I got one of these babies in 2012, with i7 3610QM.
I've since upgraded it to 12GB ram, and added SSD.
I picked it up for $950.
In 2012

Yes, the screen is pretty crappy, but it's 15" so at least is has some size.
And I usually just plug it into a TV or 24" monitor, and use it with bluetooth keyboard and mouse.

It has been an absolute workhorse for me, for nearly 7 years.
I took it apart once, a few years ago, removing the heatsink & fan completely to clean out the dust and so on. so it's still has no thermal issues.

Looking back on this review really highlights the ignorance of reviewers when it comes to laptop performance.

The 3710QM was an awesome CPU, and it benchmarks only marginally slower than the i7-8550U, a processor that is FIVE YEARS YOUNGER.

There are current model laptops, in 2019, with i7-8550U cpu, selling for $$$, which can barely beat the CPU in this samsung laptop, which sold for less than AUD$1000, NEARLY 7 YEARS AGO.

Yes, the new cpus use less power, and run cooler. But, the throttling that this review complains about is rarely an issue. Most normal use of a laptop will only require CPU for short periods, and the 3610QM can manage that without any thermal throttling. So, unless you're rendering massive videos, it's not a problem.

The pissweak performance of cuirrent CPUs is a disgrace.

This laptop, was an absolute bargain, and iincredibly, it is STILL a good laptop today. Looking at current models, it's hard to find anything significantly faster, without paying several thousand bucks.

Amazing.

Quote from: Jake M on July 11, 2013, 12:59:02
Don't be surprised by the seemingly high rating compared to the text. Notebookcheck might score laptops out of 100, but the scale truly runs from 80-90. Seriously, I view this as a 3, not an 83.

Haha, yes!  I'd like to see them change their rating system so that it truly does run from 0-100.

Quote from: Jake M on July 11, 2013, 12:59:02
Don't be surprised by the seemingly high rating compared to the text. Notebookcheck might score laptops out of 100, but the scale truly runs from 80-90. Seriously, I view this as a 3, not an 83.

Oh, well if they are giving it a 3 out of 10, then I understand and completely agree with the rating.

How in the heck do you give any laptop with such a crap screen a rating higher than 70%?  Just crazy.


ALL laptop screens should have a matte finish.  Even touchscreens.  They were doing it 10 years ago, why can't they do it today?

Function should be the first order of business in any laptop design.  If you cripple your wifi because you chose the wrong chipset to use, or put your antenna in the wrong spot (talking to you samsung), then everyone should boycott your crap.  Every laptop produced today should be dual band minimum, and probably ac even.  For the extra $5 of manufacturing cost, this is a must.

Don't be surprised by the seemingly high rating compared to the text. Notebookcheck might score laptops out of 100, but the scale truly runs from 80-90. Seriously, I view this as a 3, not an 83.

But, I'd like to add that I do like your reviews & your website, because I find it very useful - I'm just commenting on this one aspect.

I'm flabbergasted that this notebook got a 'Good' 83% Rating.  In the conclusion it states that it performs below similarly specced notebooks due to the throttling.  This proves a bad design, and the customer does not receive a notebook with the performance that they would expect.  I wouldn't class that as 'Good'.  I know you guys have to have this weighted average overall score, but it seems like it doesn't take into account some major shortcomings!