Dell Studio Xps 1645

On Dell canada website i was checking the drivers out for the 1640. When it asked to identify the model i saw 1340, 1640, and 1645. This could be a new model or there way of defining the new I7 machine not sure witch but just thought id let you know



When you click 1645 it just loops back to the begining of the selection so there are no drivers listed yet

 

Maybe it's the Core i7 version of the Studio XPS 16.

 

it is the i7

 

I think its the Core i7 also!....
Dell loves to number like that...


Cin...

 

It has been posted in another thread that the Studio 1557 has more differences compared to the 1555 than just the processor... What about the Studio XPS?

 

yep it is core i7 model.
I wish to replace my laptop with it...

 

I would so get the 820 if I can.

 

I'm happy with my new laptop. Core2Duo is plenty fast. This thing is smoking fast. i7 is sweet though. 1645 is most likely the new i7 lineup though.

 

If I could choose, I would rather have a Ati 5650 than an I7 Processor.

 

i have already called DELL and ask if its possible for a upgrade, they said about 2-3 weeks i have the opportunity to upgrade my Cpu (if i like)

but i think i stay with my p8700.....its fast enough for my kind of works. (im not renderer 3D apps a lot anyway)

 

I7 is a beast power drawer, we think we have bad battery life already. I really can't wait to hear people moan about how they only get an hours life out of it in a few weeks. The I7 is probably a fair ammount hotter too

 

Seems the i7 version is available on the US Dell.com site now. Starting price ain't bad...

Anyone know the difference between the two LED backlit 1080p screens? I really don't care much for my current RGBLED screen as the whites are not white. I wonder if the WLED 15.6 1080p screen has nice, bright whites?

 

The driver page for the 1645 is up and a number of the drivers are more up to date than the 1640 drivers and work perfectly:

IDT 92HD73C1 Audio v6.10.0.6217, A15

Dell QuickSet v9.6.8, A01

Synaptics Synaptics TouchPad v 13.2.2.2, A06

Broadcom BCM5784M LAN v12.2.1.0, A02

 

I thought the i7 was an "upgrade" or improvement over the the C2D. Am I wrong? Why would they make it worse? You'd think they would run cooler and have better battery life; not the other way around. I typically use my lappy plugged in, so maybe it won't matter to me....

 

The point is that i7 are QUAD-core, they have to draw more power than dual-cores...

 

Aside from having more cores, the i7 uses about 1.5 times as much power than a core 2 quad of the same clock frequency and standard quads use about double the power of a dual core. I don't know what the mobile line of i7 processors are like because we havn't seen them yet but intel will have had to pull a pretty impossible feat for it to get any reasonably battery life, maybe you can disable two of the cores, I don't know. I wouldn't expect more than two hours batttery life though even with a power saving profile

 

first of all the default battery is a 9-cell and not the 6-cell and from what I understand the i7 has a memory controller built-in which probably requires some power. I have no idea what means in terms of power consumption, but if you're going from a TXX00 to an i7 CPU you're increasing the CPU wattage by 10W minus the consumption of the memory controller.

 

then, I'd think, you can always down volt the i7.

 

The benchmarks show over 200 minutes with a 6-cell battery and a mid-range graphics card:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2009/09/18/intel-core-i7-for-laptops-first-review

More benchamarks: http://optimitza.cat/news/2009/09/21/intel-core-i7-for-laptops-benchmarked/

 

Random comment, but on the Canadian site it seems they changed the base screen resolution to 1680*945 instead of the customary 1600*900.

 

Yeah I noticed this too. Assumed it was a typo.

 

Ordered mine now. Costed me ~ $1400 with taxes with the following configuration:

Intel CoreTM i7-720QM (1.6 - 2.8 GHz 6M/8 threads)
4GB, DDR3, 1333MHz 2 Dimm
15.6 inh Wide Screen 16:9 1080p Full HD WLED LCD, W/2.0 MP, XPS 1645
ATI Mobility RADEON HD 4670 1GB
500GB 7200RPM Free Fall SensorSeagate Hard Drive
Intel WiFi Link 5300
9 cell battery
8X DVD+/-RW Slot Load Drive

Just missed the offer where I would have got blue ray reader for the same price, still a good deal though

 

I wonder whether Dell would be able to fit a 4830 as an upgrade to the 4670...It'll be really sweet with that config.

 

So you just called and asked to upgrade and they said yes? OR do you have a problem or issue with your current laptop and are getting a replacement upgrade? I am confused...I got mine about a month ago and I really wanted an i7..Havent called dell yet, but I am assuming that since its passed 21 days I cant get an upgrade?

 

I second that, i have left 3 months of warranty and i need to know if i can claim a free upgrade on the processor side or graphics card side (i have currently the 3670 one).

 

I received my 1640 Sep 23 and asked about an upgrade on Nov 5. Did not get a clear answer (suspect it was going to be a "no") but while on the phone I realised I needed a second laptop for work anyway in 3 months. Good excuse to pull that need forward and spend a bit more than intended on it. So I just bit the bullet and ordered a 1645 on Nov 6. So I have both now before I hand down one of them in 2 months time. It's a close call which.

Specs for each are somewhat similar - only 5 differences. (Shown as: 1640 / 1645):
T9900 / i7-820qm,
8GB 1067 / 8GB 1333,
Bluray burner / Bluray reader,
Vista 64 home (now upgraded by Dell to Win 7 HP) / Win 7 Ultimate,
Black Case / White Case.

Common specs are 500gb sata 7200, RGBLED, 370 Bluetooth, 5300 Half Mini Card.

Passmark scores are:

Overall: 1132.5 / 1276.5
CPU is the huge difference 2598 / 3868
Memory less so 1470 / 1619
Most others are the same as you would expect except the performance of the 1645 on the 2D graphics test is poor 572 / 251. Not sure of the reason but it may be test related as all the 1645s on Passmark show this trend.

Win 7 scores the same except where you would expect:

Proc 6.6 / 6.9
Mem 6.6 / 7.4
Graph 6.7
Gaming 6.7
Disk 5.9

All in all though it is hard to pick any difference in the real world. Both work just fine for me with one exception(below). 1640 cost about $50 less, 300 when you back out the Blu-ray burner. But this is distorted by the coupons available etc. And today the price difference on similar spec to my two is $190 in favour of the 1645. But there may be coupons, once again, that flip this completely about.

I always have multiple applications open and rapidly switch between them. No problem with either laptop. Photo and video editing are probably the most CPU intensive tasks I do. I'm not a gamer (son is, he'd love for you to ask me to do a test on COD Modern Warfare 2 which involved him having both laptops for a while and then only giving me one back).

But exatly as you would expect it is in rendering a video with Sony Vegas 9 that the i7 shows it's strength. My desk top (Q9650 stock, 8GB 1333, 7 lat) did it in 14min. The 1645 in 18min, the 1640 in 25min.

So I guess on that final point as it's basically a tie otherwise I'll keep the i7.

May have to just see how they do unplugged though first....

John

 

Ok just unplugged them and did the same render test. Set the power management setting to 100% proc and 50% display on each laptop. Started the render and pulled the cords. The desk top performed very poorly in this test. The 1645 at 100% battery at this load had 1h20m the 1640 1h42m. They both completed the render in the same time as before. The 1645 finished with 77% capacity which at that load was giving 1h03 min remaining. Then 8 min later the 1640 finished with,,,, 77% capacity which was 1h22 remaining.

So effectively once the task was done both batteries had lost the same capacity. Points to the i7 for getting the job done faster for the same consumption.... but... once the render was finished and just IE8, Messenger, Avast anti virus et al. were ticking over with me just clicking on the odd link on the web...the 1640 showed 3h05 left at that 77% capacity while the 1645 at 77% was only saying 1h52. 10min later the 1640 is at 73% 3h00 and the 1645 1h36 67%. Looks like the i7 is only efficient when being caned. The T9900 is the far better at medium to low pace.

So there is the clear answer! For anything at your desk go the 1645.

For video rendering in a taxi go the 1645 too.

For anything else in the taxi get a 1640.