Skip to main content

Acer Brings Out TimelineX With Sandy Bridge

Acer America today rolled out an update to its Timeline notebook series it calls the TimelineX, which packs Intel's Sandy Bridge family of CPUs. Available in three sizes – the 13.3-inch 3830T, 14-inch 4830T and 15.6-inch 5830T – the designs measure about an inch thick, making them decent PC portables, at least until the Ultrabooks arrive.

Acer says that its PowerSmart Technology provides extra long battery uptime of up to nine hours on models with integrated graphics and up to eight hours for models with discrete graphics, as well as a long battery lifecycle of up to four years.

The TimelineX also have High-Definition audio support with Dolby Home Theater v4 Audio as well as HDMI 1080p output, so customers can use a convenient single cable connection to deliver HD video and audio to an external source. In addition, the notebooks have a USB 3.0 port for fast transfers. Plus, the port can charge USB devices even when the notebook is turned off.

For discrete graphics, 16:9 1366x768 resolution screen is driven by integrated Nvidia GeForce GT 540M or Nvidia 520M graphics with Optimus technology. Additional models feature only the built-in Intel HD Graphics.

The Acer Aspire TimelineX 3830T thin and light notebook has a 13.1-inch display, weighs only 4.12 pounds and measures only 0.87-1.15 inches thin. It hits its dimensions, however, without and optical drive.

Both the Acer TimelineX 4830T (14-inch screen, 4.88 pounds) and Acer Aspire Timeline X 5830T (15.6-inch screen, 5.6 pounds) come with integrated DVD drives and feature a dedicated numeric keypad.

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

The products are available at retailers now in both the United States in Canada. The Acer TimelineX Series starts at a Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price of $599.99 in the U.S and Canada.

  • nebun
    what we need is carbon fiber bodies in order to make them more durable and lighter....i am sick of plastic
    Reply
  • lunyone
    Give me 16:9 resolution at the minimum and I'm going to buy one, especially if it's around the $500-600 price range w/dedicate graphics (light gaming use).
    Reply
  • verbalizer
    can we at least get 1440x900 or is it 1400x900.?
    I do not care for that 1366x768, no thanks..
    Reply
  • macewrox
    nebunwhat we need is carbon fiber bodies in order to make them more durable and lighter....i am sick of plastic
    And pay two grand for a laptop worth 400 bucks? No thanks.
    Reply
  • agnickolov
    malmentalcan we at least get 1440x900 or is it 1400x900.?I do not care for that 1366x768, no thanks..It's 1600x900
    Reply
  • verbalizer
    9293198 said:
    It's 1600x900
    no that that resolution dip-stick.
    i'm speaking of 1440x900 resolution as in the settings on my laptop.
    thanks for filling in the blanks (with the incorrect answer).
    Reply
  • burnley14
    malmentalno that that resolution dip-stick.i'm speaking of 1440x900 resolution as in the settings on my laptop.thanks for filling in the blanks (with the incorrect answer).Either resolution is common, 1440x900 or 1600x900. He answered your question just fine, there's no reason to be an ass. And a simple Google search would've worked much better than posing this question in a news comments section.
    Reply
  • verbalizer
    9293217 said:
    Either resolution is common, 1440x900 or 1600x900. He answered your question just fine, there's no reason to be an ass. And a simple Google search would've worked much better than posing this question in a news comments section.
    dude, you too.
    I know about the true 1600 x 900 resolution and I would have stated that.
    but the resolution in my statement was either 1440 or 1400 like I stated.
    only those two choices.
    what in the heck does 1600 have to do with either 1440 or 1400.?
    dip-stick 2..
    Reply
  • cruisx
    STHU malmental, are you stupid? Your English in your post implies that you wanted "at least" (can we at least get 1440x900). Well both the above users have told you that it is 1600x900 which is greater than what you wanted.

    Reply
  • verbalizer
    nevermind.
    bunch of ignorant baboons you are...
    still do not get it.
    is it that easy to talk over your uneducated heads, that's a shame.?

    the unit in this article max's out @ 1366 x 768.
    that's too small.
    I want nothing less than 1440 x 900.
    stated in the post above mine as referenced too.

    wake up..

    Reply