Dell Precision M3800, A Macbook Challenger?

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
  • Kunari
    Mac users won't care, but it's good news for us PC users. :)
    Reply
  • dovah-chan
    Odd GPU combination. Or might I say an odd VRAM combination. If it comes with 2GB base then that's fine and dandy but if the highest species model has only 2GB then it's a big problem.

    That's just so weird seeing how there are a surprising amount of notebooks with 4GB+ of VRAM with something like a 970M or 880M. At least 4GB of VRAM is a must when dealing with content creation apps.

    *cough*Ubuntu worst distro*cough* (okay maybe not the worst)
    Reply
  • kawininjazx
    "That's just so weird seeing how there are a surprising amount of notebooks with 4GB+ of VRAM with something like a 970M or 880M. At least 4GB of VRAM is a must when dealing with content creation apps. "

    Those are gaming cards, not workstation grade, big difference.
    Reply
  • MrMaestro
    How about you guys publish an actual review instead of an advertorial? And the resolution isn't 4K/UHD; it's 3200 x 1800 QHD+.
    Reply
  • lostandwandering
    15170386 said:
    And the resolution isn't 4K/UHD; it's 3200 x 1800 QHD+.

    Either they edited after your post or you didn't read:"... boasting a 3840x2160 resolution on a 4K HD Ultra display..."

    Reply
  • ticker47
    "How about you guys publish an actual review instead of an advertorial? And the resolution isn't 4K/UHD; it's 3200 x 1800 QHD+."

    How about you look at the actual product page before you tell people they're wrong. It comes in 1080p/4k versions:
    http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/precision-m3800-workstation/fs
    Reply
  • MrMaestro
    We have begun ordering this model at my workplace and I know the specs. If you care to look up some reviews you will see I am correct and the product page is wrong.

    Like I said, an actual review instead of regurgitating Dell's incorrect PR would be good.
    Reply
  • sullivang
    Still waiting for a 17" ultra-HD (3K would be fine) laptop, and it doesn't even have to be "fire breathing". Why on why won't they make any ultra-HD 17" screens? What's the problem?
    Reply
  • Vlad Razvan
    @sullivang - "Still waiting for a 17" ultra-HD (3K would be fine) laptop, and it doesn't even have to be "fire breathing" - WHY? Why do you need 4K on a tiny 17" pannel? I ca BARELY tell the difference between a 27" 1080p pannel and a 27" 4K one - don't tell me your eyes are that good!

    I've got a better idea! Bring back the 18,4" form factor - I shopped around for an 18,4" gaming machine for a whole year and had to settle for an ASUS ROG G751JY because the only 18.4" alternative is a 3600$ alineware machine witch was way-WAY over my budget.
    Reply
  • ticker47
    @MrMaestro - "We have begun ordering this model at my workplace and I know the specs. If you care to look up some reviews you will see I am correct and the product page is wrong."

    So you're telling us that the order page is wrong and if I ordered this with the 4K screen I wouldn't receive that? I have a hard time believing that they'd have something so colossally wrong on their website. It'd be one thing if it was just a PR page, but their order page shows its 4K.

    This is what I can select as my display options
    15.6" UltraSharp™ FHD Touch (1920x1080) Wide View LED-backlit with Premium Panel Guarantee 15.6" UltraSharp™ IGZO UHD Touch (3840x2160) 4K2K Wide View LED-backlit with Premium Panel

    And I did look at reviews. CNETs was for last years model (review dated May 2014), which did have a 3200x1800 res screen. This article is talking about the updated 2015 version, which has a newer processor (i7-4712HQ vs i7-4702HQ) in it and a better screen. So before you complain that someone is regurgitating wrong PR, do a little research and make sure you're looking at the right thing first. This was just released and they likely haven't received a review model yet, which is why this is just a spec article.
    Reply