Diference between the DH71 and ES71? basically, 2.4ghz vs 2.3, windows 8 vs 7, and thunderbolt vs no thunderbolt?
1774938
Yes Leandro, those are the only different specs as far a i can tell. I own the DH71 and I recommend it to anyone.Sorry for my English.
1774939
The DH71 has windows 8, 2.4ghz, thunderbolt and the ES71 has windows 7, 2.3ghz, and no thunderbolt
1751398
The new one comes with Allwinner 1.2Ghz. I heard it is better the PIPO MAX M6, because the Cotex A9 Quad Core 1.6GHz is better than Allwinner.
1432868
I don't believe there are any differences besides the clock speed. Everything seems identical (same chipset, RAM size/speed, disk model, wireless model, etc) and the only difference the i7-4510u has is an increased clock multiplier. I can say that 1.8 GHz base clock has proven more than enough for anything I need from this computer (read: educational Solidworks, light games/transcoding, productivity, 50+ tabs), and combined with the ssd and ample RAM, I doubt the difference would be significant unless you had heavy single-threaded workloads. It seems that this model has been marked down more because people rarely look at the clock speeds, and this is the cheapest i7 model (also the cheapest with 8GB RAM and 256GB SSD, my constraints); the market for the other one would be more professional.
1656562
System properties says 2.7; mine has the AMD processor. It is also available with Intel processor but I don't know what the speed is on that one.
517981
True. But you'll be getting a tremendously noticeable faster speed simply from the thunderbolt interface cable. I was surprised at how well it performs while not in a Raid config.
1587857
Gottlieb, that's NOT what I said. I'm talking same feature set/performance, not price. The VSX 31 is equivalent to the 1020, not the 1120. You're comparing an apple to an orange.
905381
There is absolutely no reason to get thunderbolt, USB 2.0 goes up 450mbps with 300 being the typical peak. For comparison, the most common internet today only goes from from 20-50mbps. Most at home routers don't even support Local Area Networks to 300mbps, you're really only getting thunderbolt for the name really. Thunderbolt is overkill for this, a good use of a thunderport would be like hooking up a 4k resolution monitor that needs tons of bandwidth.
515797
best I can say I installed into 2 systems upgrading to windows 7 32-bit for the aero performance worked well the cpu was e6600 in both systems and worked fine for what I needed hope this info helps
138397
Since you plan on keeping it a long time (more than 5 years), it might be best to get the i7. However the difference between them does not appear to be significant. I too am about to buy a Pro. I was gonna get the i7 but after watching countless Youtube videos and reading reviews about it I decided paying $400 more from the 2.4 ghz i5 was not worth the miniscule bump in power. From what I gather on youtube, the 2.4ghz is capable of playing all current games on high or close to high settings (not extremely high though). I've seen videos of people playing everything from Modern Warfare 2 to Mass Effect 2 to Crysis with relative ease. I've also seen a video of someone testing how capable the i5 was at multitasking by running multiple programs at the same time. He had 3 VMware windows open + itunes + email + Dreamweaver and a few others open and it ran very smoothly. If you are planing on keeping your Pro for at least 10 years (not impossible) then you may as well get the i7. If like me you predict you might upgrade in 5 years or so, then I would get the 2.4 ghz i5. The difference between that and the i7 is rather small and not worth the extra $400. Check out this video for more info: www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0-l37pgqa0 In case the link isn't working just go to Youtube and type in "2.4 GHz Core i5 or Core i7 2.66 GHz MacBook Pro". Also, according to this review, the 2.4 ghz i5 is faster than the 2.8 ghz mid 2009 macbook pro: www.macworld.com/article/150146/2010/04/15inch_macbookpro_corei5i7.html
958395
Well Taiz, in my opinion no. Thta's why I bought the 6422. I do not think 0.1 Ghz make much difference in terms of performace. Moreover, the greatest limitation of this laptop is the lack of a good video card, so I think pay $ 80 more for it is a waste of money. The other difference between them is the quality of web cam. The 6471 has a better webcam, but nothing to justify. I bought to wear at work and so the 6422 fits better my needs. I never used a SSD, but seems to be better. I have used a Hybrid Hard Drive, but I didn't notice nothing diferent.Regards,
1207742
The .3ghz won't make a huge difference. Both get incredibly hot, so a high quality cpu cooler is necessary.
1798
I think it's 1.8 but not sure. I eventually returned it because I felt the cpu is a bit slow and HD playback is somewhat lagging. If you want to get horse power and full HD, consider dell xps 13 convertible. That's what I got eventually and I love it.
526643
I see the specs in other answers here, and while not impressive for a desktop this does perform very well when compared apples to apples. I replaced a defective atom-based mobo+cpu with this one after reading many favorable reviews about performance visa-vi the atom with a higher CPU clock speed. Paired with an SSD, this little WIndows-7 based system became a noticeable upgrade for my client, who needed a repair on a small form-factor PC for basic e-mail and internet home use. - Mark, The IT Guy San Diego
1335813
I think it is thunderbolt 1. It really won't make any difference. It is only a two mechanical drive enclosure, which can't exceed thunderbolt 1 max anyway. If yoou have two ssd's, raided, that might be a different story.
1034518
I prefer G Drives because the speed of the HD 7200RPM. I know connecting via thunderbolt is not going to make it faster but I am already using my USB ports for Audio Interfaces. It is just convenience and less things to carry and connect by using the thunderbolt.
905383
I have used it with both, works perfectly with either. Get the thunderbolt adapter.
2224464
Honestly, the speed means very, very little. You're talking differences of less than 1% performance under most circumstances. 1600MHz is enough for basically everything.