Honestly, you should only buy a laptop if you need it to be portable. If you don't need the portability, it's better to get a powerful desktop. I'm saying this because u stated that u have a monitor. Which is not portable, which tells us u don’t need portability.
Some of us do need portability by day, but in the evening when you get home it's nice to plug in to a large detailed screen and give your eyes a rest @@wezh6808
@@wezh6808I'm currently at that exact dilemma. I have a 3 yeat old rog g15 that is still serviceable for anything other than gaming (plugged in) and battery life. I'm planning to get a cheaper notebook, probably zenbook, vivobook, or ideapad lineups and spend the rest for a decent desktop.
@@wezh6808 Maybe he does need portability sometimes, but not always. In my case, would love to have a desktop, but I live abroad in a university dorm, so I don't that option, even a external display would be hard to have, so I need a good screen in my laptop
I don't know man, 1200p in a 14" is already higher ppi of a 4k 27", not sure how an even higher res can make a meaningful difference. Besides, if one actually uses the laptop for many hours a day I would anyway go for a nice matte screen which is much much better on the eyes (and kinda works against higher res)
On a relatively smaller laptop (like my current one) I'd choose battery life. Personally, I think the higher resolution would only be worth it for much larger laptop screens, or desktop monitors
@JustJoshTech What is the battery life of the notebook with the highest resolution if you reduce the resolution in the Windows settings? If both notebooks have the same resolution settings, do both notebooks have the same battery life? Could you please test this? What is the cause of the safe power consumption at higher resolution? Is it the computing power of the GPU/CPU or is it the display? Do AMD GPUs/CPUs have the same problem with high power consumption at higher resolution? Or do AMD GPUs work better and more energy-efficiently?
I would prefer it on smaller screens. I have a 15.6 inch old laptop with an even lower resolution but don't really mind it or even notice it a lot of the time
I don't trust reported battery percentages. Would be ideal to run this test with both laptops until they died, that would be the most accurate measure of battery life.
@@JustJoshTech that's great news! Because for instance even when it was new, I noticed my 2021 XPS 13" was going through the last 20% of battery faster than the upper range. Unfortunately reported drainage is not linear
Does it comes OLED and Buttery smooth 2K 165Hz panel. My 3 year old laptop have have it . 4k laptops arent worth the clarity for a small display. 1440p is a standard for gaming now.
Defeinitely battery life, at home at have 4k monitor and if I want to work around the house i have a 2160p Surface Book 3 laptop. For on the go it's a 1350p thinkpad X1 nano
Battery life factors (ordered by importance from highest to lowest): Battery capacity (preferably 99Wh) Screen type (preferably LCD screen) Processor manufacture (preferably latest AMD cpu) Screen resolution (preferably 1k panel) Processor power (preferably mid-tier e.g. intel i7/amd ryzen7) If all options right, a typical daily office use will give you ~11-12 hours of battery life on a single charge on Windows OS.
@@JustJoshTechwould be an interesting video (how gpu scaling vs number of pixels affect battery life) Would be nice if you do a detailed one comparing both intel and AMD integrated graphics, and interpolation vs integer scaling ...
The main difference is refresh rate, not clarity. Until we get variable refresh rate screens in laptops battery life will suffer, but I would rather live under a plug than return to a 60Hz panel
I think 3k is a perfect resolution, it allows you to have retina-like 4to1 pixel mapping while being less demanding than 4k. For refresh rate 60 is manageable when on battery, and higher is nice to have when plugged in.
@@vmafarah9473 retina is a pixel density that from a reasonable distance doesn't allow you to distinguish pixels even with perfect vision. By apple's calculations, on a 13-14 inch display around 3k is retina, while also allowing for perfect integer scaling for a usable workspace
Atleast run it on the same refresh rate to make it fair, why blame it all on just the resolution? I know there will still be a difference, but it won't be as big as what we've seen just now.
Depends on the task. For Graphically intensive tasks, you will save battery life since the CPU/GPU will have to drive less pixels. However you panel is still high res, and for oleds that means for pixels -> more LEDs -> less battery regardless of what these pixels display
Resolution is king for me, hence why I went with an M3 pro. Best of both worlds. My gaming PC is Windows, but for these laptops, Apple is hard to beat. Samsung is also extremely good at making tablets, so I use the Tab S9 11" it has great battery life, pen, and excellent resolution. Unless you are trying to save money in 2024, you can get the best of both worlds, but it will cost ya if you don't shop around.
I believe so. Perhaps not identical but close enough. You have to upscale, interpolate, and still power each individual oled pixel on the higher rez pannel.
Does putting a 120hz to 60hz actually slow the refresh rate in the screen itself or does it still have 120hz but only changes displayed information every 2 refreshes. Therfore making this test meaningless
Nothing...save more money until you can spend at least €1,000 to avoid cheaping out on such an important purchase. Believe me, the quality and longevity of these inexpensive laptops is not worth the savings and headache you'll face later on
@@houssamalucad753 Not with the price tho. You can get M1 Pro 16 inch at around $1000-$1200 while the 15 inch Air starts at higher price yet offer worse battery life, performance, screen resolution, 1/2 RAM, 1/2 storage, and worse speakers.
Im always going for the battery life. I don't need clarity on the move and I have a 4k monitor at home.
Honestly, you should only buy a laptop if you need it to be portable. If you don't need the portability, it's better to get a powerful desktop. I'm saying this because u stated that u have a monitor. Which is not portable, which tells us u don’t need portability.
Some of us do need portability by day, but in the evening when you get home it's nice to plug in to a large detailed screen and give your eyes a rest @@wezh6808
@@wezh6808I'm currently at that exact dilemma. I have a 3 yeat old rog g15 that is still serviceable for anything other than gaming (plugged in) and battery life.
I'm planning to get a cheaper notebook, probably zenbook, vivobook, or ideapad lineups and spend the rest for a decent desktop.
@@wezh6808 Maybe he does need portability sometimes, but not always. In my case, would love to have a desktop, but I live abroad in a university dorm, so I don't that option, even a external display would be hard to have, so I need a good screen in my laptop
@@rafaelepifanio3304 I see
To be fair the difference is not that huge, the resolution is though. If you need it to work 24/7, I'm sure you can find a plug.
1k vs 2k is a huge difference if you're staring at your laptop for 8 hours+
I don't know man, 1200p in a 14" is already higher ppi of a 4k 27", not sure how an even higher res can make a meaningful difference. Besides, if one actually uses the laptop for many hours a day I would anyway go for a nice matte screen which is much much better on the eyes (and kinda works against higher res)
@@Yayaloy9, at 14" it is not that big.
1920 x 1200 is sharp enough given the screen's size and how far away from the screen we tend to be.
The lower resolution laptop also had a lower frame rate, I think that lead to this outcome.
They said they tested at 60Hz in the short at 0:16
On a relatively smaller laptop (like my current one) I'd choose battery life. Personally, I think the higher resolution would only be worth it for much larger laptop screens, or desktop monitors
I prefer a lighter laptop and more battery life over a higher resolution screen for quick on the go jobs.
Resolution easily. The key is making sure the battery gets to at least 5 or 6 hours with proper use.
the laptop with the higher resolution panel is still better than my laptop with a 1080p panel
@JustJoshTech
What is the battery life of the notebook with the highest resolution if you reduce the resolution in the Windows settings?
If both notebooks have the same resolution settings, do both notebooks have the same battery life?
Could you please test this?
What is the cause of the safe power consumption at higher resolution?
Is it the computing power of the GPU/CPU or is it the display?
Do AMD GPUs/CPUs have the same problem with high power consumption at higher resolution? Or do AMD GPUs work better and more energy-efficiently?
Nice work, Josh 👍yes, if you want long battery life, go for either Swift Go 16 or Swift Go 14, both are very good for longer battery life.
Can you run this test with MacBook Pro
I would prefer it on smaller screens. I have a 15.6 inch old laptop with an even lower resolution but don't really mind it or even notice it a lot of the time
What about running a 1800p screen on 1080p?
I don't trust reported battery percentages. Would be ideal to run this test with both laptops until they died, that would be the most accurate measure of battery life.
We are planning to do this in the future. We need to onboard some new team members so we have capactiy
@@JustJoshTech that's great news! Because for instance even when it was new, I noticed my 2021 XPS 13" was going through the last 20% of battery faster than the upper range. Unfortunately reported drainage is not linear
@@JustJoshTech What happens when you run the test with the higher resolution laptop hardware but with the software settings at the lower resolution?
Can you also test laptops for coding type pf test
Clarity > battery
For me yes
1080 p on a small 14 inch is good enough. If it were 16 inch than yeah for for the 2.8 k
Great to know. Thanks!
I would choose a 69k super Oled proplus ohio resolution screen 😊
The difference in refresh rate is much more steep than a difference in resolution. I would prefer frame rate any day.
I would choose a macbook, so I can have great battery life AND an excellent screen
Does it comes OLED and Buttery smooth 2K 165Hz panel. My 3 year old laptop have have it . 4k laptops arent worth the clarity for a small display. 1440p is a standard for gaming now.
The Zenbook 14 is a competitor to the MacBook Air and that laptop has a 60 hz IPS screen💀
@@vmafarah9473miniLED QHD 120Hz yeah
Higher resolution without question.
Defeinitely battery life, at home at have 4k monitor and if I want to work around the house i have a 2160p Surface Book 3 laptop. For on the go it's a 1350p thinkpad X1 nano
Battery over almost everything for me.
Battery life factors (ordered by importance from highest to lowest):
Battery capacity (preferably 99Wh)
Screen type (preferably LCD screen)
Processor manufacture (preferably latest AMD cpu)
Screen resolution (preferably 1k panel)
Processor power (preferably mid-tier e.g. intel i7/amd ryzen7)
If all options right, a typical daily office use will give you ~11-12 hours of battery life on a single charge on Windows OS.
Can't you just get a laptop with a high resolution screen and lower the resolution whenever you need more battery life 🤷♂️
I dont believe that works. How about a follow up short with that?
@@JustJoshTech definitely gonna watch that. I really want to know how the screen actually affects the battery.
@@JustJoshTechwould be an interesting video (how gpu scaling vs number of pixels affect battery life)
Would be nice if you do a detailed one comparing both intel and AMD integrated graphics, and interpolation vs integer scaling ...
that method would apply to Gaming Laptop or NOT?
The main difference is refresh rate, not clarity. Until we get variable refresh rate screens in laptops battery life will suffer, but I would rather live under a plug than return to a 60Hz panel
Battery for me easily. I wouldn't notice that much difference in that size of a screen anyway.
I think 3k is a perfect resolution, it allows you to have retina-like 4to1 pixel mapping while being less demanding than 4k. For refresh rate 60 is manageable when on battery, and higher is nice to have when plugged in.
what is retina in a laptop? is a it a scientific term or a fancy marketing tech name ?
@@vmafarah9473 retina is a pixel density that from a reasonable distance doesn't allow you to distinguish pixels even with perfect vision.
By apple's calculations, on a 13-14 inch display around 3k is retina, while also allowing for perfect integer scaling for a usable workspace
@@vmafarah9473 It's the display "technology" dubbed by apple as high enough resolution to make individual pixels imperceptible.
I don't understand the benefits of a non standard resolution. Do you see a difference between 1200 or 1600 display when watching a 1080 movie?
The ui and text in it will be much sharper
Atleast run it on the same refresh rate to make it fair, why blame it all on just the resolution?
I know there will still be a difference, but it won't be as big as what we've seen just now.
We did run it on the same refresh rate. We stated that in the short on screen
Sir please test of we can lower the resolution of 2.8K to 1200p and can we get better BATTERY LIFE or not?
yeah I hope he will do that
Depends on the task. For Graphically intensive tasks, you will save battery life since the CPU/GPU will have to drive less pixels. However you panel is still high res, and for oleds that means for pixels -> more LEDs -> less battery regardless of what these pixels display
And refresh rate ignored again....
Resolution is king for me, hence why I went with an M3 pro. Best of both worlds. My gaming PC is Windows, but for these laptops, Apple is hard to beat. Samsung is also extremely good at making tablets, so I use the Tab S9 11" it has great battery life, pen, and excellent resolution.
Unless you are trying to save money in 2024, you can get the best of both worlds, but it will cost ya if you don't shop around.
Wouldn't the battery life be identical if the higher resolution panel is set to lower resolution?
I believe so. Perhaps not identical but close enough. You have to upscale, interpolate, and still power each individual oled pixel on the higher rez pannel.
69%... Nice 👍🏾
Does putting a 120hz to 60hz actually slow the refresh rate in the screen itself or does it still have 120hz but only changes displayed information every 2 refreshes. Therfore making this test meaningless
I have a legion 5 pro, i just something with good battery 😢
still, for coding will take higher res
one thing is missing - what if you set lower res on high res screen - how it will change power consumption :)
Shouldn’t change at all. All pixels still need to be illuminated. Only gpu usage decreases so maybe slightly less power
Hopefully X-Elite will solve this problem for good.
3.2k
What laptop would you recommend for a tight budget ( around 500-600€)
Nothing...save more money until you can spend at least €1,000 to avoid cheaping out on such an important purchase. Believe me, the quality and longevity of these inexpensive laptops is not worth the savings and headache you'll face later on
Definitely not intel would be my first criteria.
i will choose apple macbooks
Battery > resolution.
just use 60hz
69% Nice
High res and big fat battery life M1 Pro 16 inches please. No need to compromise 👌
Heavy and bulky af though, the 15 air is a much better form factor if one doesn't need the extra power
@@houssamalucad753 Not with the price tho. You can get M1 Pro 16 inch at around $1000-$1200 while the 15 inch Air starts at higher price yet offer worse battery life, performance, screen resolution, 1/2 RAM, 1/2 storage, and worse speakers.
So to get better battery life, get low resolution? GENIUS
Lol get a macbook and then a windows desktop
What nonsense is this
stupid and useless comparison