HP 15t Laptop: i7-1065G7, 12GB, 256GB SSD, 15.6" 1080p $670 + free s/h

is this backlit screen better or worse than the "IPS" ones everyone's always talking about?

Quote from roxyprincess129 : is this backlit screen better or worse than the "IPS" ones everyone's always talking about?

IPS is pretty much the best you can get. Other screens can be worse or almost as good, but never the same.

SVA in the description typically refers to a TN panel, WVA is what you're looking for to get an ips style screen. HP's lower end panels are typically trash. Based on experience with both types, it's simply not worth it for a non ips screen unless it's a high quality high refresh rate gaming panel.

Seems like a great deal, no? How's the laptop build, battery life, temperature, etc?

Video card ain't doing much..

Wait til Ryzen 4500u release.

for this price, this is a great office work laptop..

https://slickdeals.net/f/13681616-hp-15t-laptop-i7-10510u-12gb-ddr4-256gb-ssd-15-6-339-99

This laptop was on a crazy sale on Black Friday.
Oh, I might add because it's customized it takes them forever to ship it. I received mine a week ago even though I ordered it three months ago. (First time it arrived it was damaged so I had to return it.)

Quote from ayatsuri13 : IPS is pretty much the best you can get. Other screens can be worse or almost as good, but never the same.

OLED and micro-LED would like to have a word with you.

Starting at $519 after options is coming to $759? Is there a discount code ?

This is a pretty terrible buy for several reasons.

- You're paying a premium for 10th-gen "Ice Lake," but it's really not that much faster than an 8th-gen CPU: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Com...7vsm920409. This is 10-15% faster - and that's CPU performance alone. For most uses you'll never notice a difference even side-by-side. This does have better graphics performance, but not enough for any serious gaming.

- The display is TN. Full HD, but still terrible. Spending almost $700 for a laptop with a TN panel is nuts, IMHO.

- Realtek wifi. These are notoriously unreliable, lots of dropouts. Only seem to ever see them on cheap HP laptops. Want the better Intel wifi chip? That's another $35.

- Mediocre build quality. This is the lowest rung in HP's consumer laptop lineup - not even a Pavilion brand. (From this you go up to Pavilion, then Envy, then Spectre.) Plastic everywhere, and rather cheap feeling. Generally I find that Lenovo and Acer make better budget laptops.

- Puny 41WHr battery guarantees poor battery life, esp. with a 15.6-in screen.

I'd be much happier with a $400-$500 laptop with an older/slower processor but IPS display. Even if they were the same price, I'd rather have the Acer Aspire 5 with Ryzen 3 from Amazon, which actually costs $350 and leaves you a lot of money for upgrades (which are also easy to do, unlike most HP laptops).

Quote from 02nz : This is a pretty terrible buy for several reasons. - You're paying a premium for 10th-gen "Ice Lake," but it's really not that much faster than an 8th-gen CPU: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Com...7vsm920409 [userbenchmark.com]. This is 10-15% faster - and that's CPU performance alone. For most uses you'll never notice a difference even side-by-side. This does have better graphics performance, but not enough for any serious gaming. - The display is TN. Full HD, but still terrible. Spending almost $700 for a laptop with a TN panel is nuts, IMHO. - Realtek wifi. These are notoriously unreliable, lots of dropouts. Only seem to ever see them on cheap HP laptops. Want the better Intel wifi chip? That's another $35. - Mediocre build quality. This is the lowest rung in HP's consumer laptop lineup - not even a Pavilion brand. (From this you go up to Pavilion, then Envy, then Spectre.) Plastic everywhere, and rather cheap feeling. Generally I find that Lenovo and Acer make better budget laptops. - Puny 41WHr battery guarantees poor battery life, esp. with a 15.6-in screen. I'd be much happier with a $400-$500 laptop with an older/slower processor but IPS display. Even if they were the same price, I'd rather have the Acer Aspire 5 with Ryzen 3 from Amazon, which actually costs $350 and leaves you a lot of money for upgrades (which are also easy to do, unlike most HP laptops).

If you were going to spend 500 (+/- 100) is there a particular model you'd look at right now, or you think you'd save the cash and buy the Aspire 5 still? Looking to get a laptop for my mom and while she doesn't need "the latest and greatest", would like to not needlessly overspend but also don't want to buy her a pile of junk. Thanks for any suggestions!

Quote from fibonaccisquare : If you were going to spend 500 (+/- 100) is there a particular model you'd look at right now, or you think you'd save the cash and buy the Aspire 5 still? Looking to get a laptop for my mom and while she doesn't need "the latest and greatest", would like to not needlessly overspend but also don't want to buy her a pile of junk. Thanks for any suggestions!

The Aspire 5 with IPS display and Ryzen 3 3200U is hard to beat if you are willing to open it up and add another 4 or 8GB of RAM. The CPU is plenty fast, esp. for web browsing and the like. Availability looks spotty right now but refurbished ("Amazon Renewed") may be an option.

There's a version with a 10th-gen dual-core Intel Core i3 CPU for $400, but again with 4GB RAM, which I'd want to upgrade to 8GB: https://www.amazon.com/Acer-Displ...07XPLHL3K/

Or for around $550, quad-core Core i5 with twice the RAM and SSD storage: https://www.amazon.com/Acer-Displ...07XPLKZ5P/. No need for any upgrades there and pretty future-proof.

And you can save $50 on Amazon if you have an Amex card that earns Membership Rewards points.

If you don't absolutely need a laptop right away, it may be worth waiting a month or two to see what we get in Ryzen 4000 laptops. The early reviews say the Ryzen 4000 gaming chips beat Intel by a mile, but it remains to be seen how the U-series chips that go in more mainstream/ultraportable laptops perform. ETA: The Aspire 5 linked above will be available with Ryzen 5000 CPUs in June: https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/3...processors