Why are people more interested in XPS 15 than 17?

I kinda wonder, 'cause from my point of view XPS 17 has more pros than 15 ...

 

Decent screen is only available on the 15"

 

Most people don't want huge 17" laptops. Plus, 900p on a 17.3" screen is unacceptable.

 

100% agree

 

yeah,, not everyone wants 17. And even some of those who wanted 17 went for 15 because of screen...

 

damn it ... any news on 1080p screen or sandybridge ?????

 

This notebook isn't that huge. Plus, 900p you'll find in most 17' notebooks.

 

Well i personally have the xps 15 and its like PERFECT performance for the size
I can play GRID,COD7 all in 1080p res and high textures.(GRID is almost maxed out )
And not to say the gorgeous 1080p b+RG screen.
I dont find any reason to go for 17"

 

It has been decided long ago that a laptop must be built to hold a screen size of approximately 15.4 inches to be a proper full-sized laptop. Throughout time, a range developed (15.0-16.0 inches). Anything more than that is an oversized laptop, which has it's purposes (power, screen size), but is not suitable for the average user.

For nearly everyone, the 15.0-16.0 inch size is perfect for the best combination of mobility, performance, and usability.

If you need more mobility than performance, go smaller.

 

Yes, I have seen on youtube where a user was able to play latest games on high settings on the 425M with the 1080p display.

The 15.6" is the perfect balance between portability and home entertainment, which prolly explains why its more popular.

 

personally I think 15.6" is too big to be used on a lap...I played around with some at Best Buy and ~14.5" was best for me. The keyboard size on the XPS 14 and 15 look the same to me, the 15 just has extra space on the sides, so the only difference would be the bigger screen. When you get down to 13", thats when keyboard sizes start shrinking

 

I'm gonna have to agree with almost everyone here. Most people are looking for mobility + performance + budget. Many smaller laptops don't have as good performance and if they do you pay quite a premium. Anything larger than a 15" is a pita to carry around from class to class or wherever. IMO anything larger than a 15" laptop is strictly a desktop replacement, but for those who already own a desktop the 15" xps gives the correct balance of performance and mobility at a good pricepoint. (however I do think they should allow people to choose a higher video card if they want without the bs line of so called "incompatibility", 435 + i5 woulda been a nice option)


Oh yeah.... Three words: full high definition. There are only a few laptops out there that even offer it on a15". And it seems silly it doesnt yet exist as an option on the 17"s yet.

 

I want the 17” inch for a desktop replacement,however I don’t like the fact that it’s not 1080p (at least not yet) and I am going to wait for SB now.

 

17' isn't portable or practical, i have a 17 and an 18.4, i needed a 15 for portability and better battery life.

 

17' is practical and portable, believe me. This specific notebook, the XPS 17 isn't huge at all. You can easily take it with you in most suitcases or so. With much better graphic card (GF GT 445M), more space, numeric keyboard... You can easily take it with you anywhere, it's not as warm as XPS 15, not so loud ... Seriously guys, you're just too demanding -.-

 

the xps 17 is indeed superior than the 15, the only issue, if you can call it that is that the xps 17 does not have the 1080p screen.
from my point of view, i would get the xps 17 (which i am ) and if i really didnt like the screen i would replace it.
the xps 17 chassis allows for 2 hdd/ssd's (correct me if i'm wrong, but i think xps 15 has only one), 4 slots for ram for future upgrades if needed, and has also got a number pad and of course the big 17.4" screen

people are just being picky on the 1080p screen >.<

 

I can be as demanding as I like, it's my cash. And seriously, my battery life is much better.

 

We are all XPS owners, same machine but with different specs based on what is suitable for our own individual needs. Everyone had to compromise somewhere whether the reason was money or unavailabilty of certain configs.

Life isn't perfect, if it was I would have received a free Meagan Fox and accessories... I didn't, I am happy with what i have, I will move on.............

 

I dont know why anyone would want to lug around a 17" laptop. I travel about 150,000 miles a year and the XPS 15 is pushing it on size. I had a Dell 9300 17" laptop before, and even though it was a great laptop, it never left the desk. Too big, too heavy and looks ridiculous sitting in a meeting with a 17" laptop open that you have to keep moving around to see whoever is talking haha.

17" laptops are desktop replacements, not portable machines, imho.

 

It's not business notebook, it's multimedia ... I don't understand why would you buy dell XPS for work/meetings, where Vostro is designed for this kind of things ...

 

I hate anything bigger than my current laptop- which is 14".

How anyone could LIKE a 17" or 18" laptop is beyond me... =\

 

You make the argument that XPS is multimedia. Yes, it is. Problem is the resolution on the 17" is 900p. That makes it a poor multimedia laptop. The 15" is much more suitable. 17" is really just too big and too heavy for travel.

 

If I had the choice bet. either, I would go with the 15. The 17 I would just want to keep on my desk for usage. 15 is more portable (well, to me it is)

Comes down to ones personal choice preferential. : )

Cin...

 

A 17in for someone 6' 2" is the same size as a 15in for someone who is 5' 5", size can be relative. Uses can also be relative such as someone who truly uses it as a portable would want it to be smaller as opposed to someone who brings it to the office or a friends house as a desktop replacement. I believe a 17 is usually going to sit on a desk though.

 

the 15 inch is clearly superior. better battery life, better screen, and the graphics performance is almost identical whether 420 vs 435 or 435 vs 445 the performance between both of those is so close its practically insignificant and that's the only benefit of the 17 inch model.

comes down to this 17 inch has the 445 available and it can hold 2 hard drives and 4 ram slots

the 15 inch has more portable size, lighter weight, higher resolution screen, B +RG LED screen, 150 dollars cheaper to start out, longer battery life, almost identical gaming performance (anything the 445 plays the 435 will play with only a few fps decrease especially since it uses the slower clocked 445 with the 128 bit memory width) better thermals as well due to lower level gpu used whether in optimus or clarksfield config.

if having 4 ram slots a slightly better gpu that runs hotter and having 2 hdd spots is worth giving up all those benefits then go with the 17" but u can obviously see why most people would not think that.

 

Can you show us some proof that the 17" runs hotter and that there is basically no difference between the 435 and 445, that the battery life is much better and that the 15" is a lot cheaper even after adding the 1080 (especially outside the US).

Your words make me think i must go for the 15" but I just haven't seen any comparisons or proper benchmarks anywhere/ Where did you get this information?

 

The 435 is a different chip than the 445. The 435 has 96 cores whereas the 445 has 144 cores. The 435 has a 128 bit bus whereas the 445 has a 192 bit bus. There's no comparing the two; the 445 is close to 50% faster than the 435, not "just a few FPS."

The XPS 17 has better termals than the XPS 15. My L701x idles at low 40s for the CPU and GPU. Most XPS 15 recipients report low 50s. That's not a small difference.

I have an inkling that urges me to point out that you are just making things up and don't, in fact, know what you speak of. But I won't point a finger and call you out, because that would be impolite and mean and I am a gentleman without equal.

The only advantage the XPS 15 has is resolution. You could say size as well, but only if you're shopping for a portable laptop and not a DTR laptop. In the latter case the XPS 17's size would actually be an advantage bigger screen is better after all.

 

The 445M has a 128 bit bus(because of DDR3, 192 bit GDDR5).

According to me, DELL made a biggest mistake by putting a 435M in the XPS 15.
The 5730 performs much better consuming lesser power.

Also how does the 5730 with GDDR3 compare to the 445M with DDR3?

Despite the flaws of the SXPS 16, its revival with Sandy bridge and 6xxx would be nice.
Also much easier to replace Dell's horrible thermal paste on the SXPS16

 

I get as low as 34C for the CPU and 43C-ish for GPU at idle with this XPS15. I have i5-460, 420m GPU, 9-cell, FHD.

 

I was just pointing out how stupid this thread is and how its turned into a bunch of children trying to better each other when its clear that you cannot compare the 2 and there is no real reason for this. You base your decisions on what is more suited to your needs not by listening to some that really have no idea what they are talking about (this doesn't imply everyone here). 1080/portable or more power...that's it, SIMPLE.

last time i comment on this thread its boring me zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

sry but I hate people talking about stuff they don't know a thing about....



DDR3 - 192bit....

EDIT: FYI took it from the first page of the L701x Thread

 

have fun with ur crap battery life besides the envy 14 smokes both of these anyways lol yeaaap 5650 switchable graphics radiance display and we all know the radeon cards run soo much cooler and use so much less power/performance ratio. I get the same amount of power in 30 watts as nvidia does in like 60 watts

Besides if you are gonna do any real gaming its meant to be done at 2560 x 1600 on a desktop with real power xfire 6970's soon ftw

but for sake of argument all the people that like xps 15 more are smarter, sexier, get more women, and have larger male anatomy parts then the people who like xps 17 ( and I dont even own either or plan to buy either I have the envy 14 which isn't comparable to either laptop, it wins by a large margin )

 

guess u had bad luck cause mine has never crashed on a game or anything yet and my temps are well well below limits wow u actually defend nvidia cards as better then amd's (ati was bought remember dont call them ati cards they are amd cards) speaking of heaters look how much power the nvidia draws compared to the comparable radeon especially once the 6000 series comes out

also who's service doesnt stink, dell pawns you off to india where abu gives u customer service with a heavy accent that you cant even understand what they are saying. dell service sucks hp service sucks they all suck

 

Moving from a 5730 to a 445, I can say that I notice no difference in battery life. It has actually improved with the XPS 17 vs SXPS 16. I don't know where you get your information but during general use Nvidia cards are very competitive with AMD cards. As a matter of fact, the 460 desktop part is one of the most energy efficient card on the market for watching Blu Ray videos. I guess a fanboy like you wouldn't know that though.

As for thermals, that depends largely on the laptop and has very little to do with the hardware. My SXPS 16 with repaste idled its 5730 at 40 degrees, which is the same exact temperature the 445 in my XPS 17 idles at. They both cap out at sub-80C. And the palmrest stays cooler on the XPS 17 (which is really the only thing that matters; I don't understand why I should care about how hot the insides get as long as they don't melt).

All my computers so far have used Radeon graphics. This is actually my first GeForce card, and I can honestly say that I would have no problem buying another in the future. The experience is the same (well, the 445 is more powerful, but aside from that). On the plus side, Nvidia has Ambient Occlusion included in the driver, giving me the option to turn it on either Performance or Quality mode-- Battlefield:BC2's in-game HBAO option only has ON/OFF and kills my FPS, while Nvidia's looks the same but doesn't. BIG plus to Nvidia for the option in the driver, AO makes games look amazing.

 

ofc it is and the battery life is worse which to me isnt worth it. My desktop can play every game on ulltra settings at 2560 x 1600 rez on a beautiful 30 inch monitor as soon as the 6970's are released those bad boys will be overclocked and put in crossfire setup. phenom II 1100t 4.4ghz 6 core + overclocked crossfired 6970's pretty much destroys everything out there. Any hardcore gaming ill be playing on ultra settings with a buncha AA and a 2560 x 1600 30 inch monitor with overclocked crossfired 6970's and pulling smooth as babys bottom fps.

I use my laptop for portability. I want 7+ house of usage while im on the go. I also want a nice screen to look at while im using it. The 5650 is perfect for good battery life and portable gaming and the radiance screen is great for looking at. The envy 14 is the ultimate portable machine imo but the xps 15 is also really really nice and im sure the 9 cell with optimus and a 420 gpu will also do a great job being portable giving long battery life and being able to play most games on medium rez and medium settings and the screen is also pretty to look at but i think the envy 14 does a bit better then the xps 15 in those apsects.

the reason the xps 15 is so much better is it actually does a good job and doing what it was designed to do be a long battery life portable medium gaming/multimedia notebook. The xps 17 sucks because a 17 inch is basically supposed to be a desktop replacement and the xps 17 sucks at being a desktop replacement so the xps 17 fails at what its designed for but the xps 15 succeeds at what its designed for

 

The 1080p option for the XPS 17 will be available sometime next year.

Intel has confirmed that it will launch the Sandy Bridge processor, at CES 2011. So Dell should probably have some news on SB in the first week of January.

 

Guess notebookcheck.net is wrong!

NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M - Notebookcheck.net Tech

 

But back to topic

In my opinion you have to deceide what you want...

I just ordered the XPS 17... why? Because I have no desktop.
Yeah it's big and heavy, but some of us are not planing on carrying it around all the time

The graphics are a lot better, screen is bigger and has a higher resolution(no FHD in Germany anyway, neither for the XPS 15). Also I like the way you can upgrade the 17's RAM and HDD... compared to the 15's

On the other hand the XPS 15 has a more "common" size, longer battery life and more portability.

All in all it's up to what you want and need...

Do you want a Notebook you can carry around all the time? No need for better graphics, up to 16gb RAM and 2 HDD slots? Get a XPS 15.

Do you want a Desktop replacement and don't care about portability? Bigger Screen? Better graphics? Or maybe a Numpad? Get a XPS 17.

Just my opinion


Sorry for my bad english... has been a long time since I wrote something in english

 

Not anymore... I've got mine with FHD

 

just checked dell.de, no FHD for me (XPS15) Not even an option for choosing display oO

 

Yes I know. Hopefully they just ran out of stock and can't offer it right now but return the option soon. The screen simply is great and the standard panel is nothing compared to the FHD. If the FHD is not an option anymore I can understand why going with the XPS 17

 

Am I right in saying as the GT445 is 128/192 bus width, that it would have been Dells decision to go with 192 and in that case this will definitely be the standard in all of their 445's?

 

So you start a thread asking for our opinions, and we give them to you, but instead of having a reasonable conversation, you give all your efforts into trying to counter the opinions that you asked for. You're way out numbered by people who think that 17" is too big to be a portable computer, but you assert that we're the ones who are wrong. Plus, now we're all lazy Americans because we don't want to lug around a 17" notebook?? Nobody said that the XPS17 sucks, just that it's too big for our tastes, or that we don't like the 900p screen. If our opinions are hurting your feelings then you need to seriously re-examine your life. And you're the one calling us trolls. What are you, 12?

 

Im curios as to why why you started this thread if you're not interested in listening to peoples opinions......??

Surely you would have been better off making a statement rather than entering into a discussion (on a forum)!!

 

I vote it's an interesting question, but it won't come to a consensus 'cos everyone's got different needs/agendas/opinions. Still I'll stick my 2 cents in. Depends if you're looking for one laptop to do everything - which will always be a compromise - or for a more specific task.

I'd be more interested in the 17, since I've already got an old 15" and an even older 14" that I'll take out to a coffee shop or on holiday where I don't need loads of processing power, connectivity or FHD.

My Studio 17 is my moveable DTR and media-hub. It just moves around the home, which is very easy to do. It's a pain to lug it outside the home which I do infrequently (but note it's still do-able).

However, I wouldn't be interested in the XPS 17 with the common as muck 900p screen. Forget about it. Offering FHD in the 15 yet NOT the 17 - just moronic. FHD on a 17" makes perfect sense - I know 'cos I've got it.

 

Had I known the XPS 17 had the 445 option, I would have considered it before purchasing the XPS 15. The two main reasons I chose the XPS 15 over the 17 were coupons (16% off + $100 off $999), and the glowing reviews regarding the 1080p screen. I anticipate doing more digital photography tasks than gaming, but we'll see.

 

I think that my XPS15 is too big and heavy compared to my XPSM1330. God only knows how big the XPS17 must be.

BTW, have to say that the FHD screen on my XPS15 makes a hell of a difference and watching blurays on there is better than watching on my Sony Bravia 46X2000. The FHD display on the XPS15 is truly jaw dropping and the biggest reason for going with the XPS15 instead of the XPS17.

 

Ditto the FHD on the 17 Studio (and perhaps one day on the XPS17 - hello DELL!) - I actually prefer watching Blu-rays on my laptop than my 40" Samsung 1080p TV. The colours and depth/contrast are amazing; it's a much more immersive experience than the TV. Avatar for example is simply jaw-dropping (if you like that kind of thing).

 

Granted, I do have the eyesight & colour perception of a newborn puppy... but I was hoping that any new laptop screen would look amazing in comparison to the 14.1" TFT screen on my IMB ThinkPad R40e!

Will I still be disappointed by the dell screen (either the 720p or 900p)?? Can they really be that bad....??

 

To me, there are two sizes of laptops - those you're going to use as a single-piece device on a desk most of the time, but need to be able to move around easily, and those that you move around *a lot* but can use on a desk in a dock. I used to use a 15 for both, but it's really way too big for moving around a lot, and not big enough to have a numeric keypad and big enough screen. Basically, a 15 is a tweener - good at neither task.

So, XPS-17 for the first one, and Latitude E-4310 (13") for the second one.