Razer Blade 14 - 1080p screen? Vote!

Discussion in 'Systems' started by reloader-1, Mar 15, 2016.

?

Would you be interested in the New Razer Blade 14, but with a matte 1080p non-touch screen?

  1. Yes, I prefer it and would buy it

    36 vote(s)
    54.5%
  2. No, the QHD+ screen is fine

    25 vote(s)
    37.9%
  3. I'm not interested in the Razer Blade 14

    5 vote(s)
    7.6%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. reloader-1

    reloader-1 Well-Known Member

    They had a poorly configured 1080p version, with half the RAM that users wanted (8GB). It's no wonder it sold poorly!
     
  2. VikariousOne

    VikariousOne Well-Known Member

    Yeah. I'm guessing the 8GB of RAM was the biggest reason why sales didn't go well. Anyway, they lowered the price so I see no reason for there to be a 1080P model. Realistically, any game that can't be run at 3200x1800 is a AAA game anyway meaning it will support scaling. I don't understand the problem of a high res screen.
     
  3. reloader-1

    reloader-1 Well-Known Member

    The point is a QHD 1600p screen cannot scale down perfectly to 1080p, as it results in slightly fuzzy pixels.

    This is a gaming laptop, right? Well, if it can't play games well at 1600p, you should downscale to the next best resolution. Being that 1080p is out, that means you are left with 900p.

    In other words, we are no better than the 2013 Razer Blade, merely because of a stat that sounds good on paper and looks great while surfing the web, but is a horrible choice for a laptop squarely aimed at gamers.

    That is why I fight for 1080p.
     
    Type-0 likes this.
  4. Ugh why couldnt they just release a 4k screen so it can scale down perfectly :slightly_sad:
     
    KohPhiPhi likes this.
  5. worthymatt

    worthymatt Member

    So I just ordered the 2015 Full HD today. Here's why:

    I tried both the UHD and QHD Stealths, but here are my issues with them:12.5" screen just a hair too small for me, and for the rare app that doesn't scale it's almost inhumanely possible to navigate on either hDPI screen (though I did love the touch function which is perfect for that size). Also, a pet peeve of mine, the Chroma keyboards don't backlight the special characters (with the exception of my DealthStalker) and I work in low light half the time (though again, something I did love is the new font, and the ability to customize colors--note, set a red "night" mode as this has less negative effects on your night vision and sleep cycle, also good if doing any astrophotography). And while I think typing on the keyboard can be fast, the metallic feel and short travel make it much more effort to be accurate. Other than those very few deal-breakers for me the Stealth is fantastic.

    Now why the 2015 Full HD:
    • regardless of rumors one way or the other, I don't believe there will be a 2016 refresh. The hardware in the 2015 model is perfectly adequate to run all [most] current games on high settings at 1080p, so why upgrade it? Probably not a good investment for Razer since I suspect it is a fairly low volume SKU given the much less media attention it received than the QHD+.
    • Special characters on the keyboard are backlit, though unfortunately not in chroma or the new font. A sacrifice I will make for now. It has a high quality IPS matte screen that received decent reviews (though I agree glossy screen colors pop more). And again, I work in low light a lot so prefer the lower brightness settings of the panel (for those getting the 2016, I hope the lowest setting is below 80-90 nits now). While hDPI is sharper, virtually my entire and substantial media collection is in 1080p, so need to ever leave native resolution for gaming or movie watching.
    • Even though 4th gen CPU, it's still solid, as is the 970m. And I don't need more than 8GB of RAM for anything. Spreadsheets, surfing, gaming, streaming movies... and it can do much of this with impressive battery life. No I will not have Skylake yet, DDR4, or nVME, but I likely wouldn't notice them for my purposes anyway. I will miss TB3, but honestly want it most for ease of docking(!) so will pick it up in a couple years when I buy new.
    • While I suspect the price may come down a little more, I need a laptop now and the $400 off, The Division (which I don't care about but will enjoy just seeing how it looks and runs), Diamondback Collectors (which I'll sell because I love my Deathadder Chroma) and FL Studio license are a good enough deal for me. Plus I used some of the $400 off to get a sleeve, and a BlackWidow 2016 Stealth (with Enhancement Kit) which will match the FHD and replace my DeathStalker Chroma (sacrificing the backlit special characters on this because the DS--while good to type on--has some quality issues (flexy keyboard, wobbly/loud keys).
    So all that could potentially replace my 5yo PC, which I built to game on but now never have much time. If so I'll pair it with a nice 27" 1440p external monitor to replace my dual 22s. And I'll wait two more years for the new tech like eGPUs to mature and become more affordable, and snatch up the 2018 Blade which I'm sure will finally have a Chroma logo ;) There's my long-winded 2 cents.
     
    Type-0 likes this.
  6. Burgz

    Burgz Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]

    ... :cool_:
     
    masterplo94 likes this.
  7. masterplo94

    masterplo94 Active Member

    I completely agree, we are at a point where 1080p is the standard for low end notebooks, so people who are willing to spend at least triple that, do not want the "low end" experience. Sure, it was not perfect and could have had 16 GB of RAM but I am still not sure it would have done to well financially, for Razer. The addition of a thunderbolt 3 port, may have done the trick (assuming core compatibility). Even then, I am still not sure that it would be the correct market for a more "budget" oriented notebook, to be made by an extremely high end notebook manufacturer such as Razer, and I think when they dropped that model, it proves that theory. As well a 4K display, would have been nice, I totally agree but my guess is that will be coming in the Pascal refresh. If Pascal is as powerful as I am hoping, that will be the perfect time to have a 4K display because of the large jump in performance, that Pascal is speculated to have. So if that is the case, Razer is probably holding off on the 4K display so there is an extra incentive to purchase the Pascal refresh of the blade. Since Pascal will likely be released shortly after this iteration of the blade the 4K display will serve to be another distinguishing point between the two blade versions (my guess is this 2016 blade will be basically Razers "budget" option).
     
    _ramsey_ likes this.
  8. Brastic

    Brastic Active Member

    Here are the reasons I am going with the 2016. I do agree that the 2015 is still a great machine and $400 is real money. For me, there is no single killer feature that pushes me to the 2016, but all the improvements do add up to something great.
    • Faster SSD. For gaming, this is helpful, but for video editing it is huge. Every time the hard drives get faster the systems tend to run better. Since I have my laptops for 7+ years, having a faster hard drive now helps a lot.
    • Faster RAM. (1600MHz vs 2133MHz) I would like to see some real world test on this.
    • Skylake processor. (a bit faster, and better battery life)
    • TB3. Not only can you run a desktop GPU, but the one plug docking is really nice.
    • Charging from USB-C. I am going to get a new cell phone in May and it will also charge on USB-C. For travel, I really like the idea of bringing one charger. Plus the micro USB needs to die.
    • Chroma keyboard. (Shinny)
    • More RAM for the GPU.
    • Touchscreen. Every since getting a tablet, I find myself touching my laptop screen. For Windows 10, the touch screen is a huge improvement. Windows 10 feels like it was written for the Surface with the touch screen. Yes, you can use a mouse, but touching the screen speeds things up. The weird part for me, is that I want a touch screen for my laptops, but am against it on my monitors.
    • Slightly lighter.
    • Update chipset.
    The two big things that I really wish we could have had are the 4k screen and an SD card slot.
     
    spasmatticus likes this.
  9. .Z4x.

    .Z4x. Active Member

    Are you fully convinced that this depends on user preferences
    and not on pricing and availability of the different panel types?
    I'm not..
     
  10. GoatRenterGuy

    GoatRenterGuy New Member

    It would also be cheaper by around 400 because in the CNET reveiw they said that with the same specs the new one is 400 dollars cheaper
     
  11. Overtask

    Overtask Well-Known Member

    The majority of which are desktop monitors, a lot of people don't have the cash for 1080p+ monitors. The budget of those who buy gaming laptops is normally a bit higher as gaming laptops frequently cost more than double over the average gaming desktop and therefore cater to a different segment. I'm sure that if everyone could afford it they would all happily roll a desktop with a 4K screen and a GPU that could support it.
     
    .Z4x. likes this.
  12. .Z4x.

    .Z4x. Active Member

    Amen.
     
    Overtask likes this.
  13. worthymatt

    worthymatt Member

    I agree with all of this, and if I had the need for the enhancements $400 more would absolutely be worth it for them (real world differences for me would likely be nil). It obviously just comes down to each individual's needs, so in that respect I appreciate that Razer has given us several options (none that are probably perfect, as each person's exact ideal configuration varies, but at least they've tried to listen to customers and strike a balance for the majority).
     
  14. Overtask

    Overtask Well-Known Member

    The difficulty for Razer is achieving efficient economies of scale as Razer just does not sell as many laptops as Dell for example who are therefore able to achieve greater flexibility and splitting the production line would further exacerbate this issue for Razer. You need to remember that Razer is still a business and they need to remain profitable so as @spasmatticus said they may not be able to offer everyone's ideal configuration.
     
  15. VikariousOne

    VikariousOne Well-Known Member

    Well I disagree about this. The 2013 Razer Blade's screen was not criticized because of it's resolution. Instead it was criticized for using one of the worst TN panels on the market. The reason a 1600x900 resolution was alright is because at 14 inches it still held a very respectable 131 PPI and gaming really isn't a problem in that scenario. The new Blades have a much better screen and the color reproduction along with viewing angles are much improved. Yes, a 4K screen might be slightly better, but I fail to see the point of 1080P considering the difference between 900P and 1080P being pretty much negligible in a screen of this size.
     
  16. TrueLightbringer

    TrueLightbringer Active Member

    To be honest, if this is with regards to the 2017 refresh of the Blade, we will probably have the Pascal/Polaris version of the 970m, which may very well be the sweet spot where it can run games at QHD+ just as well as the 970m can run games at 1080p.

    Of course, then there is that big problem of whether Razer will decide to 'push the envelope', and go ahead with a 4K screen as a standard/higher-end model, causing this issue all over again.
     
  17. Swanka

    Swanka Active Member

    At least 4K scales to 1080p well.
     
    Overtask likes this.
  18. PastelGraywatchsharp937

    PastelGraywatchsharp937 Active Member

    I'm really happy with the 2016 release. I am easily tempted, but I feel no compulsion at all to buy the 2016 blade :D
     
  19. TrueLightbringer

    TrueLightbringer Active Member

    Hold on, let me unpack this abit. So you like the 2016 Blade, but don't see the need to purchase it, despite being someone who is easily tempted?
     
  20. PastelGraywatchsharp937

    PastelGraywatchsharp937 Active Member

    I mean that I "like it" the way that if it was a more impressive release, I'd probably have to buy it--and I really don't need to waste the money. So I like that it's basically the same as the blade I just sold. :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Sign In with Razer ID >


Don't have a Razer ID yet?
Get Razer ID >