ASUS UL80Vt First Look: Mobility Redefined
by Jarred Walton on October 24, 2009 8:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
ASUS UL80Vt Thoughts
At this point, you should probably already have a good idea of whether the ASUS UL80Vt is going to be the sort of laptop you want to purchase. Provided that raw computational or graphics performance are not your primary concern, the UL80Vt is one of the best laptops we've looked at in a long time. If you've ever considered buying a netbook simply because they're small and get good battery life, the UL80Vt is like a netbook on steroids. It will easily provide twice the performance of your typical Intel Atom-based netbook, and it can do that while still going toe to toe in terms of battery life. The only catch is that it weighs slightly more… and it costs about twice as much as most netbooks.
What you get is a laptop that can run all day on a single charge, it won't weigh you down, and it comes with pretty much every feature you would actually need. Many 14" and smaller laptops (like the Dell Studio 14z for example) omit optical drives in order to keep size down. ASUS keeps the optical drive, adds a discrete graphics card with the ability to switch to integrated graphics, gives you an overclocked ULV processor, and a large 84Wh battery. The result is a package that's extremely easy to like.
Whether you need a lightweight laptop, something you can use on a business trip without constantly worrying about plugging in, or even a system that can run most games (albeit at lower detail settings), the ASUS UL80Vt has you covered. It's possible to equal the battery life of the UL80Vt, but it's very difficult to do while still matching the performance and features ASUS offers. We've seen ULV processors before, but we've never seen one overclocked 33% -- and it's not likely to be something Sony or other large OEMs even consider.
Has the MacBook finally met its match? That depends on whether or not you love/hate OS X. Windows 7 addresses many of the concerns users have with Windows Vista, and it does appear to improve battery life. ASUS has gone one step further and offered utilities (Power4Gear) that allow users to tweak performance and battery life settings even further. It's the combination of the right hardware with the right software that enables the UL80Vt to truly deliver on the long battery life promise.
The latest MacBook still has a faster CPU (the SP9300 is clocked at 2.26GHz -- 30% higher than the overclocked SU7300). However, it only has a 60Wh battery, and while the GeForce 9400M G integrated graphics are better than any other current IGP, the G210M appears to be at least 50% faster. When you don't need graphics performance, you can also shut off the G210M and used the GMA 4500MHD. It's a design that simply works. The MacBook also costs $1000 -- about $180 more. People that love all things Apple aren't likely to make a switch, but if you're a Windows user that has been looking for a decent alternative, it has finally arrived.
We'll have additional test results in the near future, including battery life tests with the G210M enabled, performance results with overclocking disabled, gaming, and anything else we can think of. If there's anything in particular you'd like to see in the follow up article, let us know. In the meantime, we've seen enough to give the ASUS UL80Vt a very strong recommendation. We'd love to see them ditch the glossy plastic bezel, LCD, and palm rest, and we'd like a higher contrast LCD panel as well. Those are the only complaints we have with an extremely well designed laptop. Kudos, ASUS: you've just raised the bar for what we expect from laptops.
Update: ASUS has informed us that the Best Buy model of the UL80Vt will have a rubberized palm rest. That's one complaint down. They also said that they don't have any data to support the assertion that people would be willing to pay more for a laptop with a better LCD; let them know if you disagree in the comments section. Unfortunately, I would guess they're probably right when it comes to most users: they may not actually pay attention to the LCD. If you were to put a good laptop LCD next to a poor LCD and explain the difference and show users what it looks like, they would be much more likely to opt for a better display, but that's probably not something most retail outlets bother explaining.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
100 Comments
View All Comments
7Enigma - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
I'll do it for you. Using an old review from April09 where they posted the min/WHr:MacBook2008 got a 6.36
Asus gets a 6.32 (531min / 84 WHr)
It is important however to note if the testing methodology (ie websites used/etc.) have changed significantly since the 2008 Macbook review and if so in which direction (my guess would be more draining now).
If they are directly (or closely) comparible then you have to factor in weight difference and price, and of course CPU/GPU performance differences. Since the price is $150 cheaper, the weight difference IMO would have to be significantly lighter for the MacBook to justify (build-quality, OS, intangibles aside).
JarredWalton - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
All I know for certain is that the old results had Apple at 6.36 (as mentioned), but the tests are not the same as the ones I used for the Windows laptops. Anand has the new Internet tests I'm using (I ran them on Linux, so they should run fine on OS X), so when he's had a chance to run numbers we can make the comparison. The UL80Vt is twice the relative battery life of most Windows laptops, and over three times the relative battery life of higher-spec units. I can't say for certain whether it has matched or surpassed the latest MacBook, but it should be very close if not better.Pirks - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
"32% in DivX encoding, and xxx% in CINEBENCH R10"xxx%? Really?! Are you hiding something from us Jarred? ;)))
JarredWalton - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
LOL... sorry, I was still running tests at the time and obviously missed that. It's 12% BTW; text updated.mczak - Sunday, October 25, 2009 - link
I'm wondering why asus uses a overclocked ULV chip. Presumably they increase voltage a bit when overclocked to guarantee stable operation right? So in this case power should be very similar to LV chips (+30% for higher clock plus something additional for more voltage - ULV chips are 10W, LV 17W). So why not get a non-overclocked LV chip like the SL9600 in the first place? 2.133Ghz, 6MB cache, should cost about the same as the SU7300.JarredWalton - Sunday, October 25, 2009 - link
CPU-Z reports the voltage as 0.875V -- at the overclocked 1.73GHz setting. The ULV parts are essentially CPUs that work well with very low voltages, and they usually have better overclocking headroom. Anyway, it appears that even overclocked, the SU7300 isn't consuming more than perhaps 12-13W. (I'll have to do more testing to verify that figure for the full review.) When you have a laptop that uses 9.5W on average for Internet surfing, an extra 3W is a big deal.mczak - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
Those 0.875V are presumably at idle? Would be way below published VID range under load (hopefully cpu-z reports this correctly even for mobile cpus).I just doubt a ULV chip is really any better if you overclock it to the level of a LV chip. Unless you're courageous and don't overvolt it to the same level, though you could just undervolt a LV chip instead...
In any case, I'd be very interested in the voltage adjustments (if any) under idle/load for OC/-nonOC setting - of course those chips have a VID range and hence could vary by chip but in practice they don't vary that much and the asus overclocking would presumably add a fixed voltage increase (if any).
mschira - Sunday, October 25, 2009 - link
Amazing, the most interesting new laptops at the moment are all cheap ones.Like the acer Timelines, the Asus"WTF have they been thinking with that name", the Dell Studio 14z etc.
They are all very nice, but they have compromises to keep em cheap. Not too bad compromises, but still.
Why doesn't Asus make a Lambougini version of this little nice buddy? Ditch the CD drive - who needs those - give us a nice screen, give us an expensive light, great case.
I'll happily pay the premium - it's not going to be that much anyway.
M.
KikassAssassin - Sunday, October 25, 2009 - link
Wow, with the exception of the screen, this thing is almost exactly what I've been looking for in a laptop. I've been really disappointed in the seeming non-existence of an affordable, highly-portable laptop with a dual-core ULV processor, non-Intel graphics, and a high-Wh battery. Put a high-quality display with a matte overlay (WhyTF is almost every laptop using freaking glossy nowadays?), and a toggle-able back-lit keyboard on this thing, and it would be my perfect laptop to a T.I also really like the idea of the ability to toggle between low-power integrated graphics and higher-performing discreet graphics, and I wish more laptops would include this feature. I have a feeling nVidia's going to be pushing hard for this once Arrandale comes out.
hybrid2d4x4 - Sunday, October 25, 2009 - link
One request for the game testing section: add an older title s/a Half-life 2 in addition to the usual new new games. I'm more interested in what it can run than the obvious "well, there you have it- it won't run the latest titles, get a desktop for that".Looking forward to the review!!