Is the i3 model really worth it? If I was going to purchase this, should I save for the i5?

[neonspark]

agree with most comments. i3 is actually probably fine for nearly everybody but 64GB with full windows isn't. really MSFT? 64GB of flash memory isn't worth 200 bucks and neither is the i3 vs i5.

 

[Racing Snake]

Windows 8.1.1 introduced the ability to run the full OS only on ~4GB of storage.

So out of 64, real probably 54, you'll get 48-50 GB for personal usage

Unless I have missed it on this thread somewhere...
the i3 only comes with 36GB of personal space.


Storage
64GB, 128GB, 256GB or 512GB2 • 64GB has >36GB available disk space • 128GB has >96GB available disk space • 256GB has >211GB available disk space • 512GB has >450GB available disk space

 

[maflynn]

I'd be able to live with an i3 perhaps but not the 64GB of storage, heck even the 128GB seems tight but at 999 plus the cost of the smart cover I'm pushing my budget and my luck with the wife if I get anything bigger.

 

[drbanks]

As for flash memory:

Yes, I use it as much as possible. I have a Surface Pro Classic, 128GB, with a 128GB Micro-SD card. I try to put as much as I can on the SD card, but:

This is my laptop replacement, so I have full installs of Visual Studio, Office, and some Adobe CC suite apps installed. And that disk is full. I try to keep all my user data on the SD card, but the SSD is still full.

For starters, some things just won't go onto the SD card. Dropbox, for instance, just doesn't want to keep its files on the SD card, or apparently, any other mountable drive. so there's a few GB of my mirrored files that just seem to have to be on my boot drive. In fact, my whole login profile (Users\Me directory tree) seems best suited for the boot drive because if I moved my login tree to the SD card, I'd never be able to log in and swap the SD card for a newer bigger model. So, now I have every app and its brother littering my login directory.

And speaking of apps: download App Store apps, and they go onto the boot drive, as does all of their app-specific data. Like if I want the Metro Kindle app, all the kindle books I download go onto the boot drive, not the SD card. And I got a lot of Kindle books.

I've told iTunes (yeah, I know) to move its library to an external drive, but even still, it finds a whole crapload of stuff that it insists on caching in my login directory tree. And for some reason, SyncToy just NEEDS a few GB of app local storage.

Aside from that, regular windows apps like to install to C:\Program Files. Yes, I could probably install them elsewhere, but past experience with desktop windows has taught me that trying to install applications to anywhere but the default C:\Program Files just puts you in line for a load of troubles.

Then, there's windows itself. For some reason, every time I install Microsoft's monthly load of emergency patches, the disk space used by the Windows directory balloons even more. This is typical of any standard XP/7/8/8.1 windows install, but it seems like the longer you have Windows installed, the more of your C drive it eats up.

Right now, my C:\Windows directory is absorbing 31.1 GB of my SSD, and that's AFTER I moved a whole bunch of garbage in the Windows\Installer\$PatchCache$ off to an archive drive. (About 5GB worth, so if I didn't prune, there's 36GB for Windows alone).

Not even considering apps, I just can't imagine trying to run this thing out of 64GB. Considering apps, between Program Files and Program Files x86, I've got another 32GB, plus another 12GB in Program Data. Yeah, I've blown clean past that 64GB SSD without even logging in and adding any files of my own.

Sure, you can control the Program Files load by not installing many apps, and selecting the most lightweight options of those apps you do install, but you're still staring at half your drive being absorbed by the Windows directory alone.

I just really can't see realistically running windows off a 64GB drive. If you have smaller needs, maybe RT is the right choice. It lets you actually use more of your 64GB. If you're looking for a laptop replacement, or anything that actually, comfortably runs full Windows, I'd really recommend a bare minimum of 128GB, and more realistically, 256GB.

 

[onysi]

I came here to figure this out myself. looks like ill be getting i5.

 

[Bora777]

Could anyone with a previous-generation SP shed some light on whether 4GB of RAM is sufficient for moderate to heavy Photoshop use? I'm hoping to get an i5 SP3 and I can't afford the 8GB version.

 

[ExTrAbUtTa]

I've personally used a SP1/2 with programs like Pro Tools which are notorious for being resource heavy. With an i5/4GB I am able to create and edit music projects, but within reason. If I try and add multiple tracks (or a lot), with plug ins (effects), the system will eventually crash. At that point, I am pushing a lot of information, so it is to be expected. Moderate Photoshop use, would not be an issue for that configuration on the SP3. However, I will say that if you plan to further your skill set with Photoshop, it'd be best to save a little more and purchase the 8GB version. Reason being, if you grow and want to push further with the programs abilities, the 4GB will rear its head and halt your progress. But, if you know how you use PS and aren't looking to get too crazy, you'll be perfectly fine.

As for the question about an i3 model, that can work, as long as you don't have a lot of demands. People are correct in mentioning having a little bit of storage (something like 37GB), so if your storing big files and programs (that can't be offloaded to a external storage medium), then it would be best to move into the 128GB version. My wife, personally is set on the i3 version, she currently uses a Dell Venue Pro 8 and has no issues. She isn't a power user, just a simple user, runs a couple programs, but mostly apps and really uses it for consumption, schooling and research. If you fall into this category and can effectively use eternal storage (like a microSD card) then the i3 model can very well fit the bill,

 

[psudotechzealot]

No, save up for the •i5-8GB RAM-256GB model.

 

[OliverK]

I am in the same boat... I pre-ordered the 128GB i5 for two reasons - better resale value should I sell it and more space for software.

But the truth is I really just plan on using it for very basic things - no gaming or any editing or anything the requires either extra grunt or capacity - and its not like with an SD card I can't add up to another 128GB....

So then it comes down to resale value and here my thoughts are also not clear as the difference is price is ?200 in the UK - I can't help but think the difference in resale value won't be that much so I would be better saving that money (and using some of the difference for a type cover).

But the logical side of me says 128GB and i5 is the minimum I should get...

Having said all that we have OVER TWO months in the UK until it is "delivered" so I imagine I have plenty of time to change my mind.

 

[lukemholl]

Stuck making the same choice here...

Currently using a MacBook Pro from 2011 with an i5-2415, and a Surface 2. I could never justify a Pro 2 to replace both of these, but the Pro 3 is looking extremely promising.

Not particularly bothered about storage, I don't keep much on here, and a lot of stuff is on OneDrive. Plus I can easily add an SD card if needed as it'll only be for media.

I mainly use it for the basics - mainly internet, Skype, metro apps, few games from the store, nothing taxing. In fact, I could probably happily live with RT if it wasn't for the fact 10" isn't ideal for constant use and very occasionally there's an x86 app I want/need.

But is the i3 good enough to replace both of these, and good enough long term? I don't want to end up with something that isn't a worthy replacement, but on the other hand ?200 is a big jump, especially if I never really gain from it, and too could use it towards a type cover.

Choices, choices...