3 ms·

Still frustrating when you compare Apples to Oranges. You carry extra weight of Linux here: Weight as a Macbook Pro 15" but CPU performance (passmark) of a good

Still frustrating when you compare Apples to Oranges. You carry extra weight of Linux here: Weight as a Macbook Pro 15" but CPU performance (passmark) of a good Macbook Air 11" 2013 http://www.cpu-monkey.com/de/compare_cpu-intel_core_i5_6200u-590-vs-intel_core_i7_4650u-436 http://www.cpu-monkey.com/de/compare_cpu-intel_core_i5_6200u... & display SRGB coverage 61.55% according to Notebookcheck (Macbook Air 55,2%). No real improvements on Lenovo's side. For that money (if battery is a requirement) better buy a 13" Macbook Air (it's also 500-600 grams lighter).

Xylakant 10y ago
You're comparing the entry-level Thinkpad CPU with the Top-Level Macbook CPU - not surprising that the 3 year old top level CPU compares well with the entry level of this year. It's not like the faster CPUs for the Thinkpad will be any heavier. The author also deliberately chose the "regular" T460 model instead of the lighter, more integrated (and thus less serviceable) T460s. The T460s is at least comparable in weight and power. The screen is a bit of a toss-up: I like the macbook screen since it's sturdy and doesn't scratch, but I also like the Thinkpad screen since it's not glossy.
- therealmarv 10y ago
  Also comparing that by intention: A new Macbook Air 13" with top level i7 CPU (early 2015) is in the same price region or even cheaper and outperforms his setup slightly. But it also does not meet his requirements with 16GB of RAM.
  - Xylakant 10y ago
    So yes, you can get lighter laptops that can't handle 16GB RAM and have a lower-res screen (and a worse onboard graphics) card for a comparable price. But you specifically were comparing weight and power - and that's not entirely an apple - to - apple comparison you're doing here.
pessimizer 10y ago
People really evaluate computers by the ratio of weight to CPU throughput?
- therealmarv 10y ago
  yep I do. And I also don't like Apple that you need to buy at least a heavy 15" inch laptop for getting a real quadcore.

Xylakant 10y ago

You're comparing the entry-level Thinkpad CPU with the Top-Level Macbook CPU - not surprising that the 3 year old top level CPU compares well with the entry level of this year. It's not like the faster CPUs for the Thinkpad will be any heavier. The author also deliberately chose the "regular" T460 model instead of the lighter, more integrated (and thus less serviceable) T460s. The T460s is at least comparable in weight and power. The screen is a bit of a toss-up: I like the macbook screen since it's sturdy and doesn't scratch, but I also like the Thinkpad screen since it's not glossy.

therealmarv 10y ago
Also comparing that by intention: A new Macbook Air 13" with top level i7 CPU (early 2015) is in the same price region or even cheaper and outperforms his setup slightly. But it also does not meet his requirements with 16GB of RAM.
- Xylakant 10y ago
  So yes, you can get lighter laptops that can't handle 16GB RAM and have a lower-res screen (and a worse onboard graphics) card for a comparable price. But you specifically were comparing weight and power - and that's not entirely an apple - to - apple comparison you're doing here.

pessimizer 10y ago

People really evaluate computers by the ratio of weight to CPU throughput?

therealmarv 10y ago
yep I do. And I also don't like Apple that you need to buy at least a heavy 15" inch laptop for getting a real quadcore.