ASUS UL80Vt and G51J: Going for the Gold
by Jarred Walton on December 15, 2009 1:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
Testing Overview
We're going to separate the performance results of the UL80Vt and G51J as they're not competing laptops. For the UL80Vt, we'll be comparing it against similarly priced notebooks (and a couple netbooks), which you can read about in our previous Studio 14z review. As for the G51J, we'll compare it with high-end offerings, some of which cost over three times as much! You can find the test configurations for the high-end notebooks in our High-End (Clevo) Roundup. Here are the test configurations for the two ASUS notebooks.
| ASUS UL80Vt-A1 Test System | |
| Processor | Intel Core 2 Duo SU7300 (2x1.3GHz, 45nm, 3MB L2, 800FSB, 10W) Turbo33 @ 1.73GHz/1066FSB |
| Memory | 2x2GB DDR3-1066 (Max 2x4GB) |
| Graphics | NVIDIA GeForce G210M 512MB Driver Version: 186.88 Intel GMA 4500MHD IGP |
| Display | 14.0" LED Glossy 16:9 768p (1366x768) |
| Hard Drive(s) | 320GB 5400RPM HDD |
| Optical Drive | 8x DVDR SuperMulti |
| Battery | 8-Cell, 15V, 5600mAh, 84Wh |
| Operating System | Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit |
| ASUS G51J Test System | |
| Processor | Intel Core i7-720QM (4x1.6GHz+ HTT, 45nm, 4x256KB L2, 6MB L3, 2.5GT/s QPI, 45W) Overclock @ 1680MHz (base speed) |
| Memory | 2x2GB DDR3-1066 (Max 2x4GB) |
| Graphics | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260M Driver Version: 195.62 |
| Display | 15.6" Glossy Full HD 1080p (1920x1080) |
| Hard Drive(s) | 2 x 320GB 7200RPM 16MB HDD (Non-RAID) |
| Optical Drive | 8x DVDR SuperMulti |
| Battery | 6-Cell, 11.1V DC, 4800mAh, 53.28Wh |
| Operating System | Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit |
Our tests will use standardized application benchmark suites like PCMark along with individual application results. Our in-house application tests place more weight on CPU performance, as we look at video encoding and 3D rendering performance. We'll provide any additional commentary related to application performance concerns if necessary. We will provide results from the UL80Vt with and without Turbo33 enabled. On the G51J, we only enabled the maximum overclock for heavily threaded workloads, as otherwise it didn't provide any noteworthy boost and often resulted in lower performance. Unlike the UL80Vt, the overclocking modes on the G51J can be enabled/disabled on-the-fly.
For gaming, our high-end tests standardize on performance at 1680x1050 with maximum detail settings (sans 4xAA) in a variety of games. Since the native resolution of the G51J is 1080p, we will also provide 1080p results. For the UL80Vt, nearly all of the competing notebooks use 1366x768 LCD panels, but many of the laptops are unable to run most games at that resolution, even at minimum detail settings, so we standardize on 800x600 minimum detail performance. With the G210M enabled, the UL80Vt doesn't have any difficulties at those settings, so we will also look at performance at 1366x768 with low, medium, and in a few instances high detail - basically, we'll show where the G210M runs out of steam at the native resolution. We did not perform gaming tests on the UL80Vt with the IGP enabled - why use a candle when you already have a flashlight?
Battery life testing will follow the same pattern, with both laptops set to "ideal" settings for improving battery life. With the launch of Windows 7 we have decided to showcase the best that laptops are able to offer in terms of mobility. If you run using a "Balanced" profile instead of "Power Saver", you can expect 5-15% less battery life, depending on the laptop. We tested the UL80Vt in several configurations: without Turbo33 and running IGP and G210M, and with Turbo33 with IGP and G210M.
Finally, we will combine the results for Windows power on/off and LCD quality, as the differences aren't as large for those tests. We'll also include power requirements on the combined results page.
We'll begin with the UL80Vt results, and we'll try not to get into too much detail on the following pages unless there's something truly noteworthy. By and large the tables tell the performance tale.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
66 Comments
View All Comments
crydee - Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - link
From reading other forums it sounds like the UL30VT has a nicer LCD and build quality. As soon as they start selling those and with the same battery as the UL80VT the price should be lower for an overall smaller laptop and no dvd-rom. That sounds like the laptop I'd want. 13" will be easier to handle the smaller resolution.duffmann - Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - link
On my ASUS UL30a (which also has a SU7300) there is an option to do a 1-5% overclock in the BIOS. By default it was set to a 3% when I recieved the system effectively making it 1.339GHz. Is this option also present on the UL80Vt and if so, do the "stock" numbers in the article correspond to 1.3GHz?JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - link
I did not check in the BIOS (and the laptop is on its way back to ASUS), but CPU-Z/Intel TAT showed a clock of 1.30GHz at stock and 1.73GHz overclocked, so if there is a BIOS overclock option it was not enabled.rubbahbandman - Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - link
I got the Lenovo Ideapad Y550 over the holidays and think it should be considered as well if you're looking for a budget gaming laptop.For $820 (not including tax) I got:
*Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 (only 25watt processor) vs i7 720QM (45watts for similar performance, and costs far more)
*4GB DDR3 (pretty standard)
*Nvidia Geforce 240M (23watt videocard) vs 260M (75watts)
*320GB HD (5400 RPM, my worst part, but at least it's low power, quiet, runs cooler, and doesn't vibrate as much as a 7200)
*HD LED 1366x768 native resolution doesn't seem like a disadvantage to me. It's comfortable for the eyes and doesn't require as beefy a videocard, uses less power too I'd imagine than 1920x1080. While the 240M offers far less powerful than the 260M, it good enough to play most games at 1366x768 with high settings and doesn't draw nearly as much power or produce as much heat as the 260M.
*and it comes with bluetooth, wireless N, nice 'laptop' speakers (w/a tiny sub), win 7 64bit, hdmi, dvd writer, eSATA, 6 lbs, (no TV-tuner though).
*with only a 6-cell battery I can surf the web for 4hrs 15min with my setup. gaming on the other hand is about 90min-2hrs, which is still very good compared to most.
bennyg - Thursday, December 17, 2009 - link
There's budget midrange gaming and there's budget highend gaming, you're comparing quite different categories hererubbahbandman - Thursday, December 17, 2009 - link
"ASUS G51: Affordable Midrange Gaming"FTA
I'm just pointing out there's affordable midrange gaming at less than $900 for laptops versus the $1400-1500 price tag for the G51. Neither of the computers in this article would be considered "high-end" for laptop gaming.
JarredWalton - Thursday, December 17, 2009 - link
The only thing significantly faster in laptops would be something sporting dual GPUs (for now). GTX 280M laptops are about 20-30% faster at most in gaming, which isn't much considering the majority of such laptops will cost well over $2000.Mostly, I call this "Affordable Midrange" because I consider $1500 to be the top of the midrange laptop market in terms of cost. The GTX 260M is about twice the performance (slightly more) of the GT 240M: 96 vs. 48 SPs, and clock speeds that are marginally faster, with 256-bit vs. 128-bit memory interface. Also, if you're going to quote 23W for power on the GT 240M, the GTX 260M would only be 38W -- 82W is the difference I measured between system idle and gaming load, which is going to be split between the CPU, RAM, GPU, etc. (I also only show a 31W difference between 100% CPU load and gaming load, which corroborates that 38W figure from NVIDIA.)
Of course, the GT 240M is going to be around 2.5 times the speed of the G210M in the UL80Vt, so you'll be able to run any game as long as you're willing to drop the details. Where the GTX 260M is able to run games at 1080p with medium to high detail, the GT 240M will be limited to 900p at ~medium detail.
Hulk - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
The flex results from the torque applied to the screen.Wesleyrpg - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
As well all know Asus underclocked the GTX 260M in the G51J from the defaults of 550/1375/950 to 500/1250/800 for heat management issues, but im wondering how much extra performance can be squeezed out of the system by 'overclocking' the GPU to its default speeds and beyond. I'm also curious to know how this affect the systems temps!Can the Asus G51J take advantage of faster RAM like DDR3-1333 or DDR3-1600 modules? At what point does the machine start to gain/lose performance because of extra bandwidth/latency of the faster modules?
Wesleyrpg - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
ok so i did some testing and got some very interesting results, i ran 3dmark06 three time and here are the average results!10069 (500/1250/800)
SM2.0 4417
SM3.0 4036
CPU 3179
Temp min/max 64-91
and now for the GPU running at 550/1375/950
10983
SM2.0 4854
SM3.0 4559
CPU 3191
Temp min/max 64-92
Thats it......a 10% improvement for a 1C in temp? Maybe im not getting the whole picture here or maybe Asus are downclocking for longevity reasons?