Solved! Laptop Comparison

[LiquidInfinity]

Hey all, I'm looking at a buying a new lappy and was hoping for a little input.

My needs:
Budget: <$750
Size: >13"
Weight: <10lbs
A build like a desktop replacement, but I am willing to give some oomph for portability/batt life(3hr+).
Normal web browsing/office work, photo handling, and gaming. Being able to run something like TeamFortress2, DragonAge, Portal, etc. would be nice. Obviously more power the better (while keeping battery life and heat issues reasonable). DX11 support would be lovely, but hardly required.
USB 3.0 would be kinda of nice, but also not needed.
250GB+ HDD
CD Burner, DVD player
Would like something that will last a while, and survive travel (rough handling, humidity)

I have been looking at a few computers, and have been looking a fair bit at these two:
Samsung RF510-S01 15.6-Inch HD LED Laptop - $650
Acer Aspire TimelineX AS4820TG-6847 14-Inch HD Display Laptop - $730

The Acer looks to have slightly better CPU/GPU specs, but at the cost of a smaller screen and I've heard some slight dissatisfaction with the construction quality. I would be willing to deal with that and pay the extra bucks if that system will provide a noticeable boost in the gaming (and day-to-day) performance, thoughts?

I am completely open to suggestions of other laptops, brand recommendations, and general advice.

Thanks.

 

[Maziar]

The Acer model has a notably faster GPU,so it performs better in games.

 

[LiquidInfinity]

I'm having a little trouble tracking down benchmarks for the Radeon . . . for you, would the boost in gaming performance (if you are/were a gamer) be worth the +$80, -USB3.0, -1.5" screen?

 

[Bacterius]

Find out for yourself here. Low is low settings at 1024x768, medium is medium settings at 1280x800, high is high settings at 1600x1200 and ultra is highest settings at 1920x1200 (resolutions may vary but are around these values).

Now try and find what a lower resolution looks like, you could try reducing your current computer's resolution but centering it (NOT stretching it) to see the effective screen size, but that isn't accurate because it doesn't take in account the pixels per inch values.

And personally for me it would depend on the Radeon - if it were substantially faster than the other one, I would definitely go with it. If it's just a minor improvement, I would keep the larger screen for more detail (note that at larger resolutions you visually need less anti-aliasing which is a resource hog, hence better performance anyway at higher resolutions - paradoxally)

 

[LiquidInfinity]

Thanks, that was helpful.
The Acer (Radeon Mob. HD 6550, intel i5 480) appears to be a better performing machine, but not so greatly that I think it really is worth much more than the Samsung (Nvidia 330M, i5 460), considering the other features involved.

That said, does that Samsung seem like a solid deal at the $650 price point? Full specs: http/www.circuitcity.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6701445

 

[LiquidInfinity]

Ack, it seem that the $650 deal has expired, and the computer is at a rather uninspiring $750.
Nevermind.

 

[Maziar]

I'm having a little trouble tracking down benchmarks for the Radeon . . . for you, would the boost in gaming performance (if you are/were a gamer) be worth the +$80, -USB3.0, -1.5" screen?

http/www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6550M.41143.0.html
Should give you a little more info about 6550M's performance.
If you're a gamer,then the main important thing to consider is the GPU.