Originally Posted by
CessnaJock
If so, the only figure of merit that deserves consideration is battery life.
Unless a laptop is going to be used a lot for computation-intensive apps as a substitute for a desktop, the only thing that matters is how long it will run before requiring a recharge. It amazes me how users beg for more and more CPU and GPU power, and then are disappointed when the sucker has to be plugged in everywhere they go - as if their supercomputer-with-a-handle didn't devour batteries.
For my portable word processing and email, I use a 386/16 with 1024k that will run all day without recharging - and it has a spare battery pack that can be populated with 8 throwaway AA cells.
If I'm going to be doing Windows application development on the road, then I take the Vaio - and plan on swapping the battery in two hours. P.I.A.
I am an AMD fan but moved away completely once the Core Duo/Core 2 Duo series came out. They run cooler, are equivalent or faster in performance, and are excellent at balancing power use with performance. It's that power management that's vastly superior to AMD who is quite a bit behind in the laptop stakes at present. As a desktop replacement the AMD should be OK but IMO the Intel is a better choice.