Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:: Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name
Email
Subject
Message icon

Other options

Return to this topic
Don't use smileys

Verification:

Please leave this box empty:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by Endothermic

- January 10, 2016, 03:09:39

I am looking for the best video-editing laptop I can find... It is frustrating that generally, non-Mac laptops seem to lag behind the Mac in terms of performance. Why frustrating? Why not just purchase the MacBook? Well... I just can't get used to Apple/Mac computers.. they drive me up the wall! My dad purchased a Mac desktop... when I go on it, even if very often, the way you have to navigate around a Mac makes me want to smash it... absolutely annoying system. Not least of all, is the Mac mouse... Maybe is a case of not being used to a Mac... and having to re-learn to navigate around a computer when using Macs... However, I can't be bothered and will not choose a MacBook for these reasons.. which leaves me dissapointed as there seems not to be a Windows-based laptop that can match the Specs of a MacBook for video editing purposes...

Posted by Kofftun

- June 12, 2015, 22:03:03

AMD GPU Windows drivers constantly fail to install for me. Also the alternate drivers which make trackpad usable in Windows (via Trackpad++ project) haven't become available for Mid-2015 yet. OMG, so many issues for such price. Now I think buying this laptop with Windows usage in mind was an obvious mistake >:D

Posted by ilikealuminimum

- June 12, 2015, 18:24:59

> the underlying Cape-Verde chip is actually more than three years old
> A GeForce GTX 950M or GTX 960M, which are in a similar TDP range of 50 up to 60 watts, however, are even 30 or 60% faster
> frame rate drops during prolonged gaming sessions
> The resulting stutters are very annoying
Games Performance: 85 / 93 → 91% ???

> After our one-hour stress test with Prime95 and FurMark (Windows), the CPU runs at only 1.2 GHz
> Even though devices from Asus, Acer & Co. also throttle, none of the direct rivals loses that much performance.
Application Performance: 96% ???

Meanwhile the ASUS UX501, with similar CPU, pcie SSD, much improved GPU, and similar scores in benchmarking and stress tests but without the severe throttling:
Application Performance: 92%
Games Performance: 85 / 93 → 91%

I'd to see some consistency in these reviews...

Posted by newovrhere

- June 12, 2015, 06:47:32

We dont even know the specs of the new xps 15 and still it looks better than this edition of macbook. If only the cpu and gpu were better in this it would have been worth the pricetag.

Posted by westworld

- June 11, 2015, 12:55:34

88% is way to much for this device.
You forget to mention that on top of the device, you will also need to buy at least one new charger each year. All my collegues with macbooks have had that issue. I'm at #4 at the moment.
For the price of the top end macbook I would expect a larger ssd. My old macbook has 750GB. As a front-enddeveloper, you need the extra room (VMs, dualboot)

Posted by Redaktion

- June 11, 2015, 08:53:35

Expensive pleasure. More performance, a new Force Touch Trackpad as well as longer battery runtimes are supposed to make the reworked MacBook Pro 15 even more appealing – and also justify a retail price far beyond the 2,000 Euros mark. Is that enough to compete with the improved rivals?

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-Retina-15-Mid-2015-Review.144402.0.html