID=123112&id=12431819)

The cheaper the better, but I'd rather not skimp on quality as much as possible. I'm not against Mac, but since my budget isn't huge I don't know if that's much of a possibility. In addition, Revit is Windows-only.

Light weight is also a plus.

What suggestions do y'all have?

[basroil]

$2000 for a laptop will get you a massive laptop. Unless you know you need the power on the road, you are better off buying a cheap laptop AND a decent desktop. You can get a desktop more powerful than the highest end laptops (using laptop components, there are laptops with desktop parts too) for $800-$1000, a $400 monitor, and leave enough for a low end laptop that's more than enough for web and productivity software. If you don't really need much in the laptop, you can get a netbook instead, and spend the remainder on a workstation graphics card instead (autodesk programs+ workstation cards=amazing)

If you need the power on the road, you have two options:
15"+ 1920x1080+ screen, WLED is best.
4gb ram (8gb is better, but will often be four times more expensive)
i7 720qm or better processor (you can settle for a core 2 quad as well)
ati mobility 4850 or nvidia gtx 260m/280m, or if you can find it, a quadro fx mobile or firepro mobile

You should look at the dell precision lineup, especially the 6500. Other companies may offer similar computers in their business section.

You should also see if gaming laptop makers have something in your price range, usually it'll be desktop components stuffed in a laptop form.

Don't expect these beasts to be easy to carry, but if you are actually going to do serious CAD/photo, performance will be night and day. Hell, you can get a 13", 15", AND 17" mbp, put them together, and still come up short compared to something like the 6500. So don't even consider macs, or even mention them for cad work (unless you get a mac pro and quadro fx 4800 card, but that isn't a laptop nor under $4000).

Overall, if you want lightweight and power, go with desktop+laptop.

[amg2833]

Thanks for the quick response.

It seems you're saying what I want is darn near impossible in my price range. I was worried about that. I might have to compromise my Revit abilities and live at the computer labs for another year or two.

What would you recommend if I scratched out that requirement and wanted my laptop only for everyday computing and photo editing?

[basroil]

Thanks for the quick response.

It seems you're saying what I want is darn near impossible in my price range. I was worried about that. I might have to compromise my Revit abilities and live at the computer labs for another year or two.

What would you recommend if I scratched out that requirement and wanted my laptop only for everyday computing and photo editing?

Didn't say it was impossible, and in fact, told you to look at the dell precision 6500 (and the 4400 also works with upgrade), which is $1800 (2072 for 4400 with quad core).

For just photo, go with a standard i7 720qm laptop (usually $1000-$1800) with a good screen. HP and Dell have models, as do Asus, Acer, and a few other companies. 4gb ram (if it comes with less than 4 and the cost to upgrade is more than $50, just purchase the ram yourself from newegg)

Still, check out the desktop+laptop idea, you won't regret it

[amg2833]

I couldn't seem to find that Precision model. The one I found was more than $2700.

[CliffordPhotography]

I have a HP entertainment laptop, that I payed 850 for a year ago, and I do everything you want to do and more on it.

I think its pointless to say I can spend 2000 on a laptop that needs to do this. I do everything you want and more for less then half of what you want to spend. All without an issue.

[basroil]

I couldn't seem to find that Precision model. The one I found was more than $2700.

Oops, meant 6400 with quad core. Problem is that I have it logged into my premiere account, so I see items with discounts I have already applied. 4400 for me (with quad core) was under 2k, so should be around 2k without discounts. 6400 was just a bit over 2k so perhaps it'll be significantly different for you.


Or without good support for CAD (though can still do CAD, just not as quickly):
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc=DYDWFN5&s=dhs

[amg2833]

Would i7 prove to be a real advantage over quad two duo? I can get a good laptop for about the same price with both.

[basroil]

Would i7 prove to be a real advantage over quad two duo? I can get a good laptop for about the same price with both.

No such thing as a quad two duo (four two two?).

There are i7 mobile, core 2 duo, and core 2 quad. Lets say core 2 duo 3gh is a 20 on a scale. Core 2 quad is 35-40. And i7 clocks in at a whopping 60. Also, if you ever do video editing, the SSE4.2 instructions in the i7 will help in decoding/encoding video (and may at some point end up in LR2 and the like, improving performance there). The way i7 works, it has a fairly low base clock (1.6gh for the lowest model), but also several levels of built in overclocking called turbo-boost. That means with all four cores (eight threads) running, you can get it up to maybe 2gh. If only two cores run at max (four threads), it'll let it go up even more (something like 2.4). And then if one core (two threads, same as a core 2 duo) runs, it'll go much higher (about 2.8gh. the numbers aren't exact, and vary by the specifications of the exact chip type). Means there is absolutely nothing that will slow down the system (if your program is single threaded like a game, you'll have a single very fast core, if it's like LR2, you'll have four cores and 8 threads to work with, quite nice if you ask me) compared to a core 2 quad or duo, but it'll also usually be faster. Core 2 quad is fine, but it takes even more power than the i7 720qm, and isn't quite as fast in most tests.

[amg2833]

I'm fine with having a less than adequate display. I've decided to downgrade (not get one made for Revit/Cad), but I would still like it to run CS4, etc with 50D raws fairly flawlessly. I have two possible systems. I have a "computer geek" friend who doesn't seem I need more than the Quad 2 Duo system with 2.22 Ghz. Is this true?

Here's what I configured. If I can comfortably get away with less, I'd like to.

System 1: Processor:
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM Quad Core Processor @ 1.6GHz (2.8GHz Turbo Mode, 6MB Cache
Operating System:
Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium, 64bit, English
Monitor:
15.6” Full High Definition (1080p) High Brightness LED Display with TrueLife™ and Camera/Facial Reco
Memory:
4GB Shared Dual Channel DDR3 at 1333MHz
Hard Drive:
500GB SATA Hard Drive (7200RPM)
Video Card:
512MB ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4570
Processor:
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM Quad Core Processor @ 1.6GHz (2.8GHz Turbo Mode, 6MB Cache
Operating System:
Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium, 64bit, English
Monitor:
15.6” Full High Definition (1080p) High Brightness LED Display with TrueLife™ and Camera/Facial Reco
Memory:
4GB Shared Dual Channel DDR3 at 1333MHz
Hard Drive:
500GB SATA Hard Drive (7200RPM)
Video Card:
512MB ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4570
System 2:
Studio XPS 16:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo P8700 (3MB cache/2.53GHz/1066Mhz FSB)
Operating System:
Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium, 64bit, English
LCD Panel:
Edge-to-Edge FullHD Widescreen 16.0 inch RGBLED LCD (1920x1080) W/2.0 MP
MEMORY:
4GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1067MHz (2 Dimms)
Hard Drive:
500GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive
Video Card:
ATI Mobility RADEON® HD 3670 - 512MB

[amg2833]

Well, I meant Core 2 Duo...

I'm trying to build a bridge from my knowledge to what you're saying, and it seems you're saying get the i7 regardless.

From my two systems, is that the one you'd take? I'd notice a significant difference? Please remember that this is for everyday needs also.

Thanks for all the help, by the way.

One is a Studio 15, and the other a Studio XPS 16. Whats the difference besides the XPS is available with a nicer screen?

[Panda_stunter]

ok, if you want quality for cheap, go with fujitsu brand laptops.

i paid $900 about a year and a half ago and it does everything that i throw at it. i only said the part about quality since most] prepackaged computer (either desktops or laptops) are made with components from 3 different companies; seagate, western digital and fujitsu. i was actually surprised coz i looked at my girl's laptop and lo and behold, it was fujitsu components.

my laptop (at the time) are comparable to $1500 laptops, whatever it may have been; dell, HP or whatnot.

its a core 2 duo, and it went through the hell of a load test that ive done to it. it only slowed down when i put 3 image processing program running together, LR2 and CS2 and an off-brand image processor (i believe it was photofiltre). but thats with IE/firefox and everything else running on tandem. but running CS2 and LR2 by itself, it was like a champ.

u wouldnt want to use a laptop for photo editing and thats why i got me a desktop; a dell XPS 8000. im gonna put this baby to a load test tomorrow (it just came in today) and see what a quad core i5 750 can do.

by specs, the desktop is a lot beefier than the laptop but ive setup the laptop to my specs.

and with the electronic depreciation, a fujitsu laptop and a prepackaged desktop will go for just a little over 2k. i think i saw the same model laptop for $700 and my desktop is at $1200, tax not included.

as for the debate with what to pick, i7 v. i5; i7 is the better processor. but core 2 duo isnt that far behind since it is also a quad-core based processor. core 2 is dual-processor. the way i see it, if youre gonna go i7, go with the extreme edition since youre there anyways. ive seen i5's overclocked to the point that it performs as much as the i7 extreme but still being reliable. but that also means changing out the PSU and the cooling system.

the thing that you really should look for is would it transfer and/or be used to what you are also doing which is engineering. i5 is more than enough to what you do, core 2 duo is sufficient and i7 is a little more than what you need. and seriously, youre only gonna be shaving off about 10-20 minutes total of everyday usage.

one more thing to think about is the fact that most prepackaged computer, either desktops or laptops, that are running i5/7, will also have windows 7. and windows 7 is still in its infancy stage, noone has programs readily available for the OS. core 2 duo running computers are mostly vista or XP, and they already have readily available programs for it. though, windows 7 are backwards compatible...we'll see about that. coz the canon CR2 codec doesnt work with it...yet.

hope that helps

one more thing...my i5 750 is clocked at 2.66ghz (factory based, not my test)

and the difference between an XPS and studio...styling and ergonomics. nothing more than the flash-factor in my opinion. youre paying more to look good and to say that your in the status quo.

[basroil]

u wouldnt want to use a laptop for photo editing and thats why i got me a desktop; a dell XPS 8000. im gonna put this baby to a load test tomorrow (it just came in today) and see what a quad core i5 750 can do.

by specs, the desktop is a lot beefier than the laptop but ive setup the laptop to my specs.


Mentioned that to OP too, seems he doesn't even want to think about that.

I'm fine with having a less than adequate display. I've decided to downgrade (not get one made for Revit/Cad), but I would still like it to run CS4, etc with 50D raws fairly flawlessly. I have two possible systems. I have a "computer geek" friend who doesn't seem I need more than the Quad 2 Duo system with 2.22 Ghz. Is this true?


Your geek friend hasn't been keeping up to date with everything then. quad core core 2 are more expensive and slower than i7, so why bother?

[amg2833]

I agree. Why bother. It seems I'll end up going for the i7 I listed earlier. It seems to get everything done I need.

I don't want to go the dual desktop/laptop route, because I'm a student whose never any place long. I'm in a new apartment every year, but I'm also between that and my hometown a lot. I'd have to go without a computer for almost a month at times with a desktop.

Thanks for all the help guys. Its much appreciated.

[basroil]

I agree. Why bother. It seems I'll end up going for the i7 I listed earlier. It seems to get everything done I need.

I don't want to go the dual desktop/laptop route, because I'm a student whose never any place long. I'm in a new apartment every year, but I'm also between that and my hometown a lot. I'd have to go without a computer for almost a month at times with a desktop.

Thanks for all the help guys. Its much appreciated.

That's what I've done the last two years, and works great. In fact, time at home= time without heavy PP... Plus, shipping the entire system (two 24" monitors and a mini tower) costs only about $70 in the case I stay in one place for more than 2 months

[Panda_stunter]

your computer geek friend just wants you not topping his own system. thats all it is, rivalry. and most computer geeks wants their system to be better than others, especially if you "dont know" (per se) anything and youre system is better than his.

but in truth, you dont need a quad-core processor, its just nice to have. core 2 duo is the benchmark right now for any processor. i5 and i7 is just making its debut.

you can get a mini-tower PC with the laptop for under 2k. but if youre in a tight budget, just go with the laptop and another monitor to hook up the laptop for image processing. that way, if youre gonna move, you only have a laptop and a monitor instead of laptop and a desktop .

[Panda_stunter]

I agree. Why bother. It seems I'll end up going for the i7 I listed earlier. It seems to get everything done I need.

I don't want to go the dual desktop/laptop route, because I'm a student whose never any place long. I'm in a new apartment every year, but I'm also between that and my hometown a lot. I'd have to go without a computer for almost a month at times with a desktop.

Thanks for all the help guys. Its much appreciated.

dude, like i said, if youre gonna go the i7 route, might as well go with the extreme edition clocked at 3.33ghz. the one that youre looking at the i7 920 qm with clockspeed of 1.6ghz

youre being robbed with this. youre paying for an i7 price with the speed of core 2 duo.

if you didnt read my last post, mine has i5 with a factory clock speed of 2.66ghz, more if i overclock it. sure you can get more if you overclock yours but the rules of modding (anything) is that you start with a great foundation so your end result is better than if you start with just a decent foundation.

im done, you wouldnt listen to us anyways.

[firstclass]

as for the debate with what to pick, i7 v. i5; i7 is the better processor. but core 2 duo isnt that far behind since it is also a quad-core based processor. core 2 is dual-processor.
This is incorrect. A a Core 2 Duo processor is dual core, a Core 2 Quad processor is quad core. There is no such thing as a Core 2 processor, though there is the Core 2 Solo, which is single core.

dude, like i said, if youre gonna go the i7 route, might as well go with the extreme edition clocked at 3.33ghz. the one that youre looking at the i7 920 qm with clockspeed of 1.6ghz

youre being robbed with this. youre paying for an i7 price with the speed of core 2 duo.

if you didnt read my last post, mine has i5 with a factory clock speed of 2.66ghz, more if i overclock it. sure you can get more if you overclock yours but the rules of modding (anything) is that you start with a great foundation so your end result is better than if you start with just a decent foundation.

im done, you wouldnt listen to us anyways.
You're misinformed.

An i7 at similar clock speeds to a Core 2 Duo is significantly faster. It's not just an incremental increase, it's a lot. There are a variety of reasons for this, not least among them memory bandwidth and a whole lot of logical cores. (4 times as many as in a Core 2 Duo, though only twice as many physical cores) Also, I assume it's a typo, but a 920 is 2.66 GHz, not 1.6GHz.

I personally think the extreme edition is a waste of money, especially if you intend to OC. The extreme doesn't really give you that much more, yet you pay over 3 times as much last I checked. $1k for a processor is a bit of a waste imo.

[Panda_stunter]

An i7 at similar clock speeds to a Core 2 Duo is significantly faster. It's not just an incremental increase, it's a lot. There are a variety of reasons for this, not least among them memory bandwidth and a whole lot of logical cores. (4 times as many as in a Core 2 Duo, though only twice as many physical cores) Also, I assume it's a typo, but a 920 is 2.66 GHz, not 1.6GHz.

I personally think the extreme edition is a waste of money, especially if you intend to OC. The extreme doesn't really give you that much more, yet you pay over 3 times as much last I checked. $1k for a processor is a bit of a waste imo.



yeah, it is a waste to get a processor like that, so i second your opinion, what im trying to say is that, for what he wants to use it for core 2 duo is enough. he doesnt need an i7 which he would have to pay more. and by significantly what do you mean? its twice, thrice as fast? and what does that sum up to? half a second? a second faster?

sorry, about the misinterpretation on my part regarding the core 2 duo since its a dual processor. i only said that coz the core 2 duo is the gateway for the quadcore so the concept is the same. so again, sorry, the sarcasm and the sleep-deprivation dont mix! haha!

:lol:

[firstclass]

sorry, the sarcasm and the sleep-deprivation dont mix! haha!

:lol:
Sarcasm on little sleep, my most often used form of humor, I know how that goes.

[xwinx]

Note that any Quad or any laptop bigger than 14" is going to dramatically decrease your battery life and be very heavy. Expect up to 1 1/2 hour at most

To be on subject:
P8700 / T8600 or better CPU, 4GB RAM, any graphics processor other than intel intergrated (Image processing is mainly CPU intensive).

[TheFloridaShooter]

I honestly don't believe 4GB RAM are enough if your running LR and CS3 or CS4.

[René Damkot]

Agree: I have 5.5Gig of Ram in my dual G5, and PSCS4 is regularly below 100% efficiency (swapping)...

[BeritOlam]

I don't want to go the dual desktop/laptop route, because I'm a student whose never any place long. I'm in a new apartment every year, but I'm also between that and my hometown a lot. I'd have to go without a computer for almost a month at times with a desktop.

Anthony,

I think what some of the others are trying to say is -- get the power desktop if at all possible....and only get a pimped-out laptop if you absolutely have to have it.

The reasons are many, but part of it is perspective. If you're use to doing your work (CS4 or Autocad, for that matter) on a "power tower" with a 24 inch monitor, then no laptop in the world can compete with this. So people that want that "power" whenever they can get it are going to be frustrated trying to use much of anything less....and consequently are going to be far less likely to drop $2k on a laptop that can't do what their $1k desktop will do.

Of course, if you have no "power tower" to compare it to AND/OR if you're use to using a desktop that's 4+ years old, then an i7 laptop will very likely seem like a great system for your needs.

For myself, the biggest annoyance with laptops and photo editing is desktop size. I use a Macbook for work because I need something small I can tote around....and the 13.3 inch screen is fine for sending emails and drafting my work documents. I started off using LR2 in a pinch when I really needed it, but now I find myself hardly ever doing even that any more....because I'd just rather wait until I can get home to my Mac Pro desktop and a much larger screen. It's all one's perspective.

A 15 inch laptop would be better, but many still find such workspace cramped and tiny.....and so some opt to get a 2nd monitor and push it via their laptop's external monitor option. So it's something to keep in mind as you get started with your i7 laptop. The 4570 mobility card (in one of your spec'd computres) should be plenty to push an external monitor.