I guess the question comes down to Lenovo LOQ vs HP Victus, as virtually everything is better on the HP Victus. This was a no-brainer, right?
Returning: LOQ 16 (Paid $737.99 - $81.18 Rakuten Cashback)
- 7640HS
- RTX 4050
- 8GB DDR5 5600
- 512GB QLC SSD
- 16", 1920x1200, IPS, 144hz, 350 Nits
- 4-Cell 60Wh
- WiFi 6
Purchased: Victus 16.1 (Paid $769.99 w/ Upgrades - $77.00 Rakuten Cashback)
- 7640HS (Same)
- RTX 4050 (Same)
- 16GB DDR5 5600 (Better)
- 512GB TLC SSD (Better)
- 16.1", 1920x1080, IPS, 144Hz, 300 Nits (Worse)
- 6-Cell 83Wh (Better)
- WiFi 6E (Better)
I wouldn’t have done it. The screen is the part you interact with every single time you ever use the laptop, IMO it’s the most important part to be as nice to use as possible. I’d rather upgrade the ram myself later on and have the nice LCD than have more ram out of the box with a worse screen.
The wifi, if you don’t have 6E in your house, is a non-issue.
The battery is nice…but niether is getting genuinely great battery life given they’re gaming laptops, so I’d still stick with the better LCD over the better battery.
Looks like they are both 45%NTSC. So, resolution difference aside, the only difference is the Victus has 50 less Nits. That being said, I typically run my screens dimmer than others out of preference so that doesn’t bother me.
I do have 6E. The upgrade from 6 to 6E was $10. I would have upgraded it in the LOQ anyway.
I’ll probably have it plugged in when I’m using it. I bought it because I travel a lot for work. My girlfriend will probably use it when I’m home for basic productivity so I chose the $20 upgrade for the battery.
That’s the important part of your post that makes that IMO worth it.