# Desktop PC vs Laptop



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

Following my current compter issues that I'm having atm. and factoring in a few other things, I'm considering getting a new PC and am thinking a destop would be a better option this time - i don't need the portability, the larger screen size would be a bonus.
What i would like to know if possible is: what's the power consumption like for a desktop compared to laptop - with it being on for much of the day mon-fri, is it likely to cost a lot more to run? 
Cheers


----------



## bigmc (Mar 22, 2010)

I leave mine on all day everyday, I think the only time it's been off in the last 18 months is for a restart. They use minimal power anyway tbh.


----------



## Dan Gull (Jul 24, 2009)

I know you said PC - but I have the best of both worlds in the shape of 13 inch MacBook Pro and a Apple Cinema Display + Keyboard and Magic Trackpad. 

Working at home it's as good as a desktop, yet I can still take it away as a laptop as I am at the moment.

Yes - I know it's not cheap...

Regarding power consumption I would be surprised if a laptop was less power hungry than a desktop - charging batteries is usually less efficient than direct power.


----------



## Benji471 (Jan 31, 2010)

Dan Gull said:


> I know you said PC - but I have the best of both worlds in the shape of 13 inch MacBook Pro and a Apple Cinema Display + Keyboard and Magic Trackpad.
> 
> Working at home it's as good as a desktop, yet I can still take it away as a laptop as I am at the moment.
> 
> ...


I would be inclined to agree charging wastes an awful lot if power. So from a running cost point of view I would say a desktop is cheaper to run and more than likely buy.


----------



## ardandy (Aug 18, 2006)

Pc and monitor - 3-4pph
Laptop - 2-3pph


----------



## ardandy (Aug 18, 2006)

Benji471 said:


> I would be inclined to agree charging wastes an awful lot if power. So from a running cost point of view I would say a desktop is cheaper to run and more than likely buy.


Just remove the battery.


----------



## gm8 (Apr 25, 2011)

Id go down the route of building your own. You can investigate the power consumption of most individual componennts that way. It will be far cheaper this way but I would advise buying a quality power supply


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Dan Gull said:


> I know you said PC - but I have the best of both worlds in the shape of 13 inch MacBook Pro and a Apple Cinema Display + Keyboard and Magic Trackpad.
> 
> Working at home it's as good as a desktop, yet I can still take it away as a laptop as I am at the moment.
> 
> ...


I'm about to do exactly this albeit with a 15" 2.2Ghz MacBook Pro and the new 27" Thunderbolt display - I believe this will give me the ultimate home/travel system expecially factoring in my iPad 2 an iPhone, OS X Lion, iOS 5, iCloud and the total integration the Apple family gives you.

I'm a convert - goodbye Bill Gates.

   Apple Fan   


----------



## centenary (Sep 5, 2010)

A tower or desk top pc is obviously easier to upgrade than a laptop. The disadvantage is its size.

So, imo, the choice comes down to do you want to be able to upgrade parts in a pc from time to time. IMO, few people do upgrade their desktops and even when they do, the effect on speed is very marginable since they never upgrade the most relevant part, the motherboard.

Unless you are doing lots of powerful computing, I'd go laptop every time. you never know when you may just want to go mobile but because of the desktop, wont be able too.


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Bear in mind that you can always plug an external display into almost any laptop, the only restriction in many PC-based laptops is a low-end graphics card, unless you invest in a high-end destop replacement model.

Prices are so low these days, assuming you are going down the windows route, I'd buy a reasonably well specified laptop plus an external display. Whatever happened to the laptop docking stations of the late nineties. Back when I worked for Missus Queen, she supplied me with a high-end Toshiba Satellite-Pro, docking station with second HDD, external monitor and other gizmos. I took my laptop out and about and then docked when in the office, instant connection to the network and all my peripherals. OK, so you can still do this but it's not as easy as it was back then.

Apple have cracked it with their new Thunderbolt display which is in effect a docking station with a single connection to your MacBook which supplies power, network, graphics etc., the perfect solution.


----------



## SBerlyn (Nov 9, 2008)

DW58 said:


> Apple have cracked it with their new Thunderbolt display which is in effect a docking station with a single connection to your MacBook which supplies power, network, graphics etc., the perfect solution.


What, y'mean like this item


----------



## DampDog (Apr 16, 2011)

gm8 said:


> Id go down the route of building your own. You can investigate the power consumption of most individual componennts that way. It will be far cheaper this way but I would advise buying a quality power supply


I'm with building your own desktop for a number of reasons. Personally I have the PC setup in the spare bedroom so it's a bolt-hole. I always feel anti-social if I have my nose stuck in the laptop in the living room.

Also building your own you can spend the money on the bits you really need, that might be tons of storage or a nice big screen. Buying a laptop is always acomprimise because of the size, power, heat, limitations. Plus laptops are "bespoke" and many of the parts used are for that specific laptop, which make them more expensive.

Build a desktop and just make use of the power saving features built in, Power dives down, have monitor so it pops into sleep mode. Even use the hibernate feature. All those things will cut down on energy useage. Plus decktops are cheaper because almost all of the components are standardised" what fits one, fits all, within reason..

Plus if you've not built one before you'll enjoy learning new stuff.


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Basically yes. The docking station I refer to from Toshiba (also offered by others at the time and possibly still) was a unit which mated to a port on the laptop - you actually lowered the rear end of the laptop and then pushed down an lever which drew the laptop in making the dock. It just made life much easier buy making umpteen connections in single movement.


----------



## Spoony (May 28, 2007)

DW58 said:


> I'm about to do exactly this albeit with a 15" 2.2Ghz MacBook Pro and the new 27" Thunderbolt display - I believe this will give me the ultimate home/travel system expecially factoring in my iPad 2 an iPhone, OS X Lion, iOS 5, iCloud and the total integration the Apple family gives you.
> 
> I'm a convert - goodbye Bill Gates.
> 
>    Apple Fan   


Essentially I think this is the set up I will want in future. I use a docking station in work and it is the business.


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

i like my imac and generally like all in ones i know the pitfalls with the potential of screen problems etc. but it does save space and then i have a laptop as well and tbh i prefer using the imac 99.9% of the time if i am sitting, watching etc. its just better experience.

My air for on the move and on the fly does have that advantage of being mobile and a quicker boot time running an SSD, but it does feel compromised, it was never really going to be a serious contender for my imac anyway just a 2nd system.

I think it all depends on what _you_ want personally. if you want to use the internet downstairs in a relaxed manner then a laptop will give that flexibility even something like an all in one could not. if it is a laptop and becomes stationary and constantly charging then it will destroy the battery so remove it if that occurs i have had a few desktop replacement laptops and tbh they are abit overkill IMHO they become almost housebound so the mobilty idea with them is dreamland, then if you do its heavy, you need to opertimise the battery usage to a degree to stop it chewing (unless it runs 2 GPU's)

I also like the idea of building your own it means you get a better system overall and is great knowledge. But some might not like that idea.

i might comes across as being undecided as i dont have to make any choice  think about what you do and where you do it most and make a decision based on those answers otherwise its to easy to buy something you dont really need or suit your purposes.regarding OSX and windows debate i aint going there apart from IMHO neither is perfect, but i do find myself still using windows more....but again it does not matter to me i jump and swap between the two without any difficulty. Plus your money if your buying one goes further with a desktop, but more people buy laptops now


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

Since getting mt Macbook Pro 13" Ive come to the conclusion that nearly all Windows based laptops are useless if you want them for portability because the battery doesn't last long enough.

You get an awful lot more for your money with a desktop than a laptop, however I cant see myself ever owning a desktop again unless I plug it into a TV and use it as a media server/ internet TV.

Having said that, if you generally sit in the same place which using your computer, dont like sitting watching TV at the same time then a desktop would probably suit you better.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

gr33n said:


> Ive come to the conclusion that nearly all Windows based laptops are useless if you want them for portability because the battery doesn't last long enough.


And how many laptops are you basing that on?

Most people buy the standard configuration at Dell which is nomally a 6-cell battery. In the upgrades you can get a 9-cell battery. It won't just be Dell that do it. The main difference between Apple and other laptop manufacturers is that they generally don't cheap out on components, hence the large increase in price.


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

my airs battery is honestly no better than my old windows netbook what it is down to is what you do and are using.


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/HP-DC7900...t=UK_Computing_DesktopPCs&hash=item1e661132b2

Low power, good as most reasonably priced laptops...


----------



## Bero (Mar 9, 2008)

I'm away to get a Mac mini for the living room as a media server and general web browser. With the latest update (better processor, and larger HDD and option of a stand alone graphics card) are very competitive...and small and use very little power like a laptop.


----------



## ardandy (Aug 18, 2006)

Are people suggesting that he spends £££££'s more to save pence on energy costs by buying a mac?


----------



## Bero (Mar 9, 2008)

ardandy said:


> Are people suggesting that he spends £££££'s more to save pence on energy costs by buying a mac?


Not at all - it's a side benifit...and one he requested. Look at the latest Minis and try build a comparable windows PC for the same cost.....there will not be much in it.


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

jamest said:


> And how many laptops are you basing that on?
> 
> Most people buy the standard configuration at Dell which is nomally a 6-cell battery. In the upgrades you can get a 9-cell battery. It won't just be Dell that do it. The main difference between Apple and other laptop manufacturers is that they generally don't cheap out on components, hence the large increase in price.


The last 3 laptops ive had, couldn't better 3 hours, and yes I could have bought a 9 cell battery for my XPS but they add a massive chunk onto the bottom of the laptop and make it even less portable IMO.

and as for the price id guess with a 9 cell battery the price of my XPS wouldnt have been far off the price of my MacBook PRO, I know im comparing a 13" to a 15" laptop but I dont feel restricted by the 13" screen on my MacBook.

I wasnt looking for an argument or to annoy anyone, just giving my own opinion :thumb:


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

gr33n said:


> The last 3 laptops ive had, couldn't better 3 hours, and yes I could have bought a 9 cell battery for my XPS but they add a massive chunk onto the bottom of the laptop and make it even less portable IMO.
> 
> and as for the price id guess with a 9 cell battery the price of my XPS wouldnt have been far off the price of my MacBook PRO, I know im comparing a 13" to a 15" laptop but I dont feel restricted by the 13" screen on my MacBook.
> 
> I wasnt looking for an argument or to annoy anyone, just giving my own opinion :thumb:


And your issue is you're comparing Dell consumer **** with a business grade laptop (yes, contrary to popular belief the MBP is a business grade laptop!). If you run a business grade laptop, such as the cheap and nasty Lenovo T510 I'm using now, with standard spec and basic energy optimisations I'm able to see 7, maybe 8 hours out of it. If I really wanted to, I'm sure I could push it to 9 or 10 hours.

A second-hand PC really is the way to go, IMO. If you're entertaining a laptop, you don't need cutting-edge or even reasonably modern. £100-150 I reckon would see you a perfectly acceptable USDT with all the low power stuff you'd like with a low footprint and low noise.


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

ardandy said:


> Are people suggesting that he spends £££££'s more to save pence on energy costs by buying a mac?


Lol.

"You'll save £100 a year by running this Mac!"

"I'll save £400 now by not buying that Mac"


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

OvlovMike said:


> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/HP-DC7900...t=UK_Computing_DesktopPCs&hash=item1e661132b2
> 
> Low power, good as most reasonably priced laptops...


When it become so full of "egos" in here?

Each to their own and all that, but I cant take anyone seriously who recommends and PC, Mac or Laptop in this day and age with these specs.

Intel Core Duo Processor 2.5ghz

1GB Ram

80Gb Hard Drive

Ben


----------



## DampDog (Apr 16, 2011)

gr33n said:


> When it become so full of "egos" in here?
> 
> but I cant take anyone seriously who recommends and PC, Mac or Laptop in this day and age with these specs.
> 
> ...


That's not a computer it's a calculator...


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

gr33n said:


> When it become so full of "egos" in here?
> 
> Each to their own and all that, but I cant take anyone seriously who recommends and PC, Mac or Laptop in this day and age with these specs.
> 
> ...


The difference is the speed. I could of built a similar spec PC for my parents but instead I built an i3 230 with 4GB RAM + 320GB hard drive and put Ubuntu on it.

In total it cost £400. PC is pretty much silent and not much chance of getting any viruses on it and it is pretty nippy, boot up to desktop in around 10 seconds (including POST) and a 1-2 second shutdown.


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

gr33n said:


> When it become so full of "egos" in here?
> 
> Each to their own and all that, but I cant take anyone seriously who recommends and PC, Mac or Laptop in this day and age with these specs.
> 
> ...


Memory is £30, hard drives are similar for 500GB. And how much processing power do you actually need? Bear in mind that my 'brand new' i5 laptop benches very similarly to my four dc7900s with 2.66GHz Core2Duo processors.

This frankly idiotic society where we're sold by marketing **** on how much processing power we need before our computer will even turn on, yet I build VDI environments based on less than 300MHz per person and rarely even 2GB per person - and that's for Windows 7! And I should add that I'm criticised by my peers for being too generous! I have an old Q6600 based gaming computer that's older than most people's cars nowadays and it still plays Crysis 2 with a degree of detail, only limited by it's graphics cards.

The pub specialists really do have a lot to answer for, nowadays!


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

jamest said:


> The difference is the speed. I could of built a similar spec PC for my parents but instead I built an i3 230 with 4GB RAM + 320GB hard drive and put Ubuntu on it.
> 
> In total it cost £400. PC is pretty much silent and not much chance of getting any viruses on it and it is pretty nippy, boot up to desktop in around 10 seconds (including POST) and a 1-2 second shutdown.


I couldnt agree with you more, theyre the minimum specs id recommend.

I do feel that Windows OS strangle faster computers, my XPS laptop should be more powerful than my MacBook based on its specs but it just cant cut it


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

DampDog said:


> That's not a computer it's a calculator...


Interesting calculator you run.

If anyone wishes to play the big ***** game, I'm quite happy to win for them...


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

gr33n said:


> I couldnt agree with you more, theyre the minimum specs id recommend.


Then avoid moving to an enterprise environment.

An i3-320 is far more than is absolutely necessary for Windows 7 and using most of the internet. FFS I play Team Fortress 2 on a Sony Vaio with a Centrino Duo processor running Windows 7! :wall:


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

OvlovMike said:


> Memory is £30, hard drives are similar for 500GB. And how much processing power do you actually need? Bear in mind that my 'brand new' i5 laptop benches very similarly to my four dc7900s with 2.66GHz Core2Duo processors.
> 
> This frankly idiotic society where we're sold by marketing **** on how much processing power we need before our computer will even turn on, yet I build VDI environments based on less than 300MHz per person and rarely even 2GB per person - and that's for Windows 7! I have an old Q6600 based gaming computer that's older than most people's cars nowadays and it still plays Crysis 2 with a degree of detail, only limited by it's graphics cards.
> 
> The pub specialists really do have a lot to answer for, nowadays!


Ive never bought a computer just to say ive got XYZ, I buy powerful computers because I need to run forensic software like Forensic ToolKit and EnCase. Trying to clone and scan a 1TB HDD with a Core2Duo and 1GB of RAM isnt going to get my very far unfortunately.

I dont do any PC gaming so GFX Cards are of very little interest to me, so long as it can handle miniclip pool and HD youtube content im happy :lol:


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

OvlovMike said:


> Then avoid moving to an enterprise environment.
> 
> An i3-320 is far more than is absolutely necessary for Windows 7 and using most of the internet. FFS I play Team Fortress 2 on a Sony Vaio with a Centrino Duo processor running Windows 7! :wall:


Chap, I think youve got the wrong end of the stick im afraid. I would more than agree with you that if you buy the right hardware from yesteryear and dont mind a bit of hardware upgrading you can find yourself a very cheap computer that would be capable of internet browsing but thats not what everyone wants.

You clearly know/work in the world of computing. You dont seem to grasp that their are others of us that do so aswell :wave: not everybody's computing ability ends at checking our emails and browse Detailing World :thumb:


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

gr33n said:


> Ive never bought a computer just to say ive got XYZ, I buy powerful computers because I need to run forensic software like Forensic ToolKit and EnCase. Trying to clone and scan a 1TB HDD with a Core2Duo and 1GB of RAM isnt going to get my very far unfortunately.


So why buy a Mac? If the application you use is massively multithreaded and you don't use graphics then why not buy something like a HP ProLiant tower? 24 cores and 256GB RAM over a paperweight anyday.

Just because you want/need a million processor cycles yesterday, doesn't mean that the rest of the world does - most of this world's power is wasted running processor and memory clock speeds that are massively unnecessary.


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

gr33n said:


> Chap, I think youve got the wrong end of the stick im afraid. I would more than agree with you that if you buy the right hardware from yesteryear and dont mind a bit of hardware upgrading you can find yourself a very cheap computer that would be capable of internet browsing but thats not what everyone wants.
> 
> You clearly know/work in the world of computing. You dont seem to grasp that their are others of us that do so aswell :wave: not everybody's computing ability ends at checking our emails and browse Detailing World :thumb:


But you say that the minimum you'd recommend is an i3 with a load of memory and an excessively big disk? Why would that be necessary for someone who does, I dunno, what 95% of the world does? And a cheap computer from yesteryear (if I were to stick my machine up for sale, I'd get maybe £400?!) is more than capable of running every modern game... And there's best part of £4k of kit in there! I'd get more for it in bits! I'd probably get more for scrap metal!


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

OvlovMike said:


> So why buy a Mac? If the application you use is massively multithreaded and you don't use graphics then why not buy something like a HP ProLiant tower? 24 cores and 256GB RAM over a paperweight anyday.
> 
> Just because you want/need a million processor cycles yesterday, doesn't mean that the rest of the world does - most of this world's power is wasted running processor and memory clock speeds that are massively unnecessary.


I bought a Mac because ive got my i7 XPS that will quite happily run the more processor intensive tasks I want but the battery life on its woeful, 90mins its about all it can muster.

My Mac will do what I want it too all day, browse the internet, process my photos, boot up quickly, shut down quickly, more easily portable than XPS and I wanted one.

As for the HP ProLiant tower, a little OTT for my needs :lol:


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

OvlovMike said:


> But you say that the minimum you'd recommend is an i3 with a load of memory and an excessively big disk? Why would that be necessary for someone who does, I dunno, what 95% of the world does? And a cheap computer from yesteryear (if I were to stick my machine up for sale, I'd get maybe £400?!) is more than capable of running every modern game... And there's best part of £4k of kit in there! I'd get more for it in bits! I'd probably get more for scrap metal!


I dont know what 95% of the world want (maybe you could elaborate), I wouldnt consider an i3, 4GB RAM, and between 250-320GB HDD excessive for what I think people generally use computers for these days.

Maybe I am tainted by what I use computers for and consider that others need more speed than they do, IMO people do some photo editing, they want to watch HD youtube videos, they want multiple application open at the same time and they want multi tabbed browsing and they want it to happen in a timely fashion.

You seem to have changed from talking about a £100 box of tat with 1GB of RAM to £4000 worth of computer, who's overestimating what the world needs now? :lol:


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

gr33n said:


> I dont know what 95% of the world (maybe you could elaborate), I wouldnt consider an i3, 4GB RAM, and between 250-320GB HDD excessive for what I think people generally use computers for these days.
> 
> Maybe I am tainted by what I use computers for and consider that others need more speed than they do, IMO people do some photo editing, they want to watch HD youtube videos, they want multiple application open at the same time and they want multi tabbed browsing and they want it to happen in a timely fashion.


i personally have never found a problem running a Core 2 for any of those purposes runs photoshop runs all it needs, maybe let down by the HD which is "only" 120gb oh btw 2Gb RAM and windows 7 64 bit no problems. if you wanted to get nitty then yes it does have access to network storage....to subsidize the small(er) HD. Most people dont run processor intensive tasks probably more than loading PS at times, which tbh IMO is where memory come more important as any decent processor can be strangled by that as well.

however i can def. my dell precision can beat those battery times even at a 17" screen through careful use i think i topped out about 5-6 hours which tbh for a desktop replacement aint bad.

i really dont see why some think macs are god like sometimes they are pretty much the same parts. i dont find OS X brilliant at times either (and yes before you go off and say you would not know i own 2 macs and tbh one of them sits more in bootcamp than OS X.) Just because they are not the latest processors etc. does not mean that they are rubbish (heck tbh my air is a C2D its never really a problem the only i family intel processor in our house is my imac).


----------



## DampDog (Apr 16, 2011)

Do it the other way round, see what your budget will run to, and hunt for the best deal.

I wouldn't say the system listed is "excessive" you'd build that for a reasonable price and have something that will be reasonably "future proof" for a while, that would stand upgrading as and when. You may as well stick a big HD in as they're astonishingly cheap anyway.

i3, 4GB RAM, and between 250-320GB HDD excessive for what I think people generally use computers for these days.

That said buy what suits you, not what others think suits you...


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Any chance we can stop the dick measuring contest and get back on the topic in hand?


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

Never buy a computer under the guise of 'future-proof', because frankly the only thing you're doing is pissing money up a wall. Nobody can predict what we're going to do with computers in the near future - Microsoft are talking about 128-bit computing, people are trying to reduce their equipment costs so are pushing back against the software houses...

Frankly the industry is in chaos, with a million directions and no true trend.


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

DW58 said:


> Any chance we can stop the dick measuring contest and get back on the topic in hand?


well yes that might be a good idea! i have just had a quick nose at the prices of mac minis i5, 2gb ram and 500Gb HD. £529 but that is excluding anything else necessary to use it. now if your an apple fan then everything has to be apple so excluding monitor your already nearer £700 i think a PC works out more effective.

if it were me i would go down AIO they are space saving with no tower, limited cables etc. etc.


----------



## GR33N (Apr 5, 2009)

DW58 said:


> Any chance we can stop the dick measuring contest and get back on the topic in hand?


Fair enough. Ive written a reply the last few posts, but in the interest of moving on, I wont bother posting.


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Had a similar dilemma almost every time I buy a new computer!

Stuck with laptops so I can wirelessly use stuff like i-player all over the house (our office is at home).

Currently on a Macbook Pro 13 with the i5 processor and a handy portable subwoofer with a Western Digital 500GB external drive slaved to Time Machine.

I will never buy a Windows laptop again (after having many). It's not infallible - it still crashes occasionally, still freezes but overall it's about a billion times better and runs Office fine too.

Maybe not ideal for a "power" user but I'm not one.


----------



## Leemack (Mar 6, 2009)

I've upgraded to a PC (yesterday actually)

Internet explorer/Emails and pretty much everything else decided to stop working and I did a scan this morning and found 1560 malware infections :doublesho

I now have a new pc and love it :thumb:

I won't have a laptop again


----------



## ant_s (Jan 29, 2009)

DW58 said:


> Any chance we can stop the dick measuring contest and get back on the topic in hand?


Lol may be good, every computer thread now seem's to turn into PC vs Mac.

I know jack crap about different aspects of what makes a good computer, my HP laptop does fine for me, now idea on spec lol.

Viper, do you find yourself sitting in the same place with your laptop? I sit in my bedroom 90% of the time, and when I do move it's just because I hvae the option to, I don't think i'd miss being able to move if I had a desktop.


----------

