How much CPU power do I need?
For a while, there was a line of thinking that said you couldn't buy a bad laptop. Processors were more powerful, technology had improved, and it was hard to put a foot wrong.
This was a good theory until Windows Vista replaced XP as the standard operating system and suddenly cheap $800 laptops seemed as though they were running finite element analysis computations instead of ripping a CD to iTunes.
Many factors determine how smoothly your new laptop will run, including how many free software utilities the manufacturer has installed, whether it's Centrino or Centrino 2, and whether there's a solid state disk (SSD) or hard disk (HDD) included.
But above all else, the most important factors are still the CPU, operating system, and the amount of RAM. Getting a strong combination of all three is the key to buying a laptop that isn't sluggish.
Our benchmarking has shown there are three distinct levels of performance you can expect above and beyond netbooks (which aren't really suitable for Vista).
An overall 2D performance score of 0.9 in our benchmarks will give you acceptable basic Vista performance - that is, the laptop will run smoothly, and let you open multiple applications without slowing down drastically; push it harder by opening lots of windows, or by doing multiple tasks simultaneously, such as scanning your hard disk for virus while iTunes rips music, or open a few processor-intensive apps like Photoshop, and you might notice things slow down a lot.
By comparison, the netbooks we test commonly achieve 2D performance scores of 0.39. This is enough for basic jobs like Web browsing or word processing under Windows XP, but it's not quick enough for Vista, and it will slow down drastically if you start pushing it hard by running lots of applications at once, whatever operating system you have. Keep this in mind when choosing between a netbook and a bigger, faster laptop.
The good news is that CPUs in some sub $1000 laptops are fast enough to handle the basics. A Pentium Dual Core T3400 with 2GB RAM will hit 0.9 in our benchmarks, which is acceptable for Vista though can lag when you start opening lots of applications at once.
So what's the cutoff when it comes to "acceptable performance"? Celeron will handle the absolute basics, but we'd advise against it unless your budget can't stretch to a Pentium Dual Core.
We've also tested laptops with Core 2 Duo T5500 and 1GB RAM that can run Vista, but they aren't ideal - with a DVD playing and multiple browser tabs open they get noticeably slower.
The bottom line for Vista is a Pentium Dual Core, or better yet, somewhere around the Core 2 Duo T5600 mark with 2GB RAM, which will cope but will struggle a bit when you ask it to do anything strenuous.
The sweet spot for performance and price are faster chips like the Core 2 Duo T8100 and P8600, which provide smoother sailing under Vista and can achieve overall 2D scores of 1.19. This kind of performance will be snappy under Vista even when opening multiple applications.
The fastest laptops in our tests achieved 2D scores of at least 1.3 in our benchmarks, which is what you should be looking for if you plan on doing serious video or digital photography editing or extreme gaming (which we test using separate 3D benchmarks).
For this, you'll need a Core 2 Duo T9600 or T9400. For the very best possible performance, step up to Core 2 Extreme or the ultimate: a quad core processor.
When more money equals less speed
The choice of CPU is especially critical if you're buying an ultraportable - some of these tiny thin and light laptops cost more than $3000, but have benchmark scores worse than a cheap Pentium Dual Core laptop.
Of course the objective here isn't speed, it's battery life and size - tiny low voltage chips gives your battery a better chance of lasting longer, and these laptops are much lighter.
There are a few CPUs you'll encounter in ultraportable laptops, some with lower clock speeds than a netbook, and the results vary.
Laptops with Core 2 Duo SU9400 and the lower clocked SL7100 perform capably with Windows Vista, though both can get too slow running multiple applications or opening lots of browser tabs. Make sure you try before you buy.
How much RAM?
Our RAM testing last year showed that 512MB RAM isn't enough. While you can get away with 1GB, especially if you're running Windows XP, 2GB is the sweet spot for laptops with Windows Vista.
Netbooks are also hamstrung here, with most models like Dell's Inspiron Mini 12 only letting you use a maximum of 1GB. There are some, like the ASUS N10, that offer 2GB, but they were in the minority at the time of writing. Also keep in mind that 4GB is only useful in a laptop that has a 64-bit version of Windows.
Windows XP vs Vista
The choice of OS has a greater impact the lower the laptop spec. We've already established that a sub $1000 laptop is capable of running Vista. If your laptop has a Core 2 Duo T5600 or higher with 2GB RAM, then it'll handle the basics ok.
Netbooks running Vista can be very slow. Dell, ASUS and HP are three vendors pushing Vista netbooks, but the performance isn't good. As a comparison, we found the ASUS N10 with Windows Vista and 2GB RAM to be less responsive than the ASUS S101 which we loaded with Windows XP and 1GB RAM.
On the other side of the coin, Vista has better management features for switching and customising power saving modes, and more accessible sleep/hibernation features. If you're looking at a tablet with a stylus, Vista also has better handwriting recognition.
ATI vs Nvidia
Graphics vendors seem to be perpetually on the edge of something so epic in scope that the likes of Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang promise to open cans of "whoop-ass" on Intel with their ability to make screen visuals breathtaking.
The first question is whether you even need discrete or dedicated graphics - that is, graphics chips with their own dedicated RAM, unlike integrated graphics which share main memory with the CPU and won't get you far for playing games.
The fun begins once you hit the $1500 mark for laptops, where you'll see ATI and Nvidia badges aplenty. The claims made by these two rivals are many and broad - but they boil down to games, video and application performance.
Laptop graphics can be grouped into three grades once you move beyond the dedicated Intel variety (ok for Windows, not ok for the latest games) - faster non-Intel integrated graphics, "mainstream" dedicated graphics, and high performance.
At the low end, integrated graphics such as Nvidia's 9400M (the GPU used in the Macbook Air) won't handle the latest 3D games well, but there are a number of other payoffs beyond gaming. Extra muscle helps handle Vista's 3D Aero visuals.
Certain applications like Photoshop CS4 can also make use of graphics chips, meaning your CPU is free for other things. In the near future Apple's next operating system, Snow Leopard, will make better use of onboard graphics.
Picking a laptop with an ATI or Nvidia sticker should also get you better performance if you're playing videos - by offloading the job of handling video processing to a dedicated ATI/Nvidia chip, more CPU power is available to run other tasks (such as when an anti-virus scan kicks in).
Intel set the cat among the pigeons by introducing Blu-ray decoding with Centrino 2, though AMD and Nvidia claim better performance. They also claim better picture quality.
Step up to a "mainstream" graphics chip like ATI's Mobility Radeon HD4570 or an Nvidia PureVideo-capable part, and you'll start to see advanced video features like HDMI output and upscaling, picture in picture, and support for the latest Blu-ray features like BD-Live.
For serious gaming, you'll need to go higher again to a "performance" chip like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4800 series or Nvidia 9800M GTS for playable frame rates.
Switchable or hybrid graphics is also worth keeping in mind - this gives you the best of both worlds, letting you switch between integrated graphics for better battery life, or dedicated graphics for faster performance.
Battery life
We've seen many near-perfect laptop configurations let down by poor battery life. It goes without saying that 6-cell batteries are the better choice. Also, look for laptops that come with an extra battery - you'd be surprised how many models don't have a second battery as an optional extra.
Predicting how long your new laptop will last on batteries is something of a fine art, but there are a few important things to keep in mind. Low power machines like netbooks and small Core 2 Duo laptops with 13in screens or smaller without powerful graphics should last longer. The parts of the system that consume the most power are the display, hard drive and processor - see our article on getting better battery life for your laptop (PC Authority, May 2009).
Second, don't believe what you see on brochures and advertisements about battery life. Battery scores advertised by laptop makers have been grossly inflated for years.
We don't have room to go into detail of what's wrong with advertised battery life, but in the past we've seen laptops advertised as having 11 hour battery life, that only last for five or six hours.
Mac vs PC
The decision to buy a PC or a Mac deserves its own separate feature. While we don't have room to ignite the Mac vs PC debate in full, suffice it to say that Macbooks were strong sellers last year, and with good reason - their sleek hardware, including a new unibody chassis, and excellent software for photo editing, movie and music making, all add up to a superb system.
Windows laptops have many things in their favour. One is gaming - high performance ATI and Nvidia chips make Windows laptops a no-brainer for serious DirectX10-based gaming. New MacBook Pro models perform so-so, chalking up 45fps on low settings in Crysis, but they're not a patch on the newest - and most expensive - SLI-enabled Windows laptops.
The other thing Apple lacks (at the time of wrtiting) is a cheap sub $1000 netbook. Of course there's good reason for this - Steve Jobs is reported to have said Apple doesn't know how to make a $500 laptop that's not "a piece of junk". We beg to differ - netbooks do a good job at the basics.
Then there's price. At the time of writing the white 13in Macbook started at $1649, and 15in Macbook Pros at $3199. You can certainly get a lot cheaper by choosing a Windows laptop.
Still, we think comparing Macbooks and Windows laptops on price is to some extent missing the point of choosing Apple, which provides a different way of working. If you can't afford a Mac, then get a PC, but if you can afford both, then price shouldn't be the main deciding factor.
What type of wireless?
More and more laptop vendors are including integrated 3G wireless in the laptop itself. In our anecdotal tests, we found no great advantage in having a 3G module (including the modem, antenna, and SIM card slot) built into the laptop itself, other than the convenience of not carrying around a USB modem.
Major laptop providers like Dell and Toshiba offer bundled mobile broadband from the likes of Telstra and Vodafone - you should be able to change to another carrier, but it's worth checking this.
Conclusion
The best thing you can do when buying a laptop is pick a type that fits your lifestyle and way of working. Laptop performance has come a long way, but it still varies drastically, along with battery life and features. There's a perfect laptop for everyone, and hopefully we've helped you gain a better idea of yours.