Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Computers & Peripherals => Topic started by: Dan Wells on March 25, 2015, 09:54:33 pm
-
I have been using Macs for many years, but recently started experimenting with (and liking) a Surface Pro 3 as well, so I'm very open to either Mac or Windows as I replace my main portable editing system. I’d prefer a Mac if all else were equal, but there are many more options on the PC side. I'm looking for a powerful notebook with a great high-resolution, color-accurate display, good internal storage and RAM potential and a versatile collection of ports. On the PC side, the purpose-built notebook workstations from a couple of vendors look appealing, although there are also gaming-focused notebooks that could be turned into photo powerhouses. On the Mac side, it's of course the Retina MBP 15", take it or leave it. The Mac would appeal to me more if it were more customizable (the most galling flaw is that the RAM is soldered and the SSD proprietary).
The three most interesting machines I've found are the Lenovo W541, the Dell Precision M3800 and the rMBP. Razer and Asus thin gaming notebooks look appealing, but I can't see why to choose them over the workstations from Lenovo and Dell. The lighter Lenovo W550 is a dual-core, while everything I'm looking at is a quad. The Dell M4800 seems a lot bigger and heavier than the others, even the Lenovo W541, and I can't quite see why.
.
The Lenovo is bigger and heavier than the others (6 lbs), but it has a nicer keyboard, built-in color calibration, the fastest processor (many choices, up to a VERY expensive Extreme Edition that's not worth bothering with), the only 32 GB RAM capacity in the bunch and probably the fastest graphics (Quadro k2100 available, about 1.5x the speed of the Quadro k1100/GeForce 750m in the others). It's extremely customizable, so it can cost almost anything (it starts around $1200, but goes over $2000 quickly with the desirable options). The display I’d choose is a 3K IPS model (probably from Panasonic) with a matte screen. Lenovo's RAM and SSD choices are hugely expensive, BUT it takes standard, easily accessible RAM and drives. It's actually possible to shoehorn THREE SSDs into this machine (one of them is a half-size mSATA slot limited to 256 GB that I'm unlikely to bother with – although it’s interesting that I could, in fact set it up with applications, data and cache, all on separate SSDs). My most likely configuration is a 32 GB/1.5 TB (512 plus 1 TB) combo for around $2500 (using an existing 512 GB SSD), depending on processor and graphics card.
The Dell looks (and weighs) just like a MacBook Pro, but it'll take up to 2 standard SSDs (one 2.5" plus one full-size mSATA), for a maximum capacity of 2 TB - I'm likely to use a 1.5 TB configuration, largely because I have a nice 512 GB SSD around. Maximum RAM is 16 GB, which is an easy choice – install all it will take. The display is a true 4k Sharp IGZO panel, although without the built-in color calibration of the Lenovo, and in glossy only. The processor is about 20% slower than the most likely option on the Lenovo (very similar to the base option, but the Lenovo has some reasonably priced upgrades), and about the same as the midrange rMBP. The graphics card is the professional (Quadro) version of the same card the Mac uses. Keyboard and touchpad are better than most laptops, but probably not up to Mac/high end ThinkPad standards. About $2300 once I add RAM and drives.
The Mac is the most expensive, largely because I can't use my existing drive or add my own RAM or terabyte drive. For about the same price as the others, I'd get a 16/512 configuration with the midrange processor. The fastest processor adds a couple of hundred, and is probably almost but not quite as fast as the Lenovo. To get a terabyte drive costs an extra $500, and deletes the 512GB drive (the other two accommodate two SSDs). The display is the same resolution as the Lenovo, but quite a bit lower than the 4k Dell, and glossy is the only option. Mac OS X IS nice - Windows is catching up, but not quite there yet. The concern with the Mac besides cost due to proprietary/soldered parts is repair - replacing the keyboard or touchpad on recent Macs is a $500+ job, because these frequently broken parts are permanently attached to the case, along with 15 other things. Both the Dell and Lenovo have good repair manuals and the obvious moving parts are reasonably easy to replace without replacing half the computer to get at them!
Between the PCs and the Mac, the question is basically whether or not to pay a $500 “Apple Tax” and accept reduced upgradability and repairability to get Mac OS X. If it weren’t for the operating system difference, I clearly like the Apple hardware the LEAST of the three – the PCIe SSDs are a bit faster, but the SATA SSDs in the others are already very fast, and I’d gladly trade off PCIe for multiple drives and improved access. The screen on the Mac is also my third choice – I’d rather have either 4k or matte (with built-in calibration) than neither of the above. The Adobe CC suite is essentially the same on Mac and Windows, so the only argument for the Mac comes down to Mail and Safari being nicer than Outlook and Firefox (they are, in my opinion, although I prefer MS Office on Windows to Office for Mac), and to the core OS being somewhat better, although significantly less so than it once was.
If I don’t go with a Mac, the decision between Dell and Lenovo (and between CPU and GPU options in the case of the Lenovo) comes down to a few questions:
1.) Does the GPU matter to the Adobe suite? Nothing else I use will ever access the GPU, so I’d get either the Dell or the Lenovo with the cheaper GPU unless Adobe cares about the k2100. Relatedly, does the fact that the two PCs use workstation Quadro cards, and the Mac uses a (closely related, but gaming-focused) GeForce matter? The GeForce is certainly not an advantage, but is it a disadvantage for Adobe the way it is for AutoCAD?
2.) How much difference will 20% in CPU speed (Lenovo’s upgraded CPU vs. Dell) and the ability to use 32 GB of RAM make for working with really big RAW files and some 4k video?
3.) How spectacular is that Dell 4k IGZO display going to be? Is it worth forgoing the faster CPU and GPU for?
4.) How much will I hate a 6 lb laptop instead of a 4.2 lb laptop – we’re getting spoiled – it wasn’t long ago that even the portly Lenovo would have been called an ultralight.
5.) How big a deal is the difference between decent (Dell) and spectacular (Lenovo) for the keyboard and trackpad (Lenovo also includes a trackpoiunt).
Depending on the answers to these, I could end up with the Dell, a somewhat cheaper Lenovo configured a lot like the Dell (the base CPU and GPU on the Lenovo are very close to the Dell), or a more expensive Lenovo with upgrades the Dell just doesn’t offer, or the Mac.
Any suggestions? Either suggestions on one machine over another or ideas about how to think about these questions are most welcome!
-
1. Mostly, it cares about how much RAM the GPU has, and a discreet GPU over a CPU based graphics option is very worth while. Other than that, not a lot of difference.
2. Access to more RAM will help a lot with video (4K in particular), and large RAW files if you have many layers or make panos. The CPU speed does help - 20% is not to be sneezed at, but less critical than the RAM.
3. Can't comment.
4. You'll feel it, but get used to it.
5. They're quite configurable through the utility in terms of sensitivity and which options you want (how you click, gestures, and so on). I've found both to perfectly usable but always take a separate mouse if you want to do anything remotely serious in terms of retouching in the field.
Between PC and Mac, it's entirely your personal preference, there's really no technology-based rationale to prefer one over the other.
-
Any suggestions? Either suggestions on one machine over another or ideas about how to think about these questions are most welcome!
Dell or Lenovo make sense only if you care about shiny look & feel... if you care about price/performance and what is inside (like for example 4 bays for mSATA/SSD HDDs or you want to put K5100 inside) go for OEM like Clevo - configure something @ http://www.xoticpc.com/custom-gaming-laptops-notebooks-clevo-sager-notebooks-ct-95_51_162.html , there are models that can be configured with 3840x2160 LCD panels from either Sharp or Samsung if you really want it...
-
Strictly out of curiosity, and not to start a debate, what are the things you like better in OSX vs Windows? I ask because I use both, but know a lot more about Windows and feel I might be missing something when I'm using OSX.
-
OS X just feels more "finished" to me - everything seems to be made to work together (Windows is catching up, though), and I far prefer Safari to other browsers, mostly due to privacy settings being stricter. I also prefer Mail to Outlook, although I think that is partially because I don't know Outlook as well yet (some of the feel of Windows vs. OS X is probably down to the same thing). For a long time, there was a huge difference in color management (the Mac has been excellent for years, Windows was a hack until recently), but Windows has REALLY closed that gap, and 8.1 handles color very acceptably.
As for the Sager/Clevo laptops, I couldn't find the models with the high-res panels. They are also mostly heavier and less polished than the big makers' products (although there are a few that are more appealing). One thing I'm not clear on is whether the Adobe suite cares between the gaming and workstation versions of the same graphics card? One article I read said that Adobe's GPU acceleration barely works at all on GeForce cards, but uses Quadros fully, while others have said that it doesn't matter. I'd like to get this straight, because the Dell and Lenovo are two of only a few machines with a Quadro, but if the equivalent GeForce is all the same to Adobe, there are many more options...
-
OS X just feels more "finished" to me - everything seems to be made to work together (Windows is catching up, though), and I far prefer Safari to other browsers, mostly due to privacy settings being stricter. I also prefer Mail to Outlook, although I think that is partially because I don't know Outlook as well yet (some of the feel of Windows vs. OS X is probably down to the same thing). For a long time, there was a huge difference in color management (the Mac has been excellent for years, Windows was a hack until recently), but Windows has REALLY closed that gap, and 8.1 handles color very acceptably.
Thanks Dan.
-
As for the Sager/Clevo laptops, I couldn't find the models with the high-res panels.
you need to configure/customize, they are not posted in default configurations, so it requires to actually going inside configuration to see - for example Clevo P750ZM aka SAGER NP9752-S :
15.6” FHD 16:9 LED Backlit Wide screen (1920x1080) Super Clear Matte Type Sager IPS Screen (SKU - SSC878)
15.6" 4K QFHD (16:9) Glare-Type Glossy Screen (3840x2160) (Samsung Brand / 60Hz) (SKU - S4K002) ( + 150 )
15.6" 4K QFHD (16:9) Glare-Type Glossy Screen (3840x2160) (Sharp Brand / 60Hz) (SKU - S4K001) ( + 275 )
http://www.xoticpc.com/sager-np9752s-clevo-p750zm-eta-jan23-p-7854.html?wconfigure=yes
certainly you do not buy RAM and SSD/HDD there, you buy barebones with CPU/video/display panel and put your own RAM/SSD/HDD as it is cheaper and better to procure elsewhere... Clevo (or Sager) has many other retailers, selling customized to your taste barebones or complete notebooks = http://mythlogic.com or http://www.pro-star.com
They are also mostly heavier and less polished than the big makers' products (although there are a few that are more appealing).
yes, they are workhorses, not toys :)
-
Regarding the MBP the question is if you will need more than 16GB of RAM and remember the memory compression built into OSX which works seamless. There are not yet SSD upgrades available but I believe this will come as it did with the previous 15" MBP retina version. I have the 15" MBP late 2013 with 1TB SSD. I have used MBP's since 2009 and never had a keyboard break. The only repair job was a fan which was repaired under warranty. But all HW can break. It's my only machine and I travel 100+ days per year and have had no downtime. I'm sure you can save some bucks with a PC and Windows, but I think the MBP is a no-brainer :)
-
One article I read said that Adobe's GPU acceleration barely works at all on GeForce cards, but uses Quadros fully, while others have said that it doesn't matter. I'd like to get this straight, because the Dell and Lenovo are two of only a few machines with a Quadro, but if the equivalent GeForce is all the same to Adobe, there are many more options...
it depends on what do you (and Adobe want), for example the direction where new NVidia cards are going GPU computation wise = http://www.anandtech.com/show/9096/nvidia-announces-quadro-m6000-quadro-vca-2015
at the moment LR/ACR (unlike C1) are not GPU accelerated, but they surely shall be sooner or later
also some people want to enjoy 10-bit workflow (and that requires a certain videocard)
-
C1 is an interesting point - I've used it a lot over the years, at this instant, I'm more satisfied with LR's white balance on Sony A7r images, but I
can't wait to try 8.2, which has greatly increased white balance flexibility. Does anyone know whether it differentiates between GeForce and Quadro cards? Same question applies to Premiere, which has substantial GPU acceleration (and I often encode relatively long videos). If these applications really want the Quadros, that reduces choices to the few notebooks with Quadro cards. If the GeForce versions will work, then almost any high-end notebook will do.
To each their own on the Sager/Clevo/etc. question. From what little I've been able to find out about them, they are pushing me more and more towards the Lenovo ThinkPad, precisely because Lenovo is about the only manufacturer that avoids those guys altogether (many "brand-name" notebooks are just Sagers and Clevos by another name (Sager/Clevo designs), while Apple and now Dell do their own designs, but have those companies put them together, and Lenovo actually does their own manufacturing, especially at the higher end). What I can find out about the fit and finish differences, as well as the quality of the display panels, suggests that the (modest) additional price of the ThinkPad is probably worth it.
-
Does anyone know whether it differentiates between GeForce and Quadro cards?
somebody with Quadro and C1 can tell you opencl performance index, C1 writes the number in its log - the lower the faster the card is for C1 - see ImgCore.log
for example
HD4600 = OpenCL benchMark : 0.821440
GeForce GTX 870M = OpenCL benchMark : 0.334176
C1 will be using both cards, so if you have a notebook with dual cards (Clevo has such models) = both will be used + GPU embedded in intel CPU
-
From what little I've been able to find out about them, they are pushing me more and more towards the Lenovo ThinkPad, precisely because Lenovo is about the only manufacturer that avoids those guys altogether (many "brand-name" notebooks are just Sagers and Clevos by another name (Sager/Clevo designs), while Apple and now Dell do their own designs, but have those companies put them together, and Lenovo actually does their own manufacturing, especially at the higher end). What I can find out about the fit and finish differences, as well as the quality of the display panels, suggests that the (modest) additional price of the ThinkPad is probably worth it.
lenovo does not make panels - you will get the same Sharp or Samsung panel driven by the same Nvidia or AMD or Intel card...
Sages is just a big Clevo reseller - Clevo is actually the company that does does make notebooks (most of companies in USA will buy from Sager which buys from Clevo and rebrands, but for example Pro-Star will buy from Clevo directly)
also there are MSI and Gigabyte out there
-
It looks like neither Adobe nor C1 cares about the Quadro cards (as opposed to GeForce) - a Quadro k1100 is just a GeForce 750m, and a Quadro k2100 is somewhat faster, but is just like a faster GeForce. This means that repurposing a gaming notebook is just as viable as a workstation notebook (and that the Mac, which uses a GeForce, will see benefits from its GPU). Some gaming notebooks come with cards that are a great deal faster than any Quadro normally seen in a notebook (there are reasonable notebooks with GeForce 970m cards, although the 980m seems to appear in bulky machines with desktop CPUs) Some older versions of Adobe software would ONLY accelerate if they saw a Quadro card. The newer workstation notebooks may still have design advantages over many bulky gaming notebooks (some of the gaming machines, like the Razers, are very elegant, but many of them are 8 lbs with no battery life), but there is no fundamental reason to choose one just for the Quadro.
-
Regarding the MBP the question is if you will need more than 16GB of RAM and remember the memory compression built into OSX which works seamless. There are not yet SSD upgrades available but I believe this will come as it did with the previous 15" MBP retina version. I have the 15" MBP late 2013 with 1TB SSD. I have used MBP's since 2009 and never had a keyboard break. The only repair job was a fan which was repaired under warranty. But all HW can break. It's my only machine and I travel 100+ days per year and have had no downtime. I'm sure you can save some bucks with a PC and Windows, but I think the MBP is a no-brainer :)
+1
The so-called "Apple tax" the OP speaks of quickly pays for itself with a more efficient system that "just works" without the need for the added concern and software required to fight viruses, etc. While Macs can get viruses, they are still far less common than on PCs. One day of downtime trying to sort that out will pay for another round of the so-called Apple tax. And, if you've ever used an Apple trackpad (which I've used exclusively without even thinking about a mouse for years now), then there is another bonus paid for by the Apple tax. How about AirDrop - fantastic, too. It just works. Apple also has a very helpful calibration routine built in.
What about battery life? MBPs are excellent, especially MBAirs, albeit with smaller screens and drives. If it's your only computer than a MBP would make more sense. Thinking about screen size and battery life, how does the Dell with a 4k screen compare in battery life?
Yes the Apple screen is glossy (I hated it at first, too), but the colour fidelity and contrast are excellent. BTW, I'm processing 43mb raw files on my 4-year-old MBP with 8gb of ram in LR with other apps open (Safari, Mail, OneNote, Calendar, possibly web authoring) and experience no troubles.
I gather the OP knows all this as he's "used Macs" (MBPs?), but for anyone else reading, you just can't compare numbers and expect to get the full story.
-
The so-called "Apple tax" the OP speaks of quickly pays for itself with a more efficient system that "just works" without the need for the added concern and software required to fight viruses, etc.
it is a myth spreaded by clueless people... my PC/Win just works, yes with Symantec EP protection for years - but it is free for non commercial use (client only) - just download and use :D
While Macs can get viruses, they are still far less common than on PCs.
let me translate - mac users simply have no immune system to rely on when something hits them ;) and no experience how to deal with the issue when something hits them... just like native people when europeans came with their diseases ::)
BTW, I'm processing 43mb raw files on my 4-year-old MBP with 8gb of ram in LR with other apps open (Safari, Mail, OneNote, Calendar, possibly web authoring) and experience no troubles.
my old PC/Win7 notebook with 8gb RAM (and no virtual memory - swap disabled) was running VMWare inside which RPP was working under OSX with 36mp raw files from D800 in 2.5GB ram allocated to a virtual machine and PS was working with the resulting tiffs natively in Windows at the same time, so what does it prove ? nothing... everybody has a different definition of troubles.
-
It looks like neither Adobe nor C1 cares about the Quadro cards (as opposed to GeForce) - a Quadro k1100 is just a GeForce 750m, and a Quadro k2100 is somewhat faster, but is just like a faster GeForce.
not exactly - it depends what kind of code you run on those... but then you need to ask actual developers - try "lkuhlmann" user here - he is from P1 (Lionel Kuhlmann, technical guy - not some marketing persona) and try ask him (or go to P1 U2U forums)
-
I'll add another option for you: Asus Zenbook NX500 (http://store.asus.com/us/item/201502AM200000001/A22901)
Only 500GB SSD, processor is ok but not top, weight is very good, battery life is ok but not great (compared to a Mac Retina at least) BUT it seems to have the best screen: 4K with 97% Adobe RGB (supposedly comes calibrated from the factory).
-
That Asus IS intriguing - it's basically a Windows MBP, except with a screen the likes of which nobody has seen (in this rarefied company, even the MBP has an OK screen, but nothing special). On the other hand, $2700??? Compared to everything else I'm seeing, they're charging about $500-$700 for the screen (or they're massively overcharging for the SSD and not giving the end user a choice). But it's pretty much a 4k Dreamcolor display on a laptop, or at least that's what it sounds like! It has one bit of expansion the MBP can't match - it WILL take a second SSD (there's a 2260 m.2 slot, and you can shoehorn a 512 GB drive in there). Right now, 1 TB seems to be the limit (and it's almost exactly as expensive once it has a second SSD as a MBP with a single 1 TB drive).
-
Yeah, that's quite pricey. In short if you want the screen it has no peer, otherwise the MBP is a better value (I can't believe I'm placing Apple and value in the same sentence).
Weight is actually more than I thought initially: the quoted 4.2 pounds was with a smaller battery, the one with a large batter is 5 lbs. Still ok but nothing to write home about. It seems to be giving 5-6 hours of regular use, maybe 50% less than a MBP 15 retina despite the slightly larger battery. It was just one review though.
-
Interestingly enough, Asus' ROG G501 gaming laptop (shipping in the next couple of weeks) seems to be a very similar machine with a GPU one generation newer - for $2000. It is the same panel, although perhaps without the Quantum Dot enhancement (whatever that does). The Dell M3800 also seems to use the same Sharp panel, although again without the 3M Quantum Dot technology. It looks like one can get either that Sharp panel OR full-strength processors, but about the only way to get both is with Dell's bigger, heavier Precision M4800 (or probably a Sager/Clevo equivalent)
-
I've come across another option, and I wonder if anyone has experience... Hp's ZBook 15" is bigger and heavier than the Dell M3800 or the MacBook Pro, around the same size and weight (a few ounces heavier) than the Thinkpad W541, but much lighter than the Sager/Clevo machines of similar specification ( the HP is just over 6 lbs) and significantly lighter than the comparable Dell M4800. Reviews suggest that the 3200x1800 display is gorgeous, and it's built like a Sherman Tank. On HP's website, it looks expensive, but various third parties have an appealing configuration in stock at relatively reasonable prices - about $150 over the Dell or the Thinkpad, and that includes a 3 year onsite warranty. One big bonus is that, instead of coming with a (useless) 500 GB hard drive, it comes stock with a 256 GB PCIe SSD . Of course, that drive is too small to store images on, but it'll make a great OS drive, and there are still two 2.5" bays left over (the main bay and buying a cheap adapter to stick a drive in the optical bay). One concern is that it may have very short battery life, because it never turns its Quadro GPU off (Lenovo does have this working with high-resolution displays - the W541 switches graphics correctly - and the Dell M3800 can actually do it with the full 4K display, but the ZBook and the Dell M4800 won't switch with high res displays).
-
I've come across another option, and I wonder if anyone has experience... Hp's ZBook 15" is bigger and heavier than the Dell M3800 or the MacBook Pro, around the same size and weight (a few ounces heavier) than the Thinkpad W541, but much lighter than the Sager/Clevo machines of similar specification ( the HP is just over 6 lbs)
they are just not of similar spec... Clevo P750ZM (which is the 15" one with 4K igzo as an option) is a desktop Z97 chipset, desktop CPU and cooling system that can take inside GTX980 or Quadro K5100, 2 x M.2 + 2 x regular SATA HDD/SSD drives = 4 drives inside and 15" HP can't - you need a 17" Zbook to match and then weight is the same (both then start @ 7.5Lb)
-
I've specifically been ignoring the machines that use desktop chips (Sager/Clevo also make models that use proper mobile chips) due to weight, cooling and power requirements. By the time you have an 8 lb laptop 2" thick, with a 3 lb 300 watt power supply, you might as well just carry an iMac (the 21" isn't Retina, unfortunately). Yes, at the extremes of power, there is a need for 17" laptops, or for 15" brutes with desktop processors, but there is ALSO a need for still powerful, but somewhat more elegant, machines that you might actually want to move. Is an extra 3-4 lbs (once you account for the size of the power brick) worth it for a 20% performance improvement (admittedly, the GPU is a bigger jump than that, but very little other than games uses the full power of those GPUs)?
At least for my needs, I'd rather have a machine in the 4-6 lb range (plus a 1 lb power supply) with a decently fast quad-core CPU, a decent discrete GPU, a great screen and a really nice keyboard and pointing device than an 8+ lb behemoth with an extra 20% CPU cycles, 200% or better GPU performance that few if any programs (except games) take advantage of, and a MUCH WORSE keyboard and pointing device. I certainly agree that the Sagers are faster, especially in the GPU, but there are a lot of tradeoffs to get there.
-
I've specifically been ignoring the machines that use desktop chips (Sager/Clevo also make models that use proper mobile chips) due to weight, cooling and power requirements. By the time you have an 8 lb laptop 2" thick, with a 3 lb 300 watt power supply, you might as well just carry an iMac (the 21" isn't Retina, unfortunately).
you understand that particular 15" notebook is totally different that 21" iMac in terms of handling (15" vs 21") and it will put 21" iMac to dust in a blink of an eye performance wise...
-
At least for my needs, I'd rather have a machine in the 4-6 lb range (plus a 1 lb power supply) with a decently fast quad-core CPU, a decent discrete GPU, a great screen and a really nice keyboard and pointing device
with 50mp raws coming to us today and moving that smoothly around on a 4K+ screen what do you call a decent discrete GPU ;) ?
now certainly you are the different type of need-mobility person - I need a mobile system unit, I move that piece in a shoulder bag between from a place with power, good external LCD, external kb/mouse/etc to a place with the same environment, worst case scenario is to bring iDisplayPro if it is a new place... I'd even consider a mini/micro-PC system unit, but unfortunately "they" don't make them with such options performance wise in the same form-factor/weight - so I really have to buy notebook, but I don't really care about it being slick (or even having LCD and keyboard) - it is just a portable brick easy to haul from between several fully equipped offices...
-
For my needs (and AlterEgo's point is well taken, that you can get significantly more power for somewhat less money (especially in the GPU) if you give up some mobility, some build quality and some usability without external peripherals), I've narrowed it down to three workstation laptops from well-known manufacturers. Any of the three are very powerful, well-built, have excellent displays and are ergonomically nicer than 90% of everything out there. Any one of them stuffed full of SSDs will make a great Photoshop/Lightroom/Premiere/C1 station. I just can't bring myself to pay the Apple Tax and give up expandability and repairability when Windows has gotten as usable as it has. A MacBook Pro would be well over $3000 configured as close to these machines as I can get it, and it still lags in storage by half a terabyte (3/4 terabyte in the case of the HP).
Here are the three machines (in order of ascending weight). In all cases, the prices are assuming I install my existing 512 GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD, and buy a 1 TB 850 EVO.
Any advice on choosing between the three final contenders would be great! If anyone has used any of the machines in question (or close relatives), hands-on experiences would be wonderful...
Dell Precision M3800 (4.5 lbs), $2500 with 16 GB RAM, 1.5 TB of SSDs
PROS:
Smallest, thinnest and lightest
4k display (Sharp IGZO) with excellent gamut
Employer support - this will be my personal machine, BUT my employer buys a lot of Dells.
Least expensive
Good battery life
CONS:
16 GB maximum RAM
slowest processor (15% slower than 4810MQ on others, ~20% slower than 4910MQ option on Lenovo)
slowest GPU (50% slower than Quadro k2100 on others)
Least comprehensive port configuration (Ethernet is the biggest omission - GigE is still faster than any practical WiFi (yes, 802.11ac right next to the latest router is close, but it's not common) for getting big files into the cloud, and I work at a university - we have good bandwidth)
Probably weakest keyboard and trackpad (from reviews - good luck trying to handle ANY of these machines prior to purchase).
Glossy display
Most mentions of BIOS and repair issues online
Known to thermal throttle on occasion
Lenovo ThinkPad W541 (5.5 lbs, $2600 with 24 GB RAM, 1.5 TB of SSDs)
PROS:
Thin and light for the power
Excellent keyboard and pointing devices
32 GB RAM capacity
Matte display with built-in calibrator and excellent gamut
Relatively inexpensive (by the standards of this type of laptop!)
Can have the fastest CPU in the group (priced here with a 4810MQ, but an extra $200 buys a 4910MQ - even an Extreme Edition CPU is an option, but overpriced)
Competitive GPU (K2100 offered on both Lenovo and HP)
CONS:
Lowest display resolution (again, in rarefied company - it's a 3k display!)
Possibly lower build quality
SSDs are mSATA and 2.5" only - no PCIe
A couple of reviews mention thermal issues - others laugh!
Significantly bigger and heavier than the Dell
Only 2 USB 3.0 ports - why in the world are there 2 USB 2.0 ports on a machine like this?
HP ZBook 15G2 (6.5 lbs, $2871 with 24 GB of RAM, 1.75 TB of SSDs, including 256 GB of PCIe SSD)
PROS:
Ultra-fast PCIe SSD (plus 2 other SSDs)
Absurdly complete port selection - no less than three monitor connectors, three USB 3.0, Thunderbolt 2, GigE, every possible WiFi standard
Reviews agree this has the best build quality there is - very few software issues, either.
32 GB RAM capacity
Excellent thermals
CONS:
Big and heavy (6+ lb laptops are rare these days)
Display isn't 4k or self-calibrating (we've come a long way when a full sRGB, 3200x1800, matte display is a minus)
Heavy power adapter (it may also run, although not charge, on a much lighter 90W adapter - this would be worth knowing)
Slightly more expensive than competitors
Doesn't have a 4910MQ (available as CTO, but drives the price way up)
Poor battery life due to always-on Quadro (others have the ability to run on Intel graphics when the Quadro isn't needed)
-
I think I'm about to pull the trigger on an HP ZBook 15 - the build quality, upgradability and power, along with a 3200x1800 matte screen, seem to make it worth the weight. I'll keep my Surface Pro 3 for ultraportable duties, and be all PC for the first time ever. I'm sad to be leaving the Mac altogether, but when I look at the HP alongside the Retina MacBook Pro for hundreds of dollars more, I wish Apple still made "tools to make tools" instead of $10,000 watches! Apple offers one option in a professional notebook, it is a preconfigured machine you have to take or leave, and it is impossible to fix if it breaks. Some of us might prefer "many options" over "ultralight"...
-
I'm sad to be leaving the Mac altogether
check forums - may be you can run hackintosh on it, who knows... but that means investing some time & effort
-
OS X just feels more "finished" to me - everything seems to be made to work together (Windows is catching up, though), and I far prefer Safari to other browsers, mostly due to privacy settings being stricter. I also prefer Mail to Outlook, although I think that is partially because I don't know Outlook as well yet (some of the feel of Windows vs. OS X is probably down to the same thing). For a long time, there was a huge difference in color management (the Mac has been excellent for years, Windows was a hack until recently), but Windows has REALLY closed that gap, and 8.1 handles color very acceptably.
Interesting, as I loathe the flakey Apple Mail and avoid Safari as it's so clunky in comparison with Chrome or Opera. I also replace as much Apple software as I can with something less simplistic and difficult to use.
My current huge issue with OSX is multiple monitors and full screen usage. 10 years on from having really good customisable multiple monitor functionality on Windows, OSX is still a real bodge and seems to have become worse with the the latest OSs. I was in Apple store today trying to see if the Yosemite issues had been fixed, so I can finally upgrade from Mountain Lion. The lady in store was a bit puzzled at first by the problem as she didn't use multiple monitors but after demonstrating the two options for multiple monitors where one setup is difficult and and the other terrible, she agreed it was a confusing mess. This is something that is making me think about using Windows again as I use dual monitors/full screen apps and Apple sadly seem to be making it very difficult to work with them. Plus I like more than one HD in my laptop and hate glossy screens
-
It looks like neither Adobe nor C1 cares about the Quadro cards (as opposed to GeForce) - a Quadro k1100 is just a GeForce 750m, and a Quadro k2100 is somewhat faster, but is just like a faster GeForce. This means that repurposing a gaming notebook is just as viable as a workstation notebook (and that the Mac, which uses a GeForce, will see benefits from its GPU). Some gaming notebooks come with cards that are a great deal faster than any Quadro normally seen in a notebook (there are reasonable notebooks with GeForce 970m cards, although the 980m seems to appear in bulky machines with desktop CPUs) Some older versions of Adobe software would ONLY accelerate if they saw a Quadro card. The newer workstation notebooks may still have design advantages over many bulky gaming notebooks (some of the gaming machines, like the Razers, are very elegant, but many of them are 8 lbs with no battery life), but there is no fundamental reason to choose one just for the Quadro.
Adobe GPU and PS info. (https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq1.html)
-
The so-called "Apple tax" the OP speaks of quickly pays for itself with a more efficient system that "just works" without the need for the added concern and software required to fight viruses, etc. While Macs can get viruses, they are still far less common than on PCs. One day of downtime trying to sort that out will pay for another round of the so-called Apple tax. And, if you've ever used an Apple trackpad (which I've used exclusively without even thinking about a mouse for years now), then there is another bonus paid for by the Apple tax. How about AirDrop - fantastic, too. It just works.
If I could meet the marketing muppet who came up with the fiction 'It just works', I'd smack them around the head with the various bit of flakey hardware I've had from Apple. The DVD players in MP and MBP died, the magsafe power supply was recalled, but not before damaging my laptop. Apple cable are shockingly poor in general, breaking really easily and have a very high turnover of replacements at my local Apple store according to someone who works there. My iPad was replaced within a week as the lighting port was iffy, my previous iPhone had useless battery life from the word go and it never got sorted [as a really light user it wouldn't even last me until 5pm] and my MP went back and fore numerous times trying to get it up to speed.
BTW re viruses, the worst damage ever done to any computer of mine by software was ironically by an earlier version of iTunes. Which without asking decided to rearrange all my carefully organised music into a useless bunch of random folders, not accessible by anything else. I only lost a day or two fixing that as sensibly I only let iTunes look at a small subset of my music collection.
-
In marketing circles I suspect Steve Jobs is very close to God. It has to be the most spectacular success story since Coca-Cola.
For me the decisive factor is the "planned obsolesence" built into all Apple products. Use it until some component stops working, which will happen, then discover it can't be replaced. I need a system that can evolve and expand - and that "just works". Hence Windows.
Other than that I have nothing special against Apple, and they do deserve credit for gorgeous visual design. Yes, that matters too.
-
More Communications and less Marketing, really. Jobs' old line of "the customer's don't know what they want" is pretty much antithesis to good marketing practice, where you find out what your customer wants and deliver it. So, it's mostly about the Communications and through that building other elements of marketing. Extremely well done, of course, and frankly good, solid products and very good in certain niches over the years. You can't seriously deny that Apple make good stuff overall, whether or not you're a fan.
It's basically the opposite of Commodore, who made the Amiga, which was so far ahead of either Mac or PC at the time it wasn't funny, but they had zero effective communications, and so basically died off.
As I said earlier, it's really down to personal preference, which is neither right nor wrong and entirely valid for each individual. The best thing is that it's really hard to make a truly bad choice these days - there is so much good stuff available.
-
I purchased the W530, February 2013. I went through much the same process you have, looking at the Dell, HP and even a Zenbook equivalent for the time.
The W530 has been a 'workhorse' ever since.
It is my go to computer, at the desktop, when I travel.
I purchased because it was upgradable (ram increase, SSD additions, extra drive in the optical bay), and this has let me move with program upgrades, larger files etc etc....It's still working well and speedily enough (this is subjective) even when I stitch 3 Credo 60 files together, then dive into photoshop with multiple layers. I can't say I can compare it's quadro card to anything else though. It works, so I don't question it.
The W541 looks good, and if I felt that the 530 was at the end of it's tether, I wouldn't hesitate to go there again.
Good luck with the purchase. Please let us know how you get on with the new machine.
AL
-
Here are my musings as I selected the HP ZBook 15 G2, if it helps anyone else. This includes everything I vaguely considered (and, for completeness' sake, a couple of machines (Alienware, the heaviest Clevo, the 17" options) that I didn't look at seriously. I'm presently bringing my OneDrive over onto the ZBook, which I have configured with 24 GB of RAM and 2.75 TB of storage (256 GB ultrafast PCIe boot drive, 512 GB Samsung 840 Pro for working files, 2 TB Samsung Spinpoint hard drive interfaced with OneDrive for library). In its first 24 hours, it's a VERY nice, well-made, fast machine, and it's actually not terribly heavy riding in a decent backpack from my local hiking shop (note - it's in a technical daypack I bought on closeout that has a real suspension, NOT a laptop pack with no hipbelt. The display is gorgeous! The biggest surprise on the size is not the computer itself (if you remember 15" laptops from before Apple changed the rules with the Unibodies, this is no bigger - it's a bit wider, but a bit thinner), but the power supply - it truly deserves the name power BRICK, and it is connected to the computer by a garden hose instead of a nice thin wire.
The most powerful laptops under 5 lbs (it still looks like a standard laptop, but it packs a punch). These machines all have to compromise in some way to keep their size and thermals under control. All have obligatory glossy displays – the only matte option is on the Razer Blade, and you sacrifice RAM (8 GB soldered instead of 16 GB soldered) and resolution to get it.
Apple Retina MacBook Pro (15"). While the MacBook Pro uses Intel processors that give up some speed in return for better integrated graphics (inexplicably, Apple uses these processors even on models with discrete graphics cards), many other parts of the MacBook Pro are designed for speed. Uses an extremely fast PCIe SSD (non-standard, and non-upgradeable (yet) in the latest model). No additional disks. Many models have discrete graphics, but it's an older GeForce GT750M. Current models come with 16 GB of RAM, but that's all you'll ever get - it's soldered in. Extremely expensive to maintain, because many parts (including some that break) are glued together ($700 keyboard repair, because the keyboard, trackpad, battery and most of the case are one piece).
Dell XPS 15/Dell Precision M3800. Windows' closest approach to the Retina MacBook Pro has an even higher resolution screen (4k) on some models. A low-power processor performs 20% worse than the fastest quad-core mobile chips presently available. Graphics choices include the same GeForce 750 as the MacBook Pro (XPS) and a similar chip optimized for workstation use (Precision M3800). They don't take PCIe SSDs, but they will accept two drives (1 2.5", one full-length mSATA), both of which are user-replaceable. Maximum SSD capacity is 2 TB, and it's possible to shoehorn 3 TB in here by using a 1 TB mSATA SSD and the Samsung/Seagate 2 TB hard drive. It's possible to save a lot of money, especially on the Precision, by buying minimal storage and adding your own. 16 GB maximum RAM capacity - it is socketed, and there is some chance of a BIOS upgrade that might permit 32 GB (using nearly unavailable 16 GB SODIMMs - there are only two slots).
Razer Blade. The only machine in this roundup with less than a 15” display, the 14” Razer Blade is nonetheless exactly the same weight as the 15” MacBook Pro. Its notable positive feature is a GeForce 970M graphics card that is MUCH faster than other machines in this weight range. The processor is slightly faster than Dell uses in the XPS/3800 twins, comparable to the top model MacBook Pro, and marginally slower than most of the machines in the category below. Probably the worst storage options in this group – mSATA SSDs with no 2.5” bay offered – doesn’t have the speed of Apple’s PCIe SSDs OR the flexibility of Dell’s dual-drive design. Soldered RAM (most models have 16GB, but to get the matte screen, you downgrade to 8GB with no upgrade option).
Big laptops (in the 6-7 lb range). These would have been considered perfectly average-sized 15” laptops a few years ago, until Apple rewrote the rules. Today, the big beasts buy some extra CPU power, radically increased storage capacity (and, in one case, an unusual blend of storage options), high-resolution matte screens, 32 GB RAM capacity with 4 slots and better keyboards than their smaller siblings. The three I considered closely (including the ZBook 15 I wound up with) were all workstation models, but there are also a number of 15” gaming laptops that fit in this category, and also might adapt well to photographic needs. I included the Alienware 15 as a representative of this category, although I didn’t consider it closely myself. Workstations also tend to offer a huge range of ports, including the rapidly disappearing wired gigabit Ethernet (which is still the fastest way of getting large photos to the cloud, if your back end connection can handle it). These machines also accept docking stations (or, in Alienware’s case, a graphics amplifier that serves many of the same functions, although it doesn’t provide power or some other ports, and also accepts a desktop graphics card).
Gaming machines gain graphics power compared to the workstations, but lose build and keyboard quality as well as storage flexibility. The workstation graphics cards are not based on the latest gaming cards (tending to be a generation behind), and workstation manufacturers are too concerned about reliability to shoehorn the very highest power cards into a machine this size (while a gaming laptop in the same size and weight range might very well have a higher power card). On the other hand, workstation cards tend to perform well at real work, because their drivers are written differently from the gaming cards. I was, surprisingly, unable to find good reviews comparing a workstation card to a newer, faster gaming card in photo/video editing applications, so I’m unsure whether raw power or professional drivers win out. If you both photograph and work in CAD or GIS, go for a workstation without question, while if you will never use CAD or GIS, but enjoy some games on the side, the gaming laptops will be a better fit.
Lenovo ThinkPad W541. The lightest of the true 15” workstations (the Dell Precision M3800 is really a modified XPS) at just under 6 lbs, the Lenovo also has a built-in color calibrator in some configurations! CPU and graphics options are basically the same as the rest of this group, ranging from an Intel 4710MQ up to the massively overpriced 4940MX. Even the 4710MQ is significantly faster than anything in the 5 lb group, and upgrading to the 4810 or 4910 can open up a 20% gap, especially compared to the low-power chip in the M3800/XPS twins. Graphics options include the NVidia k1100 and k2100, the latter of which is faster than anything in the 5 lb group except the Razer Blade’s full-strength GTX970M. Storage options include a short m.SATA slot that holds up to a 256 GB SSD plus a 2.5” bay, two if you ditch the DVD drive. The disadvantages include some concerns about build quality and a relatively low-resolution 2880x1620 maximum display (that counts as very high resolution unless your competition offer 3200x1800 and 4k displays!). The port selection is excellent in any other company, but the fact that two of the four USB ports are garden-variety USB 2.0 (and they are located right next to the USB 3.0 ports and not well marked) is a bit of a disappointment, as is the limited selection of monitor connections (mini DisplayPort plus VGA). VGA ports are standard on these workstations, due to old projectors in a lot of business environments – but having a couple of better options is nice, and the Lenovo provides only one. They DO include a Thunderbolt port, which allows very high speed drive connections.
HP ZBook 15. At ~6.4 lbs, a little heavier than the Lenovo, with very similar options. The highest resolution display is 3200x1800, and reviews indicate that it has slightly better gamut than the Lenovo, but it is not self-calibrating. Other than build quality that all reviews agree is extremely high (HP reps like to demonstrate by dropping it and then standing on it!), the biggest differentiating feature is that the short SSD slot is PCIe instead of mSATA. It’s still limited to 256 GB, but it is extremely fast (the one 2.5” bay with another available by ditching the DVD drive is exactly the same). The port selection is a little better than on the Lenovo, because a full-size DisplayPort is available, in addition to Mini DisplayPort (on the Thunderbolt port) and VGA. Additionally, only one of the USB ports is only USB 2.0, and it is well separated from the USB 3.0 ports, so harder to confuse with them. Unfortunately, the USB ports are scattered around the machine, which is annoying when trying to use peripherals that plug into an extra USB port for power. One USB 3.0 port is a charging port, which may also supply extra power to a drive (the Lenovo’s charging port is USB 2.0).
Dell Precision M4800. At close to 7 lbs, this is a big, heavy machine. Most options are similar to the slightly lighter HP and significantly lighter Lenovo. The disk options are yet another minor variant – no PCIe, but the mSATA slot is full length, and not limited to 256 GB (you could theoretically RAID three 1 TB SSDs in this machine). A 4k Sharp IGZO display is an option, but it’s glossy, and the best matte option is standard FHD. Port selection is a variation on the same theme – a useful HDMI port replaces the Mini DisplayPort on the others (there is a full-size DisplayPort as well), and eSATA replaces Thunderbolt. HDMI is probably a good trade, especially given the presence of the full-size DisplayPort, but I’m less certain about eSATA for Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt is theoretically a much better port – it does everything eSATA does and more, with higher bandwidth, BUT Thunderbolt peripherals beyond drives are hard to find, and some are Mac only. eSATA is common on midrange drive enclosures, while Thunderbolt is increasingly common on higher end enclosures.
Alienware 15. gain a LOT of graphics performance (especially in games) compared to the workstations, give a little back in every other way. The processor maxes out at a 4710MQ, the lowest option on the competition, RAM maxes at 16 GB, the drive configuration is slightly less flexible than the workstations (no PCIe, 2 mSATA, 1 2.5”) and there is no external drive port faster than USB 3.0 (all four USB ports are 3.0, which is nice). Screen options range up to a 4K Sharp IGZO, but glossy is inevitable beyond the base screen. It’s actually slightly heavier than even the Precision M4800. The big feature is latest generation high-end mobile graphics cards with three or four times the raw power of the cards in the workstations (including a couple of cards much faster than the Razer Blade uses). Instead of the general purpose docking stations the workstations support (with every imaginable port and sometimes drive bays), the Alienware’s equivalent accessory is a Graphics Amplifier that focuses on accepting a full-size DESKTOP graphics card (with a 300W+ power budget). Some workstation “deluxe” docking stations may accept a PCIe card, but it won’t be double-slot or allow a lot of extra power – it’s meant for a Fibre Channel or 10 Gig Ethernet adapter or the like, not a full-power gaming card. Another trick the Alienware Graphics Amplifier can do that a workstation docking station won’t is that the external graphics card will actually drive the laptop display (as well as external monitors plugged into it). On the other hand, the docking ports (other than the video ports on the graphics card) are limited to 4 USB 3.0 ports – even power and Ethernet require the laptop’s ports, so it is less convenient than a workstation dock which supplies everything with one connection.
Is this really a Laptop??? 8 lbs and up, limited battery.
HP Zbook 17. Take a Zbook 15, add an additional 2.5” bay, a 17” screen and a pound and a half, and you have a Zbook 17. The high resolution screen option goes away, but a high-gamut DreamColor display is an option. Processors, RAM and ports are the same as the 15, but graphics options go up to much higher-powered workstation cards that can add thousands of dollars to the price… Dell’s M6800 has almost exactly the same relationship to the M4800.
Sager/Clevo (and similar) laptops using desktop processors. The 15” variants of these beasts weigh nearly 8 lbs, with the 17” models around 9 lbs. They are cousins to something like the Alienware 15, emphasizing performance, especially graphics performance, over mobility. Build quality suffers compared to workstations or even Alienwares, but you get a choice of graphics cards (including both the top gaming and workstation models – some of these will accommodate two graphics cards in SLI) and desktop processors that can be 10-20% faster than the top mobile models. These are still quad-core processors, and the performance differences between desktop and mobile quad cores are not huge.
MSI GT80 Titan. A 10 lb “laptop” with an 18” screen, a top-end mechanical keyboard, TWO of the fastest graphics cards you can get and (oddly) a power-saving low-voltage quad core mobile processor that won’t keep up with a 6 lb workstation. Once you’ve built a machine that’s not really any easier to move than an iMac, why not use a faster CPU?
Eurocom Panther 5SE (and other names – it’s a Sager/Clevo). A 12 lb “laptop” with one standout feature. It uses LGA 2011 processors, so it can have more than 4 cores (up to 12, if you’re willing to pay for a 12 core Xeon). They admit the battery is really only a UPS in case the power cord(s) pull out. Dual graphics - although the very newest cards aren’t available, the option for dual high-end workstation cards IS. Four drives, but no PCIe!!! Any port except Thunderbolt is somewhere on this behemoth. Some configurations need TWO 3 lb AC adapters! Can easily be configured over $10,000, highest-end configurations can top $15,000. Actually both heavier and more expensive than an equivalently configured "trashcan" Mac Pro (although not once you add the weight of the display to the Mac Pro). Realistically, how often will anyone use a computer in this cost/weight range without one or more external displays? Certainly the fastest laptop in the world, but certainly NOT the fastest practical laptop!
-
Have you considered the Wacom Cintiq Companion? The second generation offers memory and processor options.
http://www.wacom.com/en-us/products/pen-displays/cintiq-companion-2 (http://www.wacom.com/en-us/products/pen-displays/cintiq-companion-2)
-
The Cintiq Companion looks like an interesting contraption - an expensive Surface Pro 3 with higher end configurations, perhaps aimed straight at photographers. I have an SP3, and will keep it alongside the ZBook, because they have different ideal use cases. I find the SP3 much more useful than an iPad, because it'll run reasonable photo editing applications (the real computer versions instead of the phone versions). If the Companion had been around when I bought the SP3, which would I have bought? I'm not sure - the Companion has a 16 GB RAM configuration available and faster processors, but it's significantly heavier and more expensive than the SP3. As a competitor to the ZBook, it's only a dual-core, unlike any of the machines I considered for this notebook workstation, and it lacks expandable storage (my ZBook is configured with 2.75 TB of storage - 2 SSDs and a 2 TB hard drive!). I also considered expandability crucial for this workstation, which is why I eliminated the MacBook Pro and the Razer Blade in the end. I think most photographers will end up with two (or more) computers - something really light, perhaps with a touchscreen (whether it is a Surface Pro 3, a Cintiq Companion, a MacBook Air or whatever) and either a big, powerful notebook or a desktop.
Dan