Laptop vs Desktop vs Small Form Factor

[ZLoth]

The question is... laptop, desktop, or small form factor computer?

Maybe it's because I'm either old-school or a gamer, but I prefer to build assemble my own desktops. Perhaps it's the control of selecting my own components, the easy fixability and upgradability of my computer, or that it looks neat. I build two new computers in the past year. One of them is a extremely high-end and expensive gaming computer, the other a moderate media computer with some recycled components and two BluRay drives. (Do you know how hard it is to find a case with USB 3.0 front panel ports and 5¼" drive bays?)

But, if someone comes up to me and says "Hey, can you build me a computer?", my answer is a hard no. This is partially because I don't have the time, but also because I feel that the modern-day processor with the built-in GPU is more than powerful enough for everyday users such as browsing the web, playing videos, email, and using office applications. I tend to recommend a laptop over even a small form factor computer because of the portability, plus you can still hook up a monitor via HDMI and regular size keyboard and mouse via USB. The big performance factors is just having enough memory (16GB minimum) and enough storage space (at least 500GB SSD or m.2/NVMe). They even sell gaming laptops if you don't mind spending the coin, but I tend to shy away from them due to the short time (3-4 years) before technical obsolescence.

I also don't rule out the small form factor (SFF) computers. I'm tempted to find 2-3 cheap used ones and set them up as Linux computers or test servers... if I don't set up a virtualization box first.

[kalvado]

Screwdriver vs hammer vs drill
If your job is to drive long nails in, screwdriver is useless. Screws hammered in usually still hold, though.

[MikeTheActuary]

Use the correct tool for the job.

For most home computing uses, the small computers are fine.

If you need mobility, or if you lack the space to leave a monitor, keyboard, etc. out "permanently", then you get a laptop.

Desktops/towers are the best choice if you need real performance.  Most people don't, but gaming enthusiasts, artists/musicians who produce their works on/with computers, etc. might.

[kphoger]

The trouble nowadays seems to be that towers are going away in favor of AIO computers.

[Pink Jazz]

For desktops, I prefer to build my own, even not for serious gaming. I get more of a choice of what components I want.

For laptops, I prefer to have one with upgradable RAM and storage.

[Bruce]

I've got an aging desktop setup that I'll need to eventually replace to keep playing somewhat modern games and a modern ultralight laptop that I use mainly for writing and consumption. The latter has some limited cooling abilities because of its form factor, so I've had to shy away from using it for anything too insensitive. Gaming laptops have the power but the mouse is enough to deter use.

I'm about to crack open my laptop and quadruple its storage capacity, so fingers crossed. The RAM might be next.

[bm7]

I've always primarily used desktops, I built my current gaming desktop a few years ago. Laptops have their uses, but for me I'm rarely in a situation where I need a laptop instead of using my smartphone. The biggest issue with laptops in my experience is their unreliability. My parents use laptops, and in the past 15 years they have probably owned 8 different laptops, buying a new one whenever the old one quit working. In that same time I've used 3 desktops which have never had any bigger problems than a bad RAM stick.

I don't have much use for small form factor PCs, but if you don't do much more than use the internet, they're a great cheaper option. I'm not sure how reliable they are in the long-term, but even if you had to buy a new one for $200 every year, that's a lot cheaper than buying laptops.

[bwana39]

I have a ten+-year-old I5 Lenovo Laptop. It is quite a beast. I still use it a little but it works really well for what it is.

On the other hand, I have an I-9 that was a rocket 4 years ago. I was going to reuse my old case, but the new motherboard was the wrong format. I have a nearly 15 year old 1.5KW power supply in it.  I chose storage (4tb HDD) versus speed (500GB ssd). I wish I hadn't.

[ZLoth]

The trouble nowadays seems to be that towers are going away in favor of AIO computers.

That's just it. When I was first building PCs in the early 1990s, there were multiple functionalities that required a separate expansion card, whether it be the hard drive controller (we were on IDE back then, although SCSI was also out there), video card, network card, dial-up modem (I preferred external modems over serial port), or sound card. Over time, more and more of the functionality got moved to the motherboard to the point where the only thing you were using the expansion slot for was the video card, and some of the peripherals that required an expansion card moved over to USB. And, along the way, some of the ports including serial, parallel, and PS/2 ports for the keyboard and mouse were obsoleted out.

The GPUs that have been included in the CPUs are, in my opinion, pretty good, especially in comparison with the integrated graphics of 20 years ago unless you are into gaming. As an example, I have a dedicated computer for just two things: Displaying weather graphics on a 4K television and the conversion of media discs from my physical library to my media server. This was initially done from my former daily driver, a Intel i7-4790K built in 2014 and then a AMD 7700X. Despite the major performance improvement between the two CPUs (at 5-7ⅹ improved conversion based upon handbrake framerate), both were pretty good at displaying the thunderstorm maps. Yet, I have to say that my AMD processor much more than what the "average" non-gamer person needs.

I chose storage (4tb HDD) versus speed (500GB ssd). I wish I hadn't.

I can understand the need for large amounts of storage. That's why I built a TrueNAS server a few years ago and use it for "slow storage". However, have you seen the price of SSD storage nowadays? According to NewEgg for 2.5" SSDs as of this writing:

• 500 512 GB - starts at $21
• 1 TB - starts at $33
• 2 TB - starts at $61
• 4 TB - starts at $140
• 8 TB - starts at $390

Of course, there is also performance associated with the price, especially with writes, so expect to pay a little more. Having said that, at those prices, you really[/li][/list] shouldn't be using a HDD as your main system drive anymore especially in terms of performance.

[MikieTimT]

I'm in the IT business for a living, and I rarely build towers anymore, except niche use cases.  That being said, my son built his own from recycled parts from decommissioned towers and strategic parts from the nearest MicroCenter, but paid for them all with his chore money and built it himself under my supervision.  Because all teenage boys want to do with computers at home anyway is gaming.  Makes it harder to travel with, though.

Most current laptops have powerful enough processing if they're core i5 or the equivalent AMD APU for light gaming as well as pretty much any other use case.  I steer pretty much everyone to laptops/convertible tablets unless they have a specific need for something else.  Even gaming can be done on a laptop with higher end refresh rates/resolution on external monitors using the Thunderbolt3/4 port and an EGPU dock with a desktop GPU installed with the external monitor connected to that.  Gives you the best of both worlds, although you do leave a little performance on the table over having the GPU on the PCI bus directly like a desktop allows for.

[kkt]

I like towers because if something breaks it's easy to open up the case and replace the broken part.  Even when the motherboard was obsolete, you could usually keep the case and power supply.  My needs were usually pretty modest and I could buy a 4-year-old Dell from the university surplus store, max out the memory on the motherboard, put in a new hard drive, install FreeBSD or Linux, and be good to go.

[ZLoth]

That being said, my son built his own from recycled parts from decommissioned towers and strategic parts from the nearest MicroCenter, but paid for them all with his chore money and built it himself under my supervision.  Because all teenage boys want to do with computers at home anyway is gaming.  Makes it harder to travel with, though.

Good for him. Hopefully, he has also picked up the knack for troubleshooting those computers as well.

Even when the motherboard was obsolete, you could usually keep the case and power supply.  My needs were usually pretty modest and I could buy a 4-year-old Dell from the university surplus store, max out the memory on the motherboard, put in a new hard drive, install FreeBSD or Linux, and be good to go.

YES... this. Although it has been several years ago, I had repurposed an old 64-bit windows computer into a 64-bit Linux Web server running ISPConfig. One project that I wanted to try (were it not be for the lack of time) is assembling a virtualization platform.

[kalvado]

one thing becoming non-trivial:
these older machines - especially for small side projects - consume more power than comparable modern devices.
Using that old box may be attractive  until you realize that it may consume 20-50 cents worth of power a day.  And your savings are all gone in a year or so...

[Scott5114]

So get a new power supply?

[kalvado]

So get a new power supply?

Full size CPUs have 60-100 w max power for quite a while. Raspberry pi4 has 15W maximum power.
It is not that simple, of course; but non-gui non-video tasks on old pc may cost more in power than new hardware. Ispconfig may possibly be an example of that

[Bruce]

One thing to keep in mind for a laptop: power jacks can break after a lot of abuse. Getting a model that has both a barrel/proprietary plug AND USB-C/Thunderbolt 3+ is a smart idea. A little redundancy never hurts.

[Hobart]

In my opinion, laptops and desktops fulfill two different market segments: Desktops exist for power, ease of maintenance, and in situations where you don't move often and can set up like three monitors at the same time. Laptops exist so you can pick them up and carry them around, good for business and school.

Most of my personal work is on the gaming desktop I'm writing this on, with my triple-monitor setup I find useful for music composition work. Most of my school work is on a laptop, which is good for bringing to labs, work, lounges for studying, what have you.

The issues come with all-in-ones, SFF machines, and gaming laptops.

• All-in-ones are a laptop in a different case: just as difficult to service with proprietary components, and you can't replace the monitor individually. They are literally a laptop without a keyboard and with less portability, and often, the same amount of power.
• Small form factor machines are a laptop without a screen, still hard to service, but at least you can replace the monitor or mount it to the back of a television.
• Gaming laptops are heavy, and often too hot to put on your lap. You have to put the thing on a table, just buy a desktop.

Honestly, if you can get away with an all-in-one or an SFF, you are facing most of the disadvantages of a laptop without portability... so just buy a laptop! If you really want a separate monitor, buy an entry level tower.

[zachary_amaryllis]

I like towers because if something breaks it's easy to open up the case and replace the broken part.  Even when the motherboard was obsolete, you could usually keep the case and power supply.  My needs were usually pretty modest and I could buy a 4-year-old Dell from the university surplus store, max out the memory on the motherboard, put in a new hard drive, install FreeBSD or Linux, and be good to go.

GAWD I love our local college surpus store. There's just rows of those generic Dell whatevers, not the latest and greatest, but they're fine for spinning drives ... which can also be purchased dirt-cheap here.

[kkt]

I like towers because if something breaks it's easy to open up the case and replace the broken part.  Even when the motherboard was obsolete, you could usually keep the case and power supply.  My needs were usually pretty modest and I could buy a 4-year-old Dell from the university surplus store, max out the memory on the motherboard, put in a new hard drive, install FreeBSD or Linux, and be good to go.

GAWD I love our local college surpus store. There's just rows of those generic Dell whatevers, not the latest and greatest, but they're fine for spinning drives ... which can also be purchased dirt-cheap here.

I had a hard drive die and be unrecoverable once... I got religion after that as far as backups and buying new drives and not continuing to use them very long after their warranties were up.

[bing101]

https://simplynuc.com/moonstone/
I have this one as my desktop computer. I just attach it to a TV and ready to go from there.

[J N Winkler]

I had a hard drive die and be unrecoverable once... I got religion after that as far as backups and buying new drives and not continuing to use them very long after their warranties were up.

Over the years I have had five disk failures, two of which resulted in significant data loss, and have learned the hard way to reject out of hand any data preservation strategy that relies on recovery or reconstruction of data in the event of a disk crash.  Even a near-100% recovery imposes significant time and effort costs in approximating the pre-crash state since the recovered material typically requires quality control and reinsertion into the original folder structure.

Recovery software often leaves two copies of each file, one in the original folder and the other in a single directory.  Either or both may be corrupt since recovery will not necessarily collect all of the fragments for a given file.  Not all file formats have a structure that allows validation, which is costly in any case.  (I use wrapper scripts that rely on Ghostscript for PDF, 7z for compressed archive formats, pngcheck for PNGs, and ImageMagick identify for GIFs and JPEGs, but I have never heard of a robust validation strategy for plain text or CAD files.)

The attributed causes of the five disk failures were as follows:

*  Loss of the FAT on the internal HD in a desktop PC, probably due to a memory error, shortly after a memory upgrade.  (I thought I had secured 100% compatibility with the memory already installed, but was later advised this was probably not the case.  I removed the added memory and have never again attempted a memory upgrade.  With the help of a housemate who had worked as a sysadmin, I was able to recover most of my data, but still lost a significant amount.)

*  Accidentally selecting format on an external HD.  (I lost no data, but it took considerable time to copy over the lost data from optical discs.)

*  Drive or USB interface problem involving an internal HD and a box allowing it to be used as a "cheap" external HD.  (I RMA'd the drive and box to get rid of them, and never again tried to economize in this manner.)

*  Transient memory error leading to loss of the FAT on an external disk, originally intended for backup only, which came to hold significant amounts of spillover unarchived data.  (I used Seagate's paid recovery tool and estimate I got back at least 90% of the unarchived material, but it took a considerable effort over months to winnow out the corrupt files.  The drive itself was and is mechanically healthy, and remains in service 12 years later.  I later put a larger dedicated backup drive into service.)

*  USB interface or controller problem preventing an external drive from mounting at all.  (The disk was for backup only, so I simply decommissioned it and rebuilt the backups on a replacement.)

The GPUs that have been included in the CPUs are, in my opinion, pretty good, especially in comparison with the integrated graphics of 20 years ago unless you are into gaming. As an example, I have a dedicated computer for just two things: Displaying weather graphics on a 4K television and the conversion of media discs from my physical library to my media server. This was initially done from my former daily driver, a Intel i7-4790K built in 2014 and then a AMD 7700X. Despite the major performance improvement between the two CPUs (at 5-7ⅹ improved conversion based upon handbrake framerate), both were pretty good at displaying the thunderstorm maps. Yet, I have to say that my AMD processor much more than what the "average" non-gamer person needs.

I really push back against this idea that Core i5 with integrated graphics is enough "unless you game."  We tried this when we were shopping for a new PC for my mother, who was even less likely to game than I am, and she was unhappy with it within six months since she could tell (even while browsing the Web, writing emails, processing words, etc.) that its responsiveness was subpar.

[JREwing78]

Laptops are a pretty natural choice if you have to alternate between in-office and mobile use. Modern laptops can use the USB-C jack to connect to a dock and receive charging, and generally have enough beef to drive two monitors or one 4K display. The challenge is that they are still the most expensive option, and you have to specifically seek out one that you can easily replace RAM, the SSD, and the battery. Otherwise you end up with a device that is basically unserviceable. They also still struggle to stay cool under heavy workloads.

SFF desktop PCs, depending on the specific design, can either be pretty straightforward to service, or a nightmare. They are by far the simplest to set up - grab a keyboard and mouse, connect to a TV or other suitable display, and you're done. Perfect for streaming media to a TV, or as a small, unobtrusive day-to-day PC. Put a heavy load on them, and they can suffer from overheating like a laptop can.

I draw a distinction between an OEM desktop PC (Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc) and a standard desktop PC. Despite having a similar standard desktop form factor, the OEMs are fond of using proprietary components that make them hard to upgrade. If you want a desktop PC for power and flexibility, build your own or source from a "white box" manufacturer that uses standard components.

Standard desktop PCs allow you the most flexibility to build and upgrade to your heart's content.  Much like building a hot rod car, your budget and your creativity are your only limits. You can start cheap and cheerful and upgrade later, or you can drop tons of money on a PC that will play any game in 4K without a hiccup. It definitely can be an intimidating process, however, and mistakes can be expensive.

[JREwing78]

The GPUs that have been included in the CPUs are, in my opinion, pretty good, especially in comparison with the integrated graphics of 20 years ago unless you are into gaming. As an example, I have a dedicated computer for just two things: Displaying weather graphics on a 4K television and the conversion of media discs from my physical library to my media server. This was initially done from my former daily driver, a Intel i7-4790K built in 2014 and then a AMD 7700X. Despite the major performance improvement between the two CPUs (at 5-7ⅹ improved conversion based upon handbrake framerate), both were pretty good at displaying the thunderstorm maps. Yet, I have to say that my AMD processor much more than what the "average" non-gamer person needs.

I really push back against this idea that Core i5 with integrated graphics is enough "unless you game."  We tried this when we were shopping for a new PC for my mother, who was even less likely to game than I am, and she was unhappy with it within six months since she could tell (even while browsing the Web, writing emails, processing words, etc.) that its responsiveness was subpar.

I'm going to guess that some other component was subpar (SATA instead of NVMe solid-state drive, insufficient RAM, shaky network, etc). Or perhaps it was an earlier-generation i5? Or like me she's fond of keeping lots of windows open simultaneously? I generally load up on the RAM when I spec out a PC because it's cheap insurance against laggy performance.

[J N Winkler]

I'm going to guess that some other component was subpar (SATA instead of NVMe solid-state drive, insufficient RAM, shaky network, etc). Or perhaps it was an earlier-generation i5? Or like me she's fond of keeping lots of windows open simultaneously? I generally load up on the RAM when I spec out a PC because it's cheap insurance against laggy performance.

It was a HP tower PC with 1920 x 1080 monitor back in 2013, so there was definitely a mechanical HD and an older-generation i5 in play.  I recommended the purchase based on a benchmark comparison between its CPU and the CPU in my 2011 gaming laptop, which remained very responsive right up to its replacement in 2021 (the hard drive was starting to die).  In retrospect, I think I failed to account for the integrated graphics on the i5.  (The gaming laptop had an i7 with a discrete GPU.)

[Rothman]

How does one know if a hard drive is about to die?  Slow performance can be caused by any number of variables.