G73jh Vs 17" Mbp

boonlar

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 30, 2008
259
0


Why haven't they dropped mbp prices? Who in their right mind would get it instead of a more powerful and cheaper pc?
 

Thunder82

macrumors 6502
Jul 16, 2008
439
0
Chicago, IL
Yet another one of these threads? You have to be serious. That asus notebook and a macbook pro have absolutely nothing in common. One is a 15 lb brick that will net 2hrs (max) battery life. The MBP may have less in the spec department, but is much thinner, lighter and net about 3-4 times the battery life of the Asus machine.
 

boonlar

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 30, 2008
259
0
Yet another one of these threads? You have to be serious. That asus notebook and a macbook pro have absolutely nothing in common. One is a 15 lb brick that will net 2hrs (max) battery life. The MBP may have less in the spec department, but is much thinner, lighter and net about 3-4 times the battery life of the Asus machine.
the asus is 7lbs and lasts 2-3 hours. the mbp lasts like what 4 hours? i think its pretty similar as both are 17" laptops and nobody expects to carry these around everywhere.
 

JoeG4

macrumors 68030
Jan 11, 2002
2,663
167
Bay Area, Ca.
Don't ridicule him for cross shopping, he's comparing a 17" PC laptop to a 17" MacBook Pro.

Thing is, the iPhone snobs touting a Prada case and tight jeans wouldn't touch the 17" MacBook Pro with a 10 foot pole, because it doesn't fit in the glovebox of their Audi, and Prada doesn't make a bag big enough for it.

So I think he's perfectly justified the comparison.

Performance-wise, the Asus will SMASH the MacBook Pro upside its head and eat it for breakfast.

However, it does indeed get less battery life, and the quality isn't the same. It's not BAD, it's a far cry from a $300 Toshiba, but it's not MacBook Pro quality that the Prada touting snobs swear by.

The Asus was made to do things you'll never be able to do with a MacBook Pro though.
 

boonlar

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 30, 2008
259
0
Don't ridicule him for cross shopping, he's comparing a 17" PC laptop to a 17" MacBook Pro.

Thing is, the iPhone snobs touting a Prada case and tight jeans wouldn't touch the 17" MacBook Pro with a 10 foot pole, because it doesn't fit in the glovebox of their Audi, and Prada doesn't make a bag big enough for it.

So I think he's perfectly justified the comparison.

Performance-wise, the Asus will SMASH the MacBook Pro upside its head and eat it for breakfast.

However, it does indeed get less battery life, and the quality isn't the same. It's not BAD, it's a far cry from a $300 Toshiba, but it's not MacBook Pro quality that the Prada touting snobs swear by.

The Asus was made to do things you'll never be able to do with a MacBook Pro though.
i hear asus is the best quality in the industry. they do make motherboards and inner components themselves after all. also you get two year warranty and 1 year accidental warranty for free which is good.
 

boonlar

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 30, 2008
259
0
4? Try 8. Plus OSX is a necessity for some people, and I carry mine around with me every day.
8? try 4! I've read the real reviews and they all say it gets 4 hours when actually doing stuff. the 8 hour figure is the fake figure apple gives you where they have it on doing nothing at all under optimal conditions.
 

Repo

macrumors 6502a
Feb 11, 2009
597
0
8? try 4! I've read the real reviews and they all say it gets 4 hours when actually doing stuff. the 8 hour figure is the fake figure apple gives you where they have it on doing nothing at all under optimal conditions.
Unless you use one yourself, don't make claims about that which you know nothing of.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
The ASUS is rather nice machine for the hardware. ASUS spent a good deal of time on software integration and on hardware design. The AC adapter is a brick though.

It just depends on what you do. Otherwise, even the 17" MacBook Pro is rather heavy.
 

randomerratum

macrumors 6502
Dec 3, 2009
289
0
Santa Monica, CA
"Cheaper" is the operative word here.

Having used Macs and PCs side by side for years, I can tell you that with PCs, advertised 'specs' generally mean very little because they're rarely utilized to their potential, often nothing more then marketing -- especially in "cheaper" configurations. Proper implementation of components goes a lot farther then slapping some pieces with big numbers together.

I don't have experience with this specific PC, but I do own this MBP and in my opinion it's the single fastest, most powerful and overall best laptop available. Hands down, the best computer I've ever owned... even despite the lack of Blu-Ray.
 

vectus

macrumors member
Apr 4, 2010
74
0
you can't compare dumb laptop with mbp, it just not comparable.
Actually the ASUS would walk all over the MBP in terms of peformance. Also, since it is an ASUS and they design their own motherboards (which are award-winning) you get a laptop that is far more reliable than a MBP.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/rescuecom-apple-asus,8489.html?xtmc=asus_reliable&xtcr=1

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/apple-asus-lenovo-computer-reliability,7364.html

I understand these numbers may be a little short, but they are better than nothing. One thing you have to remember is the OS and overall build quality. The exterior design of the Macbook is far greater than that of the ASUS. The internal parts are a different story. I would say that Apple engineers some great components, but ASUS seems to have a better track record as far as reliability, versatility, and performance.

You can't legally put OSX on that ASUS, so you don't get support and the newest updates. You also forfeit your wireless card since the wireless cards that ASUS use do not seem to have any "drivers" for OSX.

I, personally, wouldn't buy either. That ASUS is marketed as a desktop replacement. I already have a bad ass gaming rig that I built (3x1 eyefinity, 2 5870s, i7, etc.) so the ASUS is a waste. I also wouldn't be able to justify spending so much for a Macbook featuring some components that are almost 2 generations behind (come on refresh!).

When it comes down to it, can you justify the purchase? If not, don't buy it.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
Actually the ASUS would walk all over the MBP in terms of peformance. Also, since it is an ASUS and they design their own motherboards (which are award-winning) you get a laptop that is far more reliable than a MBP.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/rescuecom-apple-asus,8489.html?xtmc=asus_reliable&xtcr=1

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/apple-asus-lenovo-computer-reliability,7364.html

I understand these numbers may be a little short, but they are better than nothing. One thing you have to remember is the OS and overall build quality. The exterior design of the Macbook is far greater than that of the ASUS. The internal parts are a different story. I would say that Apple engineers some great components, but ASUS seems to have a better track record as far as reliability, versatility, and performance.

You can't legally put OSX on that ASUS, so you don't get support and the newest updates. You also forfeit your wireless card since the wireless cards that ASUS use do not seem to have any "drivers" for OSX.

I, personally, wouldn't buy either. That ASUS is marketed as a desktop replacement. I already have a bad ass gaming rig that I built (3x1 eyefinity, 2 5870s, i7, etc.) so the ASUS is a waste. I also wouldn't be able to justify spending so much for a Macbook featuring some components that are almost 2 generations behind.

When it comes down to it, can you justify the purchase? If not, don't buy it.
If I was going to consider such a beast, I'd go for the base $1199 model. You get the Core i7-720QM in a huge range of versions. According to ASUS there are even Core i3 and i5 versions. (I've only seen the Clarksfield ones.) Those would be somewhat cheaper. Given ASUS' history with the Turbo33 buttons, I believe you'd be able to have the battery life of the Westmere with the ability to overclock when you need it.

If it was sporting an nVidia card you'd have a chance at Optimus as well. You'd get hot swappable power on the fly graphics and battery life. That is something that ATI needs to work on. Otherwise ATI is mobile DirectX 11 and higher performance per watt.
 

vectus

macrumors member
Apr 4, 2010
74
0
If I was going to consider such a beast, I'd go for the base $1199 model. You get the Core i7-720QM in a huge range of versions. According to ASUS there are even Core i3 and i5 versions. (I've only seen the Clarksfield ones.) Those would be somewhat cheaper. Given ASUS' history with the Turbo33 buttons, I believe you'd be able to have the battery life of the Westmere with the ability to overclock when you need it.

If it was sporting an nVidia card you'd have a chance at Optimus as well. You'd get hot swappable power on the fly graphics and battery life. That is something that ATI needs to work on. Otherwise ATI is mobile DirectX 11 and higher performance per watt.
ATI's latest lineup promotes much better battery life than NVIDIA. NVIDIA has been side-tracked in terms of gaming. It doesn't seem to be their main focus anymore. I always loved NVIDIA, but their cards have been slacking as of late. Fermi was a pretty big let down. The 5870m runs cooler and uses less power than the 280m. I am trying to look up numbers for that statement, gotta find them. You are also talking about a desktop replacement. It's supposed to be plugged in most of the time.

I wouldn't compare these two laptops as they are meant for different things.
 

Repo

macrumors 6502a
Feb 11, 2009
597
0
It's supposed to be plugged in most of the time.

I wouldn't compare these two laptops as they are meant for different things.
Exactly. The Asus is a mobile desktop. The MBP is a mobile notebook.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
ATI's latest lineup promotes much better battery life than NVIDIA. NVIDIA has been side-tracked in terms of gaming. It doesn't seem to be their main focus anymore. I always loved NVIDIA, but their cards have been slacking as of late. Fermi was a pretty big let down. You are also talking about a desktop replacement. It's supposed to be plugged in most of the time.
The 300M Series is interesting but it feels like it's too little too late. I am rather interested in the Alienware M11x with the nVida 335M. That little GPU looks epic for its thermal profile.

I wouldn't compare these two laptops as they are meant for different things.
I have to agree. The ASUS is geared to gaming and even some mobile workstation roles. Quad core, RAID 0 drives, and a Mobility 5870 stand out. I'm amazed they even have a base $1199 model. That's a steal somewhat like the base M11x model at $799.

ASUS took special care to keep the noise levels down even under load. Legit Reviews took some temperatures for idle and load.
 

JoeG4

macrumors 68030
Jan 11, 2002
2,663
167
Bay Area, Ca.
I'm not entirely sure the point of a portable desktop (I have one, lol) but I know the 17" MBP is a "desktop replacement" as the Asus G73 is.

Seems the vast majority of people on this forum use MBPs as desktop replacements anyway. I actually use my 16.4" sony laptop on my lap all the time.
 

Repo

macrumors 6502a
Feb 11, 2009
597
0
Exactly. The Asus is a mobile desktop. The MBP is a mobile notebook.
I'm not entirely sure the point of a portable desktop (I have one, lol) but I know the 17" MBP is a "desktop replacement" as the Asus G73 is.

Seems the vast majority of people on this forum use MBPs as desktop replacements anyway. I actually use my 16.4" sony laptop on my lap all the time.
What I mean is the Asus is about as powerful as a desktop, but if you take it somewhere, you'll need to be able to power it. The MBP, however, is fast enough to be considered a desktop replacement, but also has the battery power to backup the "notebook" label.
 

ayeying

macrumors 601
Dec 5, 2007
4,548
11
Yay Area, CA
I'm not entirely sure the point of a portable desktop (I have one, lol) but I know the 17" MBP is a "desktop replacement" as the Asus G73 is.

Seems the vast majority of people on this forum use MBPs as desktop replacements anyway. I actually use my 16.4" sony laptop on my lap all the time.
I use a laptop as a "desktop replacement" because I don't see the need for using a 400+ watt system for something such as "Surfing the net". A simple laptop running as low as 45 watts (in the macbook air) can do all the work for those tasks.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
What I mean is the Asus is about as powerful as a desktop, but if you take it somewhere, you'll need to be able to power it. The MBP, however, is fast enough to be considered a desktop replacement, but also has the battery power to backup the "notebook" label.
A 3.0 GHz dual core puts you at about Late 2007 desktop power.
 

Repo

macrumors 6502a
Feb 11, 2009
597
0
A 3.0 GHz dual core puts you at about Late 2007 desktop power.
Which is why these "compare" threads are pointless. Apple updates there hardware on their own terms at this point. The MBP was good over a year ago when it came out, but amazingly, technology has improved and the MBP is now outdated in some aspects.

Side note: A 2007 desktop it still a desktop. :D
 

JoeG4

macrumors 68030
Jan 11, 2002
2,663
167
Bay Area, Ca.
What I mean is the Asus is about as powerful as a desktop, but if you take it somewhere, you'll need to be able to power it. The MBP, however, is fast enough to be considered a desktop replacement, but also has the battery power to backup the "notebook" label.
It's not as if you're going to be using either laptop without the power brick if you're taking care of "serious business"

When not doing "serious business" I can get 3 hours out of my Sony's battery. It's not as nice as 4, 6, 8 or whatever you guys want to claim, but it is sufficient.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
Which is why these "compare" threads are pointless. Apple updates there hardware on their own terms at this point. The MBP was good over a year ago when it came out, but amazingly, technology has improved and the MBP is now outdated in some aspects.

Side note: A 2007 desktop it still a desktop. :D
It's not that amazing for a notebook. You're looking at one or two clock speed multipliers more compared to what was available in Late 2007.
 

ValkyrieLenneth

macrumors regular
Jun 28, 2008
103
0
Vietnam
Ahhh, come on, you don't buy a notebook for running benchmark only, do you ?.
There are so many other aspects to consider when using a notebook. No offense but I think people who only look at the spec are so unwise. :D It's like you marry a man/woman based only on amount of cash, degrees, height, etc ... without knowing how much he/she can complement yourself.