Labor weekend: Lenovo i7 laptop - $499 after MIR

S

SubtleOne

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
291
Fry's has :

Lenovo Z570, Intel Core i7-2670QM, 15.6" Screen Display, Notebook With 4 GB Memory, 500GB Hard Drive, W7 Home Premium

$499 after $100 MIR valid only for Labor weekend

Note this is in-store only and I did not see it on display when I went to get one, so you probably need to specifically request it. I am using it this minute.
 
the MIR and the Intel HD 3000 graphics and no SSD...can't say how good this deal is...I hate MIR's...
 
Falkentyne said:
the MIR and the Intel HD 3000 graphics and no SSD...can't say how good this deal is...I hate MIR's...
Click to expand...

As far as I know it is the best i7 deal around. Bear in mind, this is not a refurb, but a new machine with a full guarantee.
 
i7 and the subpar integrated graphics? What use is this, who really needs an i7 for office work, especially at the big hit to battery life that comes with it?
Good price, but I don't see the point of machines like this.
 
2670QM + HD3000 = Waste. Unless you are someone who only needs raw CPU power.

I'd rather get a DV6z Quad AMD w/ 7690M @ $520.
 
A15G said:
2670QM + HD3000 = Waste. Unless you are someone who only needs raw CPU power.

I'd rather get a DV6z Quad AMD w/ 7690M @ $520.
Click to expand...

It is assuredly a completely different machine you suggest. The AMD is less than half as fast, but does indeed have much better graphics for gaming. So yes, to each his own. For someone into chess and photography, such as myself, the 2670QM is far more attractive at that price.
 
The low resolution is the worst thing about this laptop. Oh and photography with a 1366×768?
 
MissJ84 said:
The low resolution is the worst thing about this laptop. Oh and photography with a 1366×768?
Click to expand...

If high res was possible great, but I know of no attractive options anywhere near the price. Even a 1080p screen will be considerably lower res than an original 16MP or more picture, so zooming, if pixel peeping, will always be necessary. However, processing RAW pictures on less powerful hardware can be extremely slow on underpowered machines, and that is where the i7 really shines. The time saved here is huge.
 
SubtleOne said:
It is assuredly a completely different machine you suggest. The AMD is less than half as fast, but does indeed have much better graphics for gaming. So yes, to each his own. For someone into chess and photography, such as myself, the 2670QM is far more attractive at that price.
Click to expand...

Depending on the AMD processor, the one i'm talking about is about half as fast (A8-3550MX, which is pretty close to a i7-740QM). I think it's better to have a well balanced laptop/computer than one with a really good something and a really bad something. Know what I mean? You get more of a variety of things to do on the machine.

1366x768 for photography isn't that great either, just saying.
 
Yeah, what is the point of a quad core with Hyperthreading if you dont have the graphics to put it to use? The ONLY point I can see of a machine like this is as a number cruncher, *OR* as a Chess analysis rig for tournaments and study. But who uses a laptop to crunch? $499 can easily get you a comperable desktop that can do the same thing (and give you the option of upgrading to a high end graphics card later).
 
A15G said:
Depending on the AMD processor, the one i'm talking about is about half as fast (A8-3550MX, which is pretty close to a i7-740QM). I think it's better to have a well balanced laptop/computer than one with a really good something and a really bad something. Know what I mean? You get more of a variety of things to do on the machine.

1366x768 for photography isn't that great either, just saying.
Click to expand...

Not really. Aside from being able to play some games, what 'variety of things' would I gain in exchange for working more than twice as slow?

FWIW, I looked up the benchmarks, and have to say I was very unimpressed by the A8. Looks like the mobile AMD CPU is as bad a dud as the desktop version.
 
SubtleOne said:
Not really. Aside from being able to play some games, what 'variety of things' would I gain in exchange for working more than twice as slow?

FWIW, I looked up the benchmarks, and have to say I was very unimpressed by the A8. Looks like the mobile AMD CPU is as bad a dud as the desktop version.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the AMD will do most of what the Intel can do just fine. Not everyone is impatient lol. Play some games? You can play, most games, even new titles. The 7690M is no slouch it's about an inch behind a GT 555M, it's fairly priced for the performance it offers.

The 3550MX is bad, at least that's what you said. With k10stat i'm sure it'll help out quite a bit.

For photo editing i'm sure the 3550MX will have no problems with.. There are programs out there that people use and will benefit from a faster/better graphics card. But to be honest, most people would prefer the 3550MX + 7690M over this any day. I understand AMD didn't do so well with it's Llano, and BD line of Processors, but when it comes to having an "affordable" laptop with some bang in it, it's actually not that bad. Again, not everyone is impatient.
 
Falkentyne said:
Yeah, what is the point of a quad core with Hyperthreading if you dont have the graphics to put it to use? The ONLY point I can see of a machine like this is as a number cruncher, *OR* as a Chess analysis rig for tournaments and study. But who uses a laptop to crunch? $499 can easily get you a comperable desktop that can do the same thing (and give you the option of upgrading to a high end graphics card later).
Click to expand...

If you worked with RAW pictures you would understand much better. The picture files alone start at a minimum of 25MB and much more depending on the camera. Working actual effects and then converting these pictures into palatable JPGs is slowww. I used to do this on my old i3 laptop and it was painful. We are talking ten seconds per picture just for a conversion, much less applying any number of photographic adjustments. Multiply this by hundreds and the cost in time is huge.

What is the point if one doesn't have the graphics to put it to use? I am lost on that comment. What graphics to put it to use? It plays back videos just fine and renders Windows Aero without a hitch as well.
 
A15G said:
I'm sure the AMD will do most of what the Intel can do just fine. Not everyone is impatient lol. Play some games? You can play, most games, even new titles. The 7690M is no slouch it's about an inch behind a GT 555M, it's fairly priced for the performance it offers.
Click to expand...

Unless of course I have no intention of playing any games on it.
 
A15G said:
Best part about this quad core photo editing beast is that it has no USB 3.0 ports.

This deal is ice cold.
Click to expand...

Argue it as you like, but I have no need for USB 3.0 ports. It is a powerhouse work computer and a great deal at $499. One day when you buy a computer solely for work, this will make more sense to you.

If the intention is to play games then it is assuredly not for you.
 
SubtleOne said:
Argue it as you like, but I have no need for USB 3.0 ports. It is a powerhouse work computer and a great deal at $499.

If the intention is to play games then it is assuredly not for you.
Click to expand...

You keep pointing out the gaming part of this so called "argument". Does it bug you that much? I'm simply telling others that there are better deals out there. You don't have the need for USB 3.0, well that's great and i'm happy you like the laptop bud.
 
A15G said:
You keep pointing out the gaming part of this so called "argument". Does it bug you that much? I'm simply telling others that there are better deals out there. You don't have the need for USB 3.0, well that's great and i'm happy you like the laptop bud.
Click to expand...

It doesn't bug me. Your only argument for there being better deals was that it was a poor gaming machine. You argued that you preferred a more 'balanced' machine and made it clear that 'balanced' meant a machine you could game with. Sacrificing thousands of hours of manpower so that I can game on this laptop is simply not an option. My productivity, and that of most people who benefit from a faster machine, will increase exponentially, and for a very modest price.

You then dropped that argument and declared the laptop a bad deal due to a lack of USB 3.0, which of course is completely ridiculous, and can only be described as a case of sour grapes.

The fact is that for people looking for a fast laptop this is a very good deal. If they are looking for a laptop to game with then yes, it no doubt fails very badly.
 
SubtleOne said:
It doesn't bug me. Your only argument for there being better deals was that it was a poor gaming machine. You argued that you preferred a more 'balanced' machine and made it clear that 'balanced' meant a machine you could game with. Sacrificing thousands of hours of manpower so that I can game on this laptop is simply not an option. My productivity, and that of most people who benefit from a faster machine, will increase exponentially, and for a very modest price.

You then dropped that argument and declared the laptop a bad deal due to a lack of USB 3.0, which of course is completely ridiculous, and can only be described as a case of sour grapes.

The fact is that for people looking for a fast laptop this is a very good deal. If they are looking for a laptop to game with then yes, it no doubt fails very badly.
Click to expand...

I said I wanted a better balanced computer. You then spotted that since it had a dedicated graphics card that I meant it was better for gaming. It is a more balanced laptop anyway, just admit it. There are more pros than cons on the hp vs. this. You seem to have fell in love with this laptop and defend it with all your heart, that's cute but there will always be something better than what you have. Lol, have a good one,
 
SubtleOne said:
It doesn't bug me. Your only argument for there being better deals was that it was a poor gaming machine. You argued that you preferred a more 'balanced' machine and made it clear that 'balanced' meant a machine you could game with. Sacrificing thousands of hours of manpower so that I can game on this laptop is simply not an option. My productivity, and that of most people who benefit from a faster machine, will increase exponentially, and for a very modest price.

You then dropped that argument and declared the laptop a bad deal due to a lack of USB 3.0, which of course is completely ridiculous, and can only be described as a case of sour grapes.

The fact is that for people looking for a fast laptop this is a very good deal. If they are looking for a laptop to game with then yes, it no doubt fails very badly.
Click to expand...

The fact is, A15g is pretty much right on this one. The A8 can be overclocked quite a bit to give performance not much below the i7 you are discussing, and with the dedicated GPU, you are getting considerably more for your money. Further, USB 3.0 DOES matter, despite your point you have no need for it. Much faster than 2.0.

While $499 isn't bad for an i7, there are better deals to be had.
 
Just to jump in on this, in respect to photo editing all modern photo editing and RAW processing engines such as GIMP/Lightroom/NX can fully use a video card as an additional resource for the work, so having a good video card can greatly help.
My sister just got one of the DV6z PCs with the A10 and I threw some RAWs from my D300 and D700 on it and it blazed threw them with 0 issue, wasn't much slower than my rig in my sig...sadly. Hers doesn't have anything but the integrated 7660 and it showed full utilization inside of CS6 along with the CPU.
Is the i7 faster computationally? Sure, but I have used one of those i7/integrated graphics PCs before and doing any layer type editing in CS6 is pure hell on earth it is so laggy because of the brutally bad graphics. If that was AT LEAST an Ivy with the far better (relatively) 4k graphics it might be ok. My few cents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top