On Nov 17, 2:22 am, rickman <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am looking at a low end Dell laptop, the Vostro 1500, as a new
> computer for work. I may supplement this later with a new desktop
> unit for crunching FPGA designs, but I will also be using this laptop
> for this sort of work. I am looking for advice on the differences in
> CPUs for FPGA work and anything else that is relevant.
>
> I know that parallel ports are going the way of the serial port and
> the dodo bird, but I can live with that. Most tools are available as
> USB devices now.
>
> This particular computer comes with WindowsXP rather than Vista. From
> what I have heard, that is an advantage. But I notice that the
> internal bluetooth adapter is specific for XP and others from Dell are
> specific for Vista. Any idea what is up with that? Is there any
> significant advantage to using XP pro over XP home?
>
> This machine also has the "Intel(R) Integrated Graphics Media
> Accelerator X3100". Is that just another way of saying "integrated
> video"? Several of my other machines have had integrated video and it
> does seem to drag down the CPU noticeably. Any idea if I will notice
> the drag on the Core 2 Duo? They also offer an Nvidia Gforce 8400 GS
> adapter for $100 and an 8600 for $200 more. Any idea if these are
> worth it? The 1500 says it has "VGA video output & S-Video". Does
> that mean I can connect two monitors for dual display?
>
> The CPU is a T5270 (1.4 GHz, 2 MB cache) with upgrades to various
> processors for significant money. The first stepup is to a T5470 (1.6
> GHz) for $75 and others range up to $575! I am thinking I can live
> with the slower processor. The memory is 2GB.
>
> I was looking at the Vostro 1000 earlier this week with an AMD TK-53
> processor (1.5 GHz, 512 KB cache) and a smaller hard drive. It was
> $50 more so the 1500 looks like the better deal. Are there any
> significant differences in the two CPUs for FPGA work? I guess the
> small cache of the TK-53 would make it significantly slower for FPGA
> work.
>
> I saw a thread from earlier this year discussing some of this. I
> wonder how much laptops have improved since then.

About the display: 15.4" in not enough for a real work.
You should better buy a 17", your eyes would be pleased.
As they say: integrated graphic card is OK if you do not use 3D
programs.

Guru