which laptop is better?

Question

I am thinking of BUYING a laptop and I think these two are good but I cant choose. Which laptop is better the DELL INSPIRON 1546 or the ACER ASPIRE 5551?

DELL INSPIRON 1546 - Processor AMD Turion™ X2 RM-74 Dual-Core Processor
- 2.2 GHz
- 1.8 GHz HT (3600 MT/s)
- 2 x 512 KB L2 Cache
Operating System Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium
RAM - 4GB installed RAM
- DDR2
- Up to 8GB maximum RAM capacity
Graphics card ATI RadeonTM HD 4330 graphics card
- 512MB dedicated video memory
Screen type Widescreen LCD
Screen resolution - WXGA
- 1366 x 768 pixels
Screen size 15.6"
Screen features Glossy surface
Hard drive 320GB SATA 5400 rpm
Optical disk drive Dual Layer DVD Rewriter
Memory card reader 7-in-1 media card reader
USB 3 x USB 2.0 ports
FireWire No
Modem/Ethernet Integrated network connector 10/100 LAN (RJ45)
Wi-Fi wireless 1397 802.11g
Bluetooth No
Video interface 15-pin VGA video connector
Audio interface Audio jacks (1-line out, 1 Mic-in)
TV output 15-pin VGA video connector
Extension card slot 34 mm ExpressCard slot
Sound Intel High Definition Audio 2.0
Webcam Built-in 1.3 megapixel webcam
Battery 6-cell lithium-ion battery for 3 hours of use
Accessories included Power cable, AC adapter, battery, documentation
Software included Works 9
McAfee Security (trial version)
Size 373.5 x 244 x 25.9 - 37.8 mm (W x D x H)
Weight 2.64kg (approx)

ACER ASPIRE 5551 - Processor Phenom II X3 N830 Processor
- 2.1 GHz
- 1.8 GHz HT (3600 MT/s)
- 3 x 512 KB L2 Cache
Operating System Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium 64-bit
RAM - 4G installed DDR3 RAM
- Up to 8GB maximum RAM (2 x SODIMM modules)
Graphics card ATI Radeon™ HD 4250 Graphics
- 256 MB memory
Screen type Widescreen LCD
Screen resolution - WXGA
- 1366 x 768 pixels
Screen size 15.6"
Screen features Acer CineCrystal technology
LED backlighting
16:9 aspect ratio
Hard drive 320GB SATA
Optical disk drive DVD Rewriter
Memory card reader 5-in-1 media card reader
USB 3 x USB 2.0
FireWire No
Modem/Ethernet 1 x RJ-45 Ethernet port (Gigabit)
Wi-Fi 802.11b/g/n WLAN
Bluetooth No
Video interface 1 x HDMI with HDCP support
1 x VGA
Audio interface 1 x Headphone/speaker/line-out jack
1 x Microphone-in jack
TV output 1 x HDMI with HDCP support
1 x VGA
Extension card slot No
Sound - 2 x built-in Acer 3DSonic™ stereo speakers
- High-definition audio support
- MS-Sound compatible
- Built-in microphone
Webcam Acer Crystal Eye 1.3 MP webcam, 1280 x 1024 resolution
Keyboard & Mouse Keyboard: inverted "T" cursor layout, 1.8 mm (minimum) key travel
Multi-gesture touchpad, supporting two-finger scroll, pinch, rotate, flip
Battery - 6-cell Lithium-Ion battery
- Up to 3 hours battery life
Accessories included Power cord, AC adapter, battery
Software included Acer Backup Manager
Acer ePower Management
Acer eRecovery Management
Adobe® Flash® Player 10
Adobe® Reader® 9.1
eSobi™
Google™ Setup
Microsoft® Office Trial1 (Service Pack 2)
Microsoft® Works SE 91
Microsoft® Works 9
Microsoft® Works 8.5
Norton™ Online Backup Security
McAfee® Internet Security Suite Trial
McAfee® Virus Definitions
MyWinLocker® (except China, Hong Kong)
Multimedia
Cyberlink® PowerDVD™
NTI Media Maker™
Gaming
Oberon GameZone Acer Edition
Size 381 (W) x 253 (D) x 25/34 (H) mm
Weight 2.6 kg

Answer 1

The second one is definitely better. Don't be fooled by the higher CPU frequency in the first one(2.2GHz vs 2.1GHz is nothing).

With the second one you get a triple.core processor, not a dual-core one like in the first one.

Having one more core when multitasking is like having one more processor to work with when the other 2 are being used intensively.

The second one is also more future-oriented. It's got DDR3 memory,not DDR2.

DDR3 isn't only faster than the DDR2,but it also uses less energy to run, thus allowing for some battery life savings.

The video card in the first PC might be more powerful, but hey, this is little compared to what you get:

Loose 256MB and a ' faster (not much) ' graphics chip, and get what?:

Well, one more processor core(very important factor when benchmarking a computer's performance)

The software is being developed in such a manner to be able to use more than 2 cores nowadays

so having a third one will definitely make a difference.

Don't be fooled by the 7-in-1 card reader the first PC comes equipped with, compared to the 5-in-1 media reader that comes with the second one.

When talking about flash memory readers&writers every single card reader can read and write to the most popular flash memory types: SD, MMC,CompactFlash,MS,MS-DUO.

And apart from the supplemental processor core, you get DDR3 memory,which uses less energy and is faster than DDR2.

The second one also comes with an LED(Light Emitting Diode) display, which means it uses less energy - thus saving more battery for the things you actually need.

Also, LED displays are meant to produce a clearer image than the already old LCD (Liquid Cristal Display) ones.

The rest of the features are nearly the same (1.3MP webcam,6-cell battery,VGA output, 2.6kg)

Take in account that none of them has built-in bluetooth.

Although having an integrated BT chip may seem comfortable, sometimes it's nothing more than a pain in the neck when you try to actually use it.

You'd be better off with a USB-based BT chip.Trust me.

So, yes, the second one is a better choice overall and not only.

Remember: you don't need a 512MB graphics chip to run Windows Se7en smoothly and one more thing I forgot to mention:

Usually,the graphics chips that come with a laptop computer have no more than a 64-bit - wide bus, or rarely something like a 128-bit one.

And you know why is this bus important?

Well, you cannot transfer 512MB over a 64-bit bus efficiently in NO WAY.

The modern graphics cards come with 1GB of VRAM(Video Random Access Memory) and a 128-bit bus but hey, look at their processor and memory clocks, they're very high clocked, since in the desktop area the energy consumed doesn't matter that much when what we gain is raw performance.

When talking about laptops, the story changes a bit:

-you need good performance and (very) good battery life > that's why they cannot clock CPUs and GPUs too high in a portable computer.

So, they put 512MB of VRAM with a 64-bit bus and the user says: I'll get this one because it's got 512MB of VRAM,when you'll never get to make full sue of them!

To increase performance you need to either:

-increase the GPU(Graphics Processing Unit) clocks(cannot be done since it would consume lots of energy)

-increase the bus width (not the trend with laptops since it drive costs up even more)

So, getting a 256MB graphics card in a portable PC is actually better than getting something with a 512MB graphics card RAM.

Answer 2

The Dell has a slightly better graphics card (but Dell usually doesn't make graphics cards very well, or buy very good ones (Radeon is the chip set, not necessarily the card), and Inspiron is the crap line. Acer Aspire, OTOH, is a decent computer. (And probably cheaper.)

Answer 3

I'd say the dell only differrence Graphics card ATI RadeonTM HD 4330 graphics card

- 512MB dedicated video memory

Answer 4

Well,yes,they are good,but I still support Dell laptops because they are the best.

Answer 5

Too much information there, but the second one is better.