Asus' ROG G501 all-aluminum ultra-slim notebook with 960m

[Deletive]

One of these or 2 Macbook airs?
 

 

It also has a body that won't stain so bad from fingerprints, undoubtedly better battery life, slightly thinner body and it doesn't have the gamer aesthetic. In the US, a 16GB/256GB/i7 3.4GHz boost 15" MacBook Pro Retina costs $2000, so you're getting a little bit less performance for the money. I'd still rather put my money on a current-gen gaming laptop though, not something that's trying to be what it's not (like the G501.)

 

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

 

Nice  13k posts.  

[Misanthrope]

Because it has a 4k display and a 960M maybe? They can market it however they want, but it's still not a gaming product.

Right, that makes sense, let's market this non gamer laptop as a gamer laptop, we'll piss off gamers AND we'll make sure the target audience doesn't even knows about the ridiculously juvenile gamer laptop that's actually for designers.

Or just maybe, the people in charge of the specs we're fucking idiots, which is more likely?

[clementk]

lol 15.6 screen at 4k ??? This is so funny windows is crap with scaling and i already don't like the scaling on my 10 inc windows 8.1 tablet and that is a 1920x1200 screen ? Just think how horrible it will look on 15.6 and if you have to use scaling you lose the point of running 4k . That laptop would have been much better with 1080 or 1440p screen. the 4k is a wast.

[Commander Llama]

Really, really like the slick design, but damn it is really expensive.  I feel like it may have some trouble selling to some, since laptop gamers can find a more focused laptop with better performance at that price, and content consumers can just... not spend $2,000 to watch videos and click icons.

[GeneralTheoryOfBadassery]

@Asus please make one around 1000$ with 960m ...

[DomClancy]

Am I missing something, he compares it to the Razer Blade 2015 but hasn't released a review of that gaming laptop yet. Isn't that a bit of a fumble?

[Higgl3]

A 960m with 4 GB for a 4k display? Sounds like a bad idea..

I don't get why folks hate on 4k displays in semigaming ultrabooks.

 

People rave about higher than 1080p displays in ultrabooks with integrated graphics, (e.g. the dell xps 13, the carbon x1, pretty much any Asus zenbook) but as soon as you stick a 960m in there (a massive performance boost) everyone goes; "What are you thinking? a 960m can't drive a 4k display!"

 

I get what people are saying, YES a 960m cant run lots of games at 4k. but IMO that's just dumb. MOST DESKTOPS CANT RUN GAMES AT 4K

 

The 4k in these laptops was never intended so that you can run crysis 3 at ultra in 4k.

 

The 4k is there because it looks amazing for everything else, because believe it or not, people use computers for things other than just games

 

4k also has the bonus over 3k or QHD displays that you can run games at the reasonable mobile gaming resolution of 1080p whilst maintaining a crisp look that's often unachievable when running at non native resolutions due to the fact that it scales by the nice even integer multiple of 2.

 

 

Sorry to go full rant on you. It's not you in particular that I'm ranting at, it's just a general theme which I've seen in a lot of comments here and in Linus's video which has continued to irk me.

 

 

tl;dr IDK why >1080p resolutions are praised in ultrabooks with integrated graphics, and ridiculed in laptops which actually have some graphical horsepower. it seems incongruous.

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯