MSI X610: Supersizing the Netbook?
by Jarred Walton on October 6, 2009 10:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
X610 LCD Quality
We ran our standard LCD quality tests using ColorEyes Display Pro to see how well this 15.6" LCD panel performs. Unfortunately, this is another case of LCD brightness improving at the cost of LCD contrast ratios. Also, color gamut, color accuracy, and viewing angles continue to be a sore spot for laptop LCDs. It is our understanding that TN panels use the least power, so until that changes it's unlikely we will see dramatic improvements in these areas.
Like many other laptops, the MSI X610 provides a bright ~250nits LCD that unfortunately only yields a poor 215:1 contrast ratio. LCD quality matters to many people, and if MSI had used a high contrast LCD it would have made the X610 a lot more interesting as a multimedia platform. As it stands, colors look washed out and images don't "pop" the way they do on a good display. Color gamut is slightly improved compared to other solutions we've tested, coming in at 53%, and color accuracy is reasonably good after calibration, but we're still a far cry from the 100% gamma LCDs we see on desktops and laptops like the Dell Studio XPS 16.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
41 Comments
View All Comments
araczynski - Monday, October 12, 2009 - link
big screen and low resolution = yuck, well, unless of course you wear glasses.Mugur - Friday, October 9, 2009 - link
Old 690 chipset? With integrated video disabled and discrete video card? And a weak cpu? Target for this: low power=fail, long battery life=fail, performance=fail (unless compared with an Atom).I have an MSI S420 with 14", 1280x800, CeleronM 1.73 Ghz and Radeon Xpress 200m chipset/integrated video. It has only 1.9 kg without the charger (with 3 cell battery - 2h). I can see no difference :-)... I bought it for ~ 400 Euros.
Equ1n0x - Friday, October 9, 2009 - link
Why are manufacturers still making these things with these big screens? Put this in a 12.1" or even better an 11.6" factor with these specs, and it will sell. People aren't going to buy big laptops with lower end specs no matter how light they are - if you are in the market for a large screen PC, you most likely want something performance oriented.The 11.6 and 12.1 market desperately needs some PC's with decent hardware (read, decent graphics chips). The last thing we need on the market is another Atom/GMA950 and the last thing we need is a large, slow laptop. We need small and decent for a change, without paying an arm and a leg.
qwertymac93 - Friday, October 9, 2009 - link
you mean something like the msi u210?i do believe i just blew your mind.
JarredWalton - Friday, October 9, 2009 - link
The MSI U210 has the same MV-40 CPU, but it uses the RS690E IGP, which is an X1270 (or X1250). Needless to say, GPU power is quite a bit lower than the HD 4330, but it's probably a better match for the MV-40. Battery life is reported as around 4 hours - nowhere near the Atom netbook level, but probably 50-100% better performance.Mugur - Monday, October 12, 2009 - link
Not to mention the lack of 1080p video acceleration (just 720p is working and not always).Also the drivers for 690 platforms are not updated anymore at AMD...
It should have a 780 chipset.
Mugur - Friday, October 9, 2009 - link
...bought it 4 years ago.vlado08 - Thursday, October 8, 2009 - link
Hi Jarred,I'm glad that you've mentioned the POST times.
For me it just does not make any sense. To have such fast SSDs made form flash chips and OS to load faster than the POST which is a small program written also on a flash chip.
Something should be done here. I hope that Intel is going again to lead the way and probably every body else will follow. If they want Moblin to load for less than 10 seconds.
But until then you should ask these questions again and again - Why so slow? How are you going to make people buy?
And if you give information to us which system has faster POST we will make our choice (our vote)!
juampavalverde - Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - link
This people still dont get that OLD CHIPSETS + DEDICATED VIDEO eat more power than NEW CHIPSETS (780/785g or lower speed variants)... This kind of garbage could be an easier sell on a nettop, but a netbook is about low power and mobility, if they can get good enough performance with less power, why keep choosing this kind of junk?JarredWalton - Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - link
My personal thought is that MSI made the X600 and people said, "cool but it costs $800 and that's too much." So they took the design and said, "let's do it with an AMD CPU instead to cut costs." What they needed to do was go with an AMD CPU and IGP and ditch the HD 4330. Even then, I'm not sure if they could keep it close to 5+ hours of battery, which is what you really want if you're going for this sort of thin and light design.