Discussion about
Kyjibo

How does this compare with the Studio 17

I was all ready to buy a new Studio XPS 16 with windows 7 when I noticed that the high end graphics card of the Studio 17 is a relatively strong 4650 that is just behind the XPS's 4670. With comparable configurations the XPS still seems to end up at least 100 dollars more expensive than the Studio 17.

Am I missing something or is the 17 just a better buy?

sort by

2 replies
s1m0nc

I have the same conundrum here in the UK. The benchmarks I'm referencing for the two GPU's are 522 (4650) and 589 (4770) so as you say, much of a muchness.

All the Studio 17's have 1600x900 screen options, whereas the XPS 16 has either a 1366x768 hd 720p by default, a full 1080p, or the well rated RGBLED version.

Lastly, I'm favouring the i5 over the i7 processors - the new Arrandale i5's have better power consumption. Get the feeling the i7 eats batteries for breakfast. The Studio 17 has no i5 options.

So, I guess that didn't answer the question. The price difference is far greater here - probably about 300 USD between the Studio 17, and the XPS16 with the basic screen. More for the RGBLED. Will prob end up with the S17 - it's annoying - not quite the balance I want (and exacerbated by the abysmal-ness of the Dell website - truly terrible).
0 like dislike
Kyjibo

I actually ended up buying an Asus UL80vt off amazon after Engadget posted a favorable review that brought it to my attention. The battery life is killer and the 210M does a good job of playing things for when I am away from my tower. This was after my attention moved from the SXPS16 to the SXPS13 so it does not really apply here, but I figured I would mention it anyway.
0 like dislike