[Best Buy] HP 15.6" Gaming Laptop - Black (AMD Ryzen 5 4600H/256GB SSD/8GB RAM/NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050/Win 10) - $799

TeriyakiJack wrote: ↑ Then shouldn't be looking at a gaming laptop. Tonnes of other options out there for cheaper, same price, with much more portability.

$799 for this isn't a bad deal IMO tho. Heck you see used laptops with these kind of specs (or worse) listing for 800+ right now.

It's mainly for the price + specs, a Ryzen 4500 + IPS. I'm looking for something for my dad to last him ~5 years. If you have any recommendation at this price range, I'll be very grateful.

vernonco wrote: ↑ https://www.londondrugs.com/asus-tuf-ga ... 71229.html
This laptop from London Drugs is sold out but probably better value. Same processor, 512 SSD instead of 256 and better graphics GTX1650 instead of a 3Gb GTX1050. LD has it for $899 and likely on sale for $799 when in stock, same as the HP. Even if not on sale, for $100 more, better value for the bigger SSD and much better graphics card. May also be available elsewhere, I did not check.

I believe that was very similar to the Memory Express unit.

1050 will get you 30 fps, a shame they didn't throw in something a little bit better...

This versus https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B0865P ... UTF8&psc=1 for $749?

Bubblegum86 wrote: ↑ Here a good comparison.

Great post, I had no idea 1 generational upgrade (but same class level) produced such a huge improvement. It's basically equivalent in difference to moving up from a 1650 to a 2070

Honestly, it seems off from my own personal experience.

My 13" Razer Stealth with 1650GTX performs better than my passively cooled 1050 GTX on my desktop, but not by this wide of a margin.

Man I wish Dell refurb had a coupon now for like 40% off like they used to. I’d jump on this beast if they did but current price too much. Love the build quality of these older Dells

https://www.dellrefurbished.ca/laptops/ ... 07691.html

coffeebean wrote: ↑ Great post, I had no idea 1 generational upgrade (but same class level) produced such a huge improvement. It's basically equivalent in difference to moving up from a 1650 to a 2070

Honestly, it seems off from my own personal experience.

My 13" Razer Stealth with 1650GTX performs better than my passively cooled 1050 GTX on my desktop, but not by this wide of a margin.

Actually its not just a generational upgrade.

1060 to 1660 would be generational change in the same class.
1050 to 1660 would be a generational change on top of being in a completely different class.

Their naming could be better admittedly.

The difference between between a XX50 and a XX60, you'd imagine would be small but its quite large.
Same on the other spectrum. The difference between a 1660 vs 2060 ( to the untrained eye), should be huge. But its really not thatt much of a difference.

redflagdealsguy wrote: ↑ I believe that was very similar to the Memory Express unit.

Yes, I believe it was the same model.

planavr wrote: ↑ This versus https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B0865P ... UTF8&psc=1 for $749?

HP has the newer and better CPU. Asus has a marginally better GPU, double the SSD for $50 less. Also the Asus is a mainstream chassis, not a flashy gaming chassis

It's crazy how much emphasis is always put on gaming like it's the most important thing in the world.

Bishop8 wrote: ↑ Why is the GTX 1050 (non-ti) better than the GTX 1650?

When I looked at the link last night, it made no mention of a dedicated GPU. It just said integrated Vega... I must have been tired as hell, my bad.

TeriyakiJack wrote: ↑
Actually its not just a generational upgrade.

1060 to 1660 would be generational change in the same class.
1050 to 1660 would be a generational change on top of being in a completely different class.

Their naming could be better admittedly.

The difference between between a XX50 and a XX60, you'd imagine would be small but its quite large.

Nvidia definitly has a confusing naming scheme.

The GTX 1060 was officially replaced by the RTX 2060 wich made sens at first, 2xxx replacing the previous 1xxx.
But then Nvidia said "No wait that's too simple, Here is the new 16xx family that slots between the 2 other ones."
Most probably this was done because the cheapest RTX2060 was still pretty expensive and they needed a low-price option.

The 1660ti (there is no non-ti version of the 1660 mobile for some reason) is basicaly a light version of the 2060 but without Ray Tracing or Tensor Cores so they both perform very close, the 1660ti being equivalent to a RTX2060 Max-Q, but the 1660ti cannot do Ray Tracing.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-Ge ... 426.0.html

So now you have:
GTX 1060 officially replaced by the RTX 2060 (equivalent to the GTX 1070) wich makes sens
GTX 1050 officially replaced by the GTX 1650 (equivalent to a GTX 1060 Max-Q) because there is no RTX2050 model
GTX 1660ti (equivalent to the RTX 2060 Max-Q) wich kinda slots in between but doesn't officially replaces any previous model and is a ti version because why the hell not.

The Nvidia family tree is becoming really hard to follow.

vernonco wrote: ↑ HP has the newer and better CPU. Asus has a marginally better GPU, double the SSD for $50 less. Also the Asus is a mainstream chassis, not a flashy gaming chassis

Gaming wise does the newer CPU outweigh the GPU difference?

Still gonna get better performance than the internal GPU of 4700u... but yes you are correct... very odd coupling.

kowell wrote: ↑ A new gen Ryzen 4600H with a 3 and 1/2 years old GTX 1050???
Why? How?
I thought the GTX 1050 was discontinued...

4600 has more cores, but Asus probably has better build quality and is $50 less. Both have non IPS screen and full HD so similar in that aspect (HP has IPS my mistake). Asus has 512 SSD too so there is that... not sure on the memory and slot upgradability as I haven't really looked into either that much. Can you turn off the stupid green blacklit LED on the keyboard is the real question, haha.

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_c ... _3500u-900

planavr wrote: ↑ This versus https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B0865P ... UTF8&psc=1 for $749?

sleepyguy wrote: ↑ 4600 has more cores, but Asus probably has better build quality and is $50 less. Both have non IPS screen and full HD so similar in that aspect.

I thought the HP here has an IPS, is that a big difference?

15.6" diagonal Full HD (1920 x 1080) IPS anti-glare WLED-backlit display with micro-edge bezel delivers crisp and clear widescreen viewing

You are correct my mistake. The colours will have better contrast and screen better viewing angles. Although some non-IPS screens i've seen look pretty damn good... close to IPS... not sure the Asus has that though. Is it a big deal... depends... some people can't stand to look at any screen under 4K, some others love 720p resolution on everything (yes i'm not kidding). So to each their own. I have tons of screens at home and generally IPS has much better quality.

planavr wrote: ↑ I thought the HP here has an IPS, is that a big difference?

15.6" diagonal Full HD (1920 x 1080) IPS anti-glare WLED-backlit display with micro-edge bezel delivers crisp and clear widescreen viewing

sleepyguy wrote: ↑ You are correct my mistake. The colours will have better contrast and screen better viewing angles. Although some non-IPS screens i've seen look pretty damn good... close to IPS... not sure the Asus has that though. Is it a big deal... depends... some people can't stand to look at any screen under 4K, some others love 720p resolution on everything (yes i'm not kidding). So to each their own. I have tons of screens at home and generally IPS has much better quality.

SO for the extra $50 versus the Asus one I'm thinking the newer processor and IPS Screen even with the smaller SSD would be worth it. When I look up benchmarks the difference between a 3500u and 4600h is very high whereas the difference between the GPUs is not as dramatic.

planavr wrote: ↑ Gaming wise does the newer CPU outweigh the GPU difference?

Personally I would suggest a 1660Ti as min for decent gaming. However I do understand that the price point would jump a lot. Your choice.