Which screen do you think look better?

I think the better looking screen is the.

  • 15.4" LED

    Votes: 14 60.9%
  • 17" old 1680x1050 res.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 17" new 1920x1200 option.

    Votes: 9 39.1%

  • Total voters
    23

aliquis-

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
May 20, 2007
680
0
Forget about resolutions, this is total impression of the colors and whatever.

I ordered the 15.4" led one yesterday but I still would have wanted 256MB vram and therefor the 17" 1920x1200 one but it cost so much more I can get a complete gaming PC for the money.

Higher resolution is nice but I figure and external 20" IPS panel will give better picture quality anyway so ..

Also with the LED I'm affraid of crappy colors but with the old kind I'm affraid it will lose brightness with time instead (maybe not noticable during the lifespann of a laptop?)

So which one looks better?
 

aliquis-

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
May 20, 2007
680
0
Nice to see that some people seem to like the led even if there is report of the yellow stuff, does everyone have a yellow tone of the whole screen before it's calibrated or i some peoples ok? Or is it only that some people are used to 9.3 k displays (which imho looks like ****)
 

triddent222

macrumors regular
Jul 27, 2007
202
0
Somewhere interesting
To answer the OP question: I am extremely happy with my Screen (2.2ghz MBP, 128mbs VRAM). I had the 2.33ghz 256mbs VRAM (previous model), and while the screen quality (color/brightness wise) was superb, this one looks MUCH better. I have it at half brightness right now, in a medium-lit room, and the colors are very rich and lively (i have a fruity background, so I can see a great range of colors). I dont know about the life span of either of the screen, but I do know LED screens last longer.

[EDIT: I didnt realize both posters were the same person...oops :p]: To the poster above me (as of the time of this post), I had no yellowing effect what so ever. The color profile was a bit warm (red/yellow), but hardly noticeable unless compared to a perfectly calibrated screen. I calibrated mine manually, and now it looks pristine.

Good luck with your purchase(s).
 

DaveSM

macrumors member
Aug 11, 2007
36
0
I don't see why you complain about having only 128mb of video memory for the 15,4''. I just ordered the 2,4ghz version which have 256mb of video memory.
 

aliquis-

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
May 20, 2007
680
0
I don't see why you complain about having only 128mb of video memory for the 15,4''. I just ordered the 2,4ghz version which have 256mb of video memory.
Because I don't want to pay what would be (with 20% adc student of) 4000 sek for something with a what? 300 sek value? More hdd is nice but not that important, and I don't give a **** about 1/11th faster cpu for 3000 sek more.

+200MHz, 128MB vram, 40GB hdd = 4 000 Swedish kronor = 589.57200 U.S. dollars

The CPU alone is a 3 000 Swedish kronor = 442.17900 U.S. dollars upgrade. I only want the vram.

If I would upgrade I would go with 17" 1920x1200 since atleast it adds more things I would had use for.

128MB vram is only worth tens of dollars, not hundreds.