They're the same HP model with i5 6200U, 1080p screen, and 8 GB Ram. Both are $459.99. Only difference is that the first has a 128 GB SSD, while the second has a 1 TB HD. SSD is obviously faster and less fragile plus longer battery life, but if you can't stand to bring along a portable drive or flash storage, the 1 TB is an option. I haven't used an HP laptop in ages though, no idea how they fare these days.
I'm not a fan of Intel's line up of U processors, they are slow. sure they are low power, but they pair them with tiny batteries. I really just don't like them. They are all dual cores and slower than a lot of cellphones.
7th gen A10s slaughter them in all contests with a true quad core and at least marginal graphics having an R5.
If you are not planning to game, with that budget, get a laptop with the i5 6200u. You can get from any known brand. The HP with SSD that TMTOWTSAC suggested is a great deal. The integrated graphics are very capable for video playing, web browsing and also low power consumption.
Personally, I won't go with an AMD laptop, if you are not planning to game in a budget.
Hrm, I always had a negative impression of the A10 series. In benchmarks they start out fast, but have to clock down after just a few minutes due to the amount of heat they produce. That can't be great for battery life. The graphics are faster, but he said it wasn't for gaming. Guess it depends on what he'll be using it for, and whether the higher core count will matter.
You guys ever actually used a 6200u laptop? They are honestly pretty crappy. Even the i7 6500U is pretty much garbage. I would certainly never suggest one to a client. There is a reason that brand new laptop is under $500.
I've never used a 6200U but I do have a 5005U laptop, which is quite a bit slower. And it's just fine for web browsing, school work, and watching videos. In fairness, I've never used an A10 either so I can't say from personal experience how responsive they are. Here's a review though: