ASUS UL80Vt and G51J: Going for the Gold
by Jarred Walton on December 15, 2009 1:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
General Windows Performance
Moving to our combined results, we start with general Windows power on/off times. Some of the laptops have less RAM, which can help in the hibernate/resume tests, but most of the newer models now ship with 4GB. We run each test multiple times and take the best result so as to minimize variance.
In another ironic twist, the G51J trails the UL80Vt in virtually every test. You'd think with a substantially slower CPU that the G51J would easily take the lead, but that's not the case. Boot time in particular is very slow on the G51J, but it beats out the high-end competition in most of the other results. What we'd really like is to see better POST times; why is it that the UL80Vt can POST in five seconds but the G51J requires more than twice as long? Clearly companies are spending more time optimizing boot times on netbooks and thin and light designs than on larger notebooks.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
66 Comments
View All Comments
bennyg - Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - link
I think you're not getting the whole pictureRun it for an hour and then see the max temps then
When mine arrives I intend to downclock below the 9800MGTX speeds ... for longievity.
clarkn0va - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
You may want to blur that picture of the bottom of the second laptop.JarredWalton - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
Ummm... oops! Thanks.Zero110 - Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - link
YOU'RE TOO LATE!!! Just kidding.KikassAssassin - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
I'm one of those people who has complained on the internet about the viewing angles, and I think your assessment is spot-on, because I came from an older laptop that had a higher-quality, but much dimmer, display. I do like that the UL80Vt's display is so much brighter than my previous laptop's, but the fact that such low-quality displays are commonplace nowadays is really sad. Companies will do anything to cut costs, I guess, but it's unfortunate that it's being done with such an important component. I guess most consumers don't care that much about the display quality, though, or else they wouldn't be able to get away with it. It would be nice if laptop manufacturers would at least offer the option of upgrading to a high-quality display. I would seriously have been willing to spend $1000 on a UL80Vt with a display on par with, say, the Macbook Pro or Dell Studio XPS (throw in a matte finish, an all-aluminum chassis, and a backlit keyboard, and you'd have the perfect laptop).Also, I notice in this article you said the graphics switch time takes about five seconds. I guess your fifteen second time to switch to the nvidia GPU went away when you reinstalled the old drivers? I'm still curious what might've been causing that.
JarredWalton - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
I think it may have been either drivers or something else; at one point I broke the GPUs with updated Intel and NVIDIA reference drivers. (They altered the support list to explicitly exclude hybrid GPUs after that, I guess.) Anyway, it's working fine now. If you're running a 3D app when you try to switch, it will blank for a bit and then you'll get an exclamation point on the NVIDIA icon, which is maybe what happened before... worst I've seen that I can confirm worked was around 10 seconds.Agree on the LCD, finish, etc. I've got a Photodon cover for a 17" laptop that I'm going to test out in a little bit and see how that compares to running a native matte LCD.
zorxd - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
What's the point of having a dedicated GPU in this laptop? It's too slow for gaming anyways. It's a thin and light laptop. Better to save 150-200$ to get a desktop computer to play games. The X4500MHD IGP will play 1080p movies just fine anyways. What else do you need? It's like people who want a dedicated GPU on an atom laptop or on their mac. Most of them will never make use of it.DominionSeraph - Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - link
WTH? It's the discrete graphics that make the UL80Vt interesting. Without it, there's no reason for it to have anything more than an Atom.Too slow for gaming? Jarred mentions playing Batman and Fallout 3 for several hours each. Sounds to me as though he was deriving entertainment value. Bet it plays WoW just fine, too.
With laptops, there's always tradeoffs between price, performance, portability, and battery life. The UL80Vt seems to hit a sweet spot.
And, honestly, for non-portable gaming, save yourself $600 and get a console.
zorxd - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
the UL30A is much more interestingJarredWalton - Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - link
Someone asked me to run DXVA Checker on the G210M to see what it says. Here are the results for the interested:NVIDIA GeForce G210M
ModeMPEG2_IDCT: DXVA2, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
ModeMPEG2_VLD: DXVA2, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
ModeMPEG2_A: DXVA1, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
ModeMPEG2_C: DXVA1, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
ModeVC1_VLD: DXVA2, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
ModeVC1_IDCT: DXVA1/2, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
ModeWMV9_IDCT: DXVA1/2, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
ModeH264_VLD_FGT: DXVA2, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
ModeH264_VLD_NoFGT: DXVA2, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
9947EC6F-689B-11DC-A320-0019DBBC4184: DXVA2, NV12, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
B194EB52-19A0-41F0-B754-CC244AC1CB20: DXVA2, X8R8G8B8, 720x480 / 1280x720 / 1920x1080
For the record, DXVA Checker fails to get any useful information when using the GMA 4500MHD.