Lenovo VS HP "Gaming" Laptop?

[haloxcrysis1]

For light/medium gaming,
which is better to buy?

[Differences are written in BOLD]

Lenovo IdeaPad 510 laptop

CPU: i5 6200u
GPU: GeForce 940mx
RAM: 8GB DDR4
Screen size/resolution: 15.6" / 1980x1020
Price: £430

Dimensions: (22.9 mm) x (379 mm) x (260 mm)

------

OR

------

HP Pavilion 17-g131na laptop ?

CPU: i5 6200u
GPU: GeForce GT 940m 2GB GDDR3
RAM: 8GB DDR3
Screen size/resolution: 17.3" / 1600x900
Price: £500

Dimensions: (27.1 mm) x (418.8 mm) x (286.8 mm)

------

My concern about the Lenovo is that....
there's gotta be a catch as to why it's so cheap, right?
£430 for an i5 laptop with a 940mx GPU ???
Is this version of the 940mx slow or something?
Can someone enlighten me?

------

How about performance?
The 940mx would still be pushed hard to achieve the
Lenovo's 1080p screen while the HP's 940m
only needs to push 900p.
So what's more worth it?

------

How about reliability?
Which brand/case size, etc. etc.
is more reliable?

(The HP seems to be thicker according to theh dimensions
and aren't thicker laptops better at dealing with heat which affects lifespan/reliability?
Although I guess the dimensions don't take into account the screen lid thickness.....)

------

Don't know about the reputations of the brands Lenovo and HP, though.

My old Acer died after 5 years of VERY GOOD CARE
(with a cooling pad no less).
The screen went black/no back light/nothing and it doesn't boot (not even BIOS shows up).
Even a HDMI or VGA to TV connection shows no life.

Is it something to do with cheaper unleaded solder?

So I don't want to have to buy another laptop
that dies in 5 years and goes off to the landfill site.

Any help is appreciated!

------

I really like the HP's 17.3" screen size and 1600x900 resolution
(not so eye-numbingly small and not so large that it slows down gaming)
but I don't know HP's reputation when it comes to reliability.
I don't want to buy a laptop that will die in just 5 years.

I like the Lenovo's (better??) 940mx GPU but
is it really worth it considering the 1080p resolution?
Wouldn't that cancel out some performance gain from
having a 940mx over a 940m?

Also, the price tag is suspiciously low for the Lenovo.

Biggest concern really, (since I suspect the 940mx isn't that much better
than the 940m)
is just which laptop would last longer. (Preferably a lot longer than 5 years.)

And if you think there's better brands out there in terms
of laptop lifespan, let me know.

 

[dudeman509]

940 isn't a good gaming GPU in either form. It will play light games, and modern AAA titles at lower resolutions and low framerates. If you want a true "gaming" laptop that will play things for the next several years at playable framerates, you will want something with at least a GTX 960M.

My preference would be a 1080p screen like the Lenovo, and I hate laptops in 17" form factors...just my personal opinion FWIW.

 

[1shado1]

I'm betting your average laptop these days only lasts about 5 years, and that's with GREAT care and maintenance. YMMV.

 

[GreyCatz]

Just to confuse you even more:

Lenovo lists battery life at "up to 5 hours" and weight at 2.2 kg. HP lists weight at 2.8 kg and Box.co.uk indicates that battery life is up to "4 hours (with power management)". Neither is very impressive, but I'm actually surprised to see a laptop with worse battery life than a Lenovo.

Lenovo starts product warranty from the moment the device leaves the factory, whereas HP starts warranty from the date of purchase. Warranty may also differ from one market to the other (I have a 2-year warranty on my Ideapad Y50, but I know other markets only get 1 year).

Is £430 "suspiciously low" for the Ideapad? Lenovo is (still) the world's largest PC manufacturer and they churn out a bewildering array of models in massive numbers at a furious pace - that's how they make their money. I'd say £430 is your typical, 'attractive Lenovo price'.

The question is whether a 17.3" screen is worth an extra £70 for the HP. I have no experience with HP's customer service, but if you go to HP's own user forum and read posts from users and support staff, you can get some idea as to how you'll be treated if something goes wrong.

Lenovo's customer service is still very much optimized for business clients. You may find yourself patiently explaining several times that NO: You don't have your own IT department, and NO: You don't have a VAT number, or NO: You don't have a secretary on stand-by from 8am to 5pm to wait for the UPS truck, because you're at work yourself.

Echoing some of the other posters, I'd say whatever you choose: You're looking at affordable, almost identical, devices that will last you 2 years. And try not to drop them on the floor - neither the device itself nor the support structure is really designed to repair, remedy or replace devices in this price segment.

Personally, I'd go for the Lenovo. Better display (2K IPS) and battery life.

Best of luck,
GreyCatz.

 

[haloxcrysis1]

940 isn't a good gaming GPU in either form. It will play light games, and modern AAA titles at lower resolutions and low framerates.

I've played with a 940m laptop and was disappointed with how it ran stuff at 1080p
(some modern but not even cutting edge, games only achieved 30fps on high settings
rather than max)

but when playing at 1600x900, I'm fairly content
with what it can do (generally 4-5yr old games running at 40fps+ seems fair to me) and only really want to play occasionally (once/a few times a week at the most
frequent as I have things to study as well).

I'm thinking it would be a mistake to get the 940mx @1080p
over the 940m @900p,
performance-wise but of course some people
say "nothing below a 1080p screen!"
but I haven't been spoiled yet to really mind
if I get 900p or 1080p, in terms of aesthetics.
The IPS is very desirable but the resolution seems too high for what
I want it to do. (I.e. unnecessarily lag for a little bit more eye candy, possibly.)
I'm cool with hooking up my laptop to a TV and playing 1080p occasionally
like that but with the laptop alone, 900p seems like a safer default.

I guess I really should have just made this thread ask
"Lenovo or HP, which is more reliable? What brands are better? How long will it last?"

I'm quite paranoid since I've never owned either brands' laptops before!

 

[dudeman509]

940 isn't a good gaming GPU in either form. It will play light games, and modern AAA titles at lower resolutions and low framerates.

I've played with a 940m laptop and was disappointed with how it ran stuff at 1080p
(some modern but not even cutting edge, games only achieved 30fps on high settings
rather than max)

but when playing at 1600x900, I'm fairly content
with what it can do (generally 4-5yr old games running at 40fps+ seems fair to me) and only really want to play occasionally (once/a few times a week at the most
frequent as I have things to study as well).

I'm thinking it would be a mistake to get the 940mx @1080p
over the 940m @900p,
performance-wise but of course some people
say "nothing below a 1080p screen!"
but I haven't been spoiled yet to really mind
if I get 900p or 1080p, in terms of aesthetics.
The IPS is very desirable but the resolution seems too high for what
I want it to do. (I.e. unnecessarily lag for a little bit more eye candy, possibly.)
I'm cool with hooking up my laptop to a TV and playing 1080p occasionally
like that but with the laptop alone, 900p seems like a safer default.

I guess I really should have just made this thread ask
"Lenovo or HP, which is more reliable? What brands are better? How long will it last?"

I'm quite paranoid since I've never owned either brands' laptops before!

1080p for me is preferable for multitasking on a laptop screen. You can always run games at a lower res.

HP's are hit and miss. My personal experience: my girlfriend has had one for 7 years without issue (finally replaced it now). My old work one (Elitebook 8460) - massive piece of junk. New Elitebook has been a fantastic computer for the past year, and much smaller.

Lenovos are generally pretty solid in the reliability department. Some of them do feel quite cheap, though.

 

[haloxcrysis1]

I'm betting your average laptop these days only lasts about 5 years, and that's with GREAT care and maintenance. YMMV.

What about proper gaming laptops?
Those with 950m/960m/etc. ?
Do they last longer, or is it the same story?
Or does it only really change when you get into the £1,000 price range??
(Way beyond my budget...rather build a desktop for that price lol).

I'm trying to figure out what caused my Acer to die.
Non-leaded cheap solder forming microscopic tin whisker crystals
shorting nearby circuits?
Sneaky BIOS chip firmware time-bomb?
Static short?
Unlucky random power surge frying the motherboard??
(Capacitors don't look burnt/leaking so I haven't a clue what killed my laptop. )

Do you have any experience with different brands, i.e.
which are more long lasting these days?
I have an old laptop that is working after an abusive 9 years
while the Acer was treated like a king yet died after 5 years....
Planned obsolescence?

Dying laptops aren't just bad for my wallet/convenience/data,
the environment also suffers if it can't be recycled.
(And I read that lead is replaced with ANOTHER poisonous element
so what good does that do with the whole "stopping water contamination"
excuse for making lead soldered laptops illegal to sell new??)
Weird huh.

 

[haloxcrysis1]

Just to confuse you even more:

Lenovo starts product warranty from the moment the device leaves the factory, whereas HP starts warranty from the date of purchase. Warranty may also differ from one market to the other (I have a 2-year warranty on my Ideapad Y50, but I know other markets only get 1 year).

Is £430 "suspiciously low" for the Ideapad? Lenovo is (still) the world's largest PC manufacturer and they churn out a bewildering array of models in massive numbers at a furious pace - that's how they make their money. I'd say £430 is your typical, 'attractive Lenovo price'.

The question is whether a 17.3" screen is worth an extra £70 for the HP. I have no experience with HP's customer service, but if you go to HP's own user forum and read posts from users and support staff, you can get some idea as to how you'll be treated if something goes wrong.

Lenovo's customer service is still very much optimized for business clients. You may find yourself patiently explaining several times that NO: You don't have your own IT department, and NO: You don't have a VAT number, or NO: You don't have a secretary on stand-by from 8am to 5pm to wait for the UPS truck, because you're at work yourself.

Echoing some of the other posters, I'd say whatever you choose: You're looking at affordable, almost identical, devices that will last you 2 years. And try not to drop them on the floor - neither the device itself nor the support structure is really designed to repair, remedy or replace devices in this price segment.

Personally, I'd go for the Lenovo. Better display (2K IPS) and battery life.

Best of luck,
GreyCatz.

A good battery life would be nice but I mostly intend to use it as a desktop
replacement and occasionally moving it around the house/on holiday.

And about the price, I just wondered because I usually see 940mx
laptops a lot higher in price.
Also, the Currys website markets it as "everyday"
rather than "Achieve" or "Game" (Currys' current marketing terms, don't ask me!)

maybe they're just unaware?
A 940mx laptop being classed as "everyday"
doesn't sound very gaming capable lol.
Ah who knows.

Why do you think these will last for only 2 years?
Just wondering.
Are all brands like this, nowadays??

 

[haloxcrysis1]

1080p for me is preferable for multitasking on a laptop screen. You can always run games at a lower res.

HP's are hit and miss. My personal experience: my girlfriend has had one for 7 years without issue (finally replaced it now). My old work one (Elitebook 8460) - massive piece of junk. New Elitebook has been a fantastic computer for the past year, and much smaller.

Lenovos are generally pretty solid in the reliability department. Some of them do feel quite cheap, though.

Forgive me for asking yet another question, but
how do you know Lenovos are generally reliable?

I was just a bit hesitant because of the £430 price tag
(seemed a bit too good to be true, for a laptop of this spec,
which isn't of proper gaming standard but at least can handle
some mean 5 year old games on medium/high at 900p at least
I would imagine)

I'm also wondering what the FPS difference would be
between

940m @900p
VS
940mx @1080p

Is it like a measly 1-3FPS difference
or 10+ FPS difference!?

 

[dudeman509]

In my experience, laptop GPUs run very hot and stop working around the 4-5 year mark. This has namely been a problem with ATI/AMD ones for me.

A laptop with a good cooling solution such as MSI models, or any with a dual heat-pipe solution that is not shared between CPU + GPU is probably a good bet for one that will last longer (GTX 950-960 models).

Both my Dell (graphics chip died; otherwise it's still working on 1st gen i7/Intel Graphics) and my Acer (2nd gen i7, integrated graphics) have been pretty solid. Both of them needed a charger, and the Dell for sure has a total crap cooling solution and often runs very hot (1st gen chip is partly to blame for that as well).

Lenovo, despite the cheap-feeling build quality, is usually a solid bet for reliability. They take abuse and keep on going.

 

[GreyCatz]

Judging by your questions, it seems that your budget says £500 but your user profile says £1,000. I mean no disrespect, but short of stumbling on a 'killer bargain' or Holiday special you're going to have to adjust one or the other.

Either find a Christmas deal on an ASUS ROG or an MSI, or settle for lesser specs and quality in an affordable price range. The HP and Lenovo under consideration are capable productivity/web surfing machines that will allow you to play some interesting game types. If you're concerned with FPS and resolution, let alone long-term heat issues, you're looking in the wrong price range.

The Pavilion and Ideapad lines are the 'bread-and-butter' segment of these manufacturers, and you'll find all kinds of permutations to entice regular users who just want something that works for office/internet tasks and the occasional A or AA game. They are both decently reliable and very popular, but you will find duds and lots of mixed reviews.

Lenovo covers the whole gamut from high-end ThinkPads with legendary reliability and durability all the way down to crappy, throw-away gadgets designed to last little more than 12 months. If you can get 2 years of regular usage from either laptop, I'd say that's on par with what you can reasonably expect for £500.

 

[haloxcrysis1]

Judging by your questions, it seems that your budget says £500 but your user profile says £1,000. I mean no disrespect, but short of stumbling on a 'killer bargain' or Holiday special you're going to have to adjust one or the other.

Either find a Christmas deal on an ASUS ROG or an MSI, or settle for lesser specs and quality in an affordable price range. The HP and Lenovo under consideration are capable productivity/web surfing machines that will allow you to play some interesting game types. If you're concerned with FPS and resolution, let alone long-term heat issues, you're looking in the wrong price range.

The Pavilion and Ideapad lines are the 'bread-and-butter' segment of these manufacturers, and you'll find all kinds of permutations to entice regular users who just want something that works for office/internet tasks and the occasional A or AA game. They are both decently reliable and very popular, but you will find duds and lots of mixed reviews.

Lenovo covers the whole gamut from high-end ThinkPads with legendary reliability and durability all the way down to crappy, throw-away gadgets designed to last little more than 12 months. If you can get 2 years of regular usage from either laptop, I'd say that's on par with what you can reasonably expect for £500.

I find the gaming capability of the 940m and better, to be acceptable
but I'm not a hardcore gamer. Just semi-casual.
I just have to make a decision on whether 17" is that important to me over 15"
and whether I should bite the bullet, pay £100 or so more for a thicker
laptop that's designed for cooling for gaming.
I mean, if it lasts even 2 years longer than 5 years, then
that extra £100 / 2 = £50 a year (only for those 2 extra years though) which is actually more cost effective than
the usual £100+ a year (i.e. £500ish laptop lasting 5 years lol)

So I could probably stretch to £600 if it lasts another 2 years longer than 5 years
(and I see at least one 950m laptop at that price....950m isn't that impressive but
it's surely a significant step up from the 940m.)

I really don't mind the 940m,
but I was just wondering which brand had the better chance of lasting beyond 5 years.
And if the 940mx would outperform @1080p VS the 940m @900p
or if the FPS loss is acceptable in return for 1080p gameplay.

No one has really answered that one yet but I assume the answer is
"any performance gain of going from 940m to 940mx will disappear
and possibly even perform worse than the 940m @900p
so it's not worth it"

unless the FPS difference is like 5FPS or less
I can deal with that if it means 1080p gaming, I guess.
Not that I really care for a 1080p screen as I can just
hook up the laptop to a 1080p TV but just wondered
about the 940mx's improvement over 940m.
Is it negligible?
Sadly I assume so. (Can't find any real world comparison benchmarks
for the two GPUs, just simulation charts I think.)

 

[haloxcrysis1]

In my experience, laptop GPUs run very hot and stop working around the 4-5 year mark. This has namely been a problem with ATI/AMD ones for me.

A laptop with a good cooling solution such as MSI models, or any with a dual heat-pipe solution that is not shared between CPU + GPU is probably a good bet for one that will last longer (GTX 950-960 models).

Both my Dell (graphics chip died; otherwise it's still working on 1st gen i7/Intel Graphics) and my Acer (2nd gen i7, integrated graphics) have been pretty solid. Both of them needed a charger, and the Dell for sure has a total crap cooling solution and often runs very hot (1st gen chip is partly to blame for that as well).

Lenovo, despite the cheap-feeling build quality, is usually a solid bet for reliability. They take abuse and keep on going.

I still find it difficult to believe my laptop could
have died from overheating (I used a cooling pad! And it barely got hot from
the touch underneath but maybe I have selective amnesia....perhaps some games
were more straining than others and I just forgot?)

I mean, I THINK I treated it pretty well but I just can't fathom
the possibility that I let it overheat "one too many times"
because I honestly don't remember it overheating that many times.
A few times I forgot to plug the cooling pad in, sure,
but to kill the laptop after 5 years?
I think the motherboard was just cheap rubbish.

But I do wonder if it's something to do with
non-leaded tin solder forming tin whisker crystals that short
upon contact with other conductive parts on the motherboard.

Or it could have been a very unlucky short from a thunderstorm
or something (not that I remember a single thunderstorm that caused any problems, mind you).

Or some dodgy self destructing BIOS chip/firmware....

The GPU was an ATI HD 5650 so I can totally see your reasoning
for suspecting AMD/ATI equipment being prone to overheating.
Maybe the thermal paste disintegrated! (I don't think I saw any thermal paste on
the GPU when I opened it up to inspect it)

It's a mystery why my old Acer died.
If I knew the culprit, I would be less paranoid about
reliability as I could possibly take measures
to extend the laptop lifespan in ways other than just using a cooling pad for example.

Thanks for the help.

 

[dudeman509]

A few times I forgot to plug the cooling pad in, sure,
but to kill the laptop after 5 years?
I think the motherboard was just cheap rubbish.

Many are. Something power-related went out on my replacement Dell board (the one that had a WORKING graphics chip!). Unfortunately, that's not uncommon for those models.

The GPU was an ATI HD 5650 so I can totally see your reasoning
for suspecting AMD/ATI equipment being prone to overheating.
Maybe the thermal paste disintegrated! (I don't think I saw any thermal paste on
the GPU when I opened it up to inspect it)

Many use a thermal pad. Not as effective. If it has a shared heat sink, it's often harder for the GPU to bleed out that heat since it's right downstream from the hot CPU.

My piece of crap Core 2 Duo Toshiba Tecra still lives on...I was waiting for like 2 years for that thing to croak before I gave up and bought something new with some semblance of speed to it. It was a $1000 laptop at the time, built for business, so I guess it was built to be tough.

 

[haloxcrysis1]

A few times I forgot to plug the cooling pad in, sure,
but to kill the laptop after 5 years?
I think the motherboard was just cheap rubbish.

Many are. Something power-related went out on my replacement Dell board (the one that had a WORKING graphics chip!). Unfortunately, that's not uncommon for those models.

The GPU was an ATI HD 5650 so I can totally see your reasoning
for suspecting AMD/ATI equipment being prone to overheating.
Maybe the thermal paste disintegrated! (I don't think I saw any thermal paste on
the GPU when I opened it up to inspect it)

Many use a thermal pad. Not as effective. If it has a shared heat sink, it's often harder for the GPU to bleed out that heat since it's right downstream from the hot CPU.

My piece of crap Core 2 Duo Toshiba Tecra still lives on...I was waiting for like 2 years for that thing to croak before I gave up and bought something new with some semblance of speed to it. It was a $1000 laptop at the time, built for business, so I guess it was built to be tough.

Business laptops....now there's a great idea,
but not many have a dedicated GPU lol.
(Although I guess it doesn't hurt to check.)

How long did your Toshiba last?
Curious if the "unleaded solder" theory is supported.
Strangely, my old laptop is 9 or 10 years old
and the lawful requirement to not include
lead in the solder, probably was incorporated 10 years ago.
Did my laptop just scrape the deadline lol?
Or maybe the non-leaded solder tin whisker thing
is less common in the real world,
in terms of actually causing a fatal shorting problem....I really don't know.

Yeah my laptop has a shared heat sink.
I wonder if laptops mention what cooling systems
they have....otherwise a disassembling guide could reveal that kind of info.

Thanks for the help, man.

 

[dudeman509]

How long did your Toshiba last?

2006-2010. Still works, I just hate it.

Remember the Xbox 360 "red ring of death" where the graphics chips would desolder slightly from the motherboards? I believe something similar happens to most ATI graphics chips in laptops, and it may be from the type of solder used.

MSI, Apple, Dell, and others usually advertise their dual heat pipe/fan cooling systems if they have one in a certain model. The Inspiron and Ideapad Y700 I was looking at recently had a discrete cooler for the graphics.