MSI Megabook S271: a Look at AMD's Turion X2
by Jarred Walton on October 16, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
Closing Thoughts
So there you have it, our first look at a Turion equipped laptop, which also happens to be a dual core Turion X2. Unfortunately for AMD and MSI, the conclusions we can reach are none too surprising. Intel offers better performance at equivalent clock speeds with Core 2 Duo desktop processors versus AMD Athlon X2 processors, and that performance advantage extends to the mobile sector as well. There are a few points in Turion X2's favor, however.
First, it should be less expensive than any of the Core 2 Duo equipped laptops. Second, AMD's low-power state seems to require a bit less power than Intel's low-power state (we would need "identical" configurations to say for sure). Related to the power draw, battery life appears to be slightly better with Turion X2 than with Core 2 Duo, at least if the system is generally idle. The flipped side is that Turion X2 under full load uses more power than Core 2 Duo, so if you intend to run CPU intensive tasks while on battery power it will have less battery life.
Taking a look at the big picture, the MSI S271 and Turion X2 should be more than fast enough for typical business/office use. If you're just looking for a reasonably priced ultraportable laptop and you like the thought of having the extra processor core available when you need it, the MSI S271 should keep you satisfied. That doesn't mean it's better than other options on the market, but it is at least competitive.
We definitely had problems with memory compatibility during our testing, and that can be a problem with just about any laptop currently available. The name brand memory suppliers are usually a safe bet, but in this case it appears that the MSI S271 BIOS is still in need of compatibility tuning. As we mentioned earlier, the whole point of getting a dual core notebook seems to be improved multitasking performance, so having more than 512MB of memory definitely makes sense. In fact, we wouldn't recommend the purchase of any laptop with less than 1GB of memory these days.
If Turion X2 had become available at the beginning of this year, around the same time that Intel launched the Core Duo platform, it would have been much easier to recommend. There are almost certainly areas where Turion X2 would show a performance improvement over Intel Core Duo. If you're trying to decide between a Core Duo laptop and a Turion X2 laptop, overall we would say it's pretty close to a tie, so you should focus on features and other extras that might be important. If you are more concerned with performance, you will either want a better CPU, GPU, or both.
We mentioned in the beginning that the majority of laptops with AMD processors have often been targeted at the budget sector, so they eliminate many higher performance features that people find useful. Unfortunately, that situation doesn't seem to have changed much with the release of Turion X2. While you can certainly find low-end Core Duo notebooks that feature integrated graphics and few expansion options, there are also many midrange and high-end solutions available. The most powerful Turion X2 laptop we can currently find is a 17 inch widescreen model, also from MSI, which includes GeForce Go 7600 graphics: the MSI MS-171772; Compaq and others make similarly equipped notebooks. The good news is that you can find these starting at around $1300, so the price difference is pretty reasonable, although not everyone wants a larger notebook.
In the end, despite the difficulties we initially experienced during benchmarking and testing this laptop, the MSI S271 really isn't that bad. It looks nice, it performs reasonably well, and it's very portable. Battery life is good, and the only real problem we had was memory compatibility. (We also had a problem with the wireless networking, but we would suspect that we caused the issue during our frequent hardware changes.) "Not that bad" is not the same thing as being good, unfortunately.
The internal design could definitely use work, as we don't like having to pry open the system just to install or upgrade memory. The laptop is also clearly a budget dual core model, as most of the components are on the lower end of the performance spectrum. The integrated graphics in particular could present a real performance bottleneck in the next year or so. If you're okay with avoiding 3D applications and sticking with Windows XP rather than upgrading to Windows Vista, then the MSI S271 should suffice. Then again, if you're okay with those limitations, just about any laptop is likely to "suffice". Our overall feeling concerning the MSI S271 is that it is unremarkable.
Taking a look specifically at the Turion X2 lineup, it looks like AMD has a tough road ahead for their mobile sector. They are definitely competitive in terms of battery life and price, but they trail in all our performance benchmarks. (Note that we're talking about CPU benchmarks like 3D rendering and video encoding, which are pretty consistent regardless of chipset and other factors.) The problem AMD faces is the same old story of getting manufacturers to build systems based around their platform rather than an Intel platform. If all the offerings are lower-end budget designs, the market perception can become skewed, when in fact it's as much component choice as CPU that's affecting the results.
How do they convince manufacturers to build higher-spec notebooks using Turion X2 CPUs? In the gaming arena, particularly in laptops, the graphics processor is going to be far more important than the CPU choice, so some midrange Turion X2 offerings with better graphics should be able to offer a pricing advantage while offering similar gaming and battery life performance. All other components being equal, the Core 2 Duo should offer more CPU performance than Turion X2, but both will be GPU limited in virtually any modern 3D game.
Finally, it's worth noting that the slowest Core 2 Duo mobile processor is currently the T5500 (1.66GHz 2MB cache), which is only slightly cheaper than the T7200 (2.00GHz 4MB cache) we tested today in the ASUS A8JS; the fastest Core 2 Duo mobile processors already reach 2.33 GHz, albeit at a much higher cost. Meanwhile, the TL-60 is currently the fastest Turion X2 available, and at present it is priced slightly higher than the T7200 while offering less CPU performance. AMD doesn't really have a truly high-end mobile CPU offering that can compete with a Core 2 Duo T7200 or higher, so that market will continue to belong to the top Intel CPUs (for those that are interested in spending $3000+ on a laptop), but we hope to see more midrange and lower configurations that will be worth considering.
If we were looking to get a low cost dual core laptop right now, we would be far more inclined to go with the HP Compaq nx7400 for $60 more, which includes 1GB of memory and an Intel Core 2 Duo T5600 processor. We're also not sold on the need for dual core CPUs in an ultraportable laptop; sure, you can do it, but most of us would rather have a 14" or larger display if we're talking about a higher performance dual core laptop. If you're after an ultraportable with long battery life, it might actually be advantageous to stick with single core offerings and worry less about CPU performance anyway.
If you want a dual core laptop, we would recommend most people spend a bit more money, as we feel the best designs start at closer to $1500 rather than $1000. If you just want a reasonably fast, inexpensive 12.1" laptop, the MSI S271/MS-1058 is an option to consider, but it has some drawbacks that we've covered in this review. We will have a full review of the ASUS A8JS shortly, and other than the shorter battery life we have found it to be a far more desirable laptop than the MSI S271.
So there you have it, our first look at a Turion equipped laptop, which also happens to be a dual core Turion X2. Unfortunately for AMD and MSI, the conclusions we can reach are none too surprising. Intel offers better performance at equivalent clock speeds with Core 2 Duo desktop processors versus AMD Athlon X2 processors, and that performance advantage extends to the mobile sector as well. There are a few points in Turion X2's favor, however.
First, it should be less expensive than any of the Core 2 Duo equipped laptops. Second, AMD's low-power state seems to require a bit less power than Intel's low-power state (we would need "identical" configurations to say for sure). Related to the power draw, battery life appears to be slightly better with Turion X2 than with Core 2 Duo, at least if the system is generally idle. The flipped side is that Turion X2 under full load uses more power than Core 2 Duo, so if you intend to run CPU intensive tasks while on battery power it will have less battery life.
Taking a look at the big picture, the MSI S271 and Turion X2 should be more than fast enough for typical business/office use. If you're just looking for a reasonably priced ultraportable laptop and you like the thought of having the extra processor core available when you need it, the MSI S271 should keep you satisfied. That doesn't mean it's better than other options on the market, but it is at least competitive.
We definitely had problems with memory compatibility during our testing, and that can be a problem with just about any laptop currently available. The name brand memory suppliers are usually a safe bet, but in this case it appears that the MSI S271 BIOS is still in need of compatibility tuning. As we mentioned earlier, the whole point of getting a dual core notebook seems to be improved multitasking performance, so having more than 512MB of memory definitely makes sense. In fact, we wouldn't recommend the purchase of any laptop with less than 1GB of memory these days.
If Turion X2 had become available at the beginning of this year, around the same time that Intel launched the Core Duo platform, it would have been much easier to recommend. There are almost certainly areas where Turion X2 would show a performance improvement over Intel Core Duo. If you're trying to decide between a Core Duo laptop and a Turion X2 laptop, overall we would say it's pretty close to a tie, so you should focus on features and other extras that might be important. If you are more concerned with performance, you will either want a better CPU, GPU, or both.
We mentioned in the beginning that the majority of laptops with AMD processors have often been targeted at the budget sector, so they eliminate many higher performance features that people find useful. Unfortunately, that situation doesn't seem to have changed much with the release of Turion X2. While you can certainly find low-end Core Duo notebooks that feature integrated graphics and few expansion options, there are also many midrange and high-end solutions available. The most powerful Turion X2 laptop we can currently find is a 17 inch widescreen model, also from MSI, which includes GeForce Go 7600 graphics: the MSI MS-171772; Compaq and others make similarly equipped notebooks. The good news is that you can find these starting at around $1300, so the price difference is pretty reasonable, although not everyone wants a larger notebook.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
In the end, despite the difficulties we initially experienced during benchmarking and testing this laptop, the MSI S271 really isn't that bad. It looks nice, it performs reasonably well, and it's very portable. Battery life is good, and the only real problem we had was memory compatibility. (We also had a problem with the wireless networking, but we would suspect that we caused the issue during our frequent hardware changes.) "Not that bad" is not the same thing as being good, unfortunately.
The internal design could definitely use work, as we don't like having to pry open the system just to install or upgrade memory. The laptop is also clearly a budget dual core model, as most of the components are on the lower end of the performance spectrum. The integrated graphics in particular could present a real performance bottleneck in the next year or so. If you're okay with avoiding 3D applications and sticking with Windows XP rather than upgrading to Windows Vista, then the MSI S271 should suffice. Then again, if you're okay with those limitations, just about any laptop is likely to "suffice". Our overall feeling concerning the MSI S271 is that it is unremarkable.
Taking a look specifically at the Turion X2 lineup, it looks like AMD has a tough road ahead for their mobile sector. They are definitely competitive in terms of battery life and price, but they trail in all our performance benchmarks. (Note that we're talking about CPU benchmarks like 3D rendering and video encoding, which are pretty consistent regardless of chipset and other factors.) The problem AMD faces is the same old story of getting manufacturers to build systems based around their platform rather than an Intel platform. If all the offerings are lower-end budget designs, the market perception can become skewed, when in fact it's as much component choice as CPU that's affecting the results.
How do they convince manufacturers to build higher-spec notebooks using Turion X2 CPUs? In the gaming arena, particularly in laptops, the graphics processor is going to be far more important than the CPU choice, so some midrange Turion X2 offerings with better graphics should be able to offer a pricing advantage while offering similar gaming and battery life performance. All other components being equal, the Core 2 Duo should offer more CPU performance than Turion X2, but both will be GPU limited in virtually any modern 3D game.
Finally, it's worth noting that the slowest Core 2 Duo mobile processor is currently the T5500 (1.66GHz 2MB cache), which is only slightly cheaper than the T7200 (2.00GHz 4MB cache) we tested today in the ASUS A8JS; the fastest Core 2 Duo mobile processors already reach 2.33 GHz, albeit at a much higher cost. Meanwhile, the TL-60 is currently the fastest Turion X2 available, and at present it is priced slightly higher than the T7200 while offering less CPU performance. AMD doesn't really have a truly high-end mobile CPU offering that can compete with a Core 2 Duo T7200 or higher, so that market will continue to belong to the top Intel CPUs (for those that are interested in spending $3000+ on a laptop), but we hope to see more midrange and lower configurations that will be worth considering.
If we were looking to get a low cost dual core laptop right now, we would be far more inclined to go with the HP Compaq nx7400 for $60 more, which includes 1GB of memory and an Intel Core 2 Duo T5600 processor. We're also not sold on the need for dual core CPUs in an ultraportable laptop; sure, you can do it, but most of us would rather have a 14" or larger display if we're talking about a higher performance dual core laptop. If you're after an ultraportable with long battery life, it might actually be advantageous to stick with single core offerings and worry less about CPU performance anyway.
If you want a dual core laptop, we would recommend most people spend a bit more money, as we feel the best designs start at closer to $1500 rather than $1000. If you just want a reasonably fast, inexpensive 12.1" laptop, the MSI S271/MS-1058 is an option to consider, but it has some drawbacks that we've covered in this review. We will have a full review of the ASUS A8JS shortly, and other than the shorter battery life we have found it to be a far more desirable laptop than the MSI S271.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
31 Comments
View All Comments
Cehtna - Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - link
You take one Acer Ferrari 5000 and a TravelMate 8210, and you benchmark them!These are both made by Acer and the battery and chassis are exactly the same and other features should also be the same..
They both come in variants with:
ATIX1600 - 256MB/512MB HyperMemory GRAPHICS
15,4" TFT WSXGA+ (1680x1050) MONITR
1024MB DDR2 MEMORY
120GB SATA HDD
Lithium 9 cells BATTERY
This way its;
LX.TEH06.017 TravelMate 8215WLMi with
Intel Centrino 2 Duo T7200 CPU
Mobile Intel® 945PM Express CHIPSET
versus;
LX.FR50J.016 Ferrari 5002WLMi with
Turion64 2X TL50 CPU
ATI Xpress 1150 CHIPSET
JarredWalton - Tuesday, November 14, 2006 - link
Thanks... now just get Acer to send me both for review! Oh, wait... that's not as easy to accomplish, is it? I would love to review more laptops, with more variation among configurations. However, the simple fact of the matter is that we have to review what we are sent in most cases.I certainly don't make enough money to go out and buy laptops that I want to review, and a lot of companies don't necessarily want to have us do a head-to-head among their computing laptops. What happens if laptop X seriously trounces laptop Y and they both cost about the same amount?
In the end, most people purchase laptops within their price range, so if AMD offers cheaper laptops, some people will buy those laptops whether or not they are faster. Those who want better performance are generally going to pay for more expensive laptops, and in that market that AMD laptops really don't compete very well right now.
etee - Friday, November 24, 2006 - link
AMEN to that. I bet HP, MSI (or any other company that makes value notebooks) doesn't want to see a performance review between their $550 and $1000 notebooks whose only difference is +200Mhz CPU, +40GB HDD, +1GB RAM.... If the public saw the lack of perf. improvement for the money, they'd never buy the $1000 notebook. Too bad discrete graphics hasn't become standard on the mainstream midrange $1000 notebooks yet. That might actually would justify the price.I also found that this review was all over the place and really didn't do a good job of isolating the variables that led to various performance indicators.
How do we quantify the value of the discrete GFX of the ASUS notebook? Certainly system perf. would be significantly improved just because we don't have UMA graphics hogging up the system memory bandwidth. I think the intel notebook should have featured UMA graphics for comparison.
I understand that the notebook makers won't hook you up with samples of all of their offerings. That doesn't mean that the only option is to cover the ASUS and MSI side by side. It would be better to compare a single system with various components upgraded. You can't get every model of notebook from MSI, but you can make your own "models" with upgraded CPUs, RAM, HDDs, batteries and try to generate an approximate price for such a model. If we did this separately for the MSI and ASUS, then the reader can be left to decide what suites them better for a given price. At the very least we wouldn't be trying to compare apples to oranges.
abakshi - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
Honestly, I found this review pretty useless. Forgoing the fact that other sites have actually done comparisons of the 271 with its Core Duo couterpart (the S270, if I recall), it still doesn't offer much.Obviously an IGP solution will be much slower than a Geforce Go 7700. I think most people who are going to read and interpret your graphs know that. But why must everyone have a a GF7700? Integrated graphics at the level of the current ATI chipsets are a good step up from what the vast majority of Intel-powered laptops come with, which is Intel's GMA junk.
The article constantly refers to the ATI IGP as a huge drawback to the machine, implying that the competition has something better. Which other 12" portable has discrete graphics, besides the (heavier, not quite ultraportable) Dell XPS M1210? In fact, I'd argue the widespread use of ATI IGPs is a strength of the AMD platform - the Radeon Xpress chips are far better for everyday usage (from multimedia playback to general performance) than the Intel GMA950 chips. And unlike the GMA chips, R-X200/1150 will run Win Vista's Aero Glass interface and most modern 3D apps very comfortably.
The other problem, related to the point on IGPs, is the focus on gaming. Who plays 3D games on a 12", <5 lbs. laptop? Aren't things like battery life and heat output far more important in this setting than how many FPS it can get in Half-Life 2? Why is there any stress at all on gaming? The almost nonexistent ultraportable gaming market is clearly not the target audience for this machine.
The review even goes to the point of suggesting that mid-level discrete graphics chips like the ATI Mobility Radeon X1400 are inadequate. Something like an X1400 is more than adequate for the vast majority of users. It will run every common 3D function (like Aero Glass) and will even run relatively recent 3D games decently. Ever hear of battery life? Not everyone needs to get 60 FPS while playing Half-Life 2 on their miniscule screen in the train.
So for example, I play games -- but for that, I have my desktop rig at home, with a dual-core A64 X2 4400+ (ironically now probably outperformed by my laptop's Core 2 Duo @ 2.0) and an ATI Radeon X1800XT 512. I'm currently using a Dell E1705 as my primary laptop, with an ATI MR X1400 GPU, which is great - it's solid (with consistently updated and universally compatible ATI drivers, unlike Intel junk), currently running dual-boot Win XP MCE and Vista RC1, and gets far better battery life than versions with more powerful GPUs (NV 7900GS, GTX, etc.).
IntelUser2000 - Wednesday, October 18, 2006 - link
Exactly. Then who cares whether you have a slow integrated card or a SLOWER one. The point of most IGP reviews are to see whether any people who plays latest 3D games will bother with the IGP for their 3D games.
0.1 to 0.2. Nobody will care.
There are no direct comparisons of GMA and R1150 testings on Win Vista's Aero Glass. They are both certified, so they can both run it that's for sure.
Intel also has unified drivers and updated drivers for their IGP. 845G to G965. Of course the drivers aren't up to par as ATI based ones, but considering ATI's specialty, its expected.
I'd say then having GMA950 will be more important for battery life than R1150 then. Because R1150 is more fully featured, and will waste unnecessary battery life.
Final point is: the review isn't perfect, but there aren't many better Turion X2 laptops either. Anandtech happened to review the ones they got in hand.
That's the problem with laptop reviews, it isn't as vast as the desktop ones, but that's little out of scope.
JarredWalton - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
Did you get hung up on page 10? That was there merely to point out that the IGP solutions CAN'T play modern games. End of story. A couple quotes:The point of the article isn't comparing IGP performance; we took exactly one page to clearly show that IGP is inadequate for gaming, and if you don't play games it largely won't matter. A "focus on gaming" would be more what we had in the http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=274...">XPS M1710 review, where we did spend a lot of time on that subject as anyone buying a $3500 notebook with high-end graphics will probably want to make use of them! Oh yeah, I also talked about the advantages of an http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=276...">E1705 with X1400 in another article.
Most notebooks with GMA950 run everything they need to without problems. GMA950 will run Aero Glass I believed (slower than Xpress 1100 but again, that's probably not a concern of anyone looking at budget systems). To say that Xpress 1100 can "run Win Vista's Aero Glass interface and most modern 3D apps very comfortably" is simply not true. It can run them, and perhaps Aero Glass will be fine; modern 3D apps choke on X300SE type hardware. I will worry about fully benchmarking/testing Vista on laptops when it actually ships, but I've read that Aero Glass may kill battery life. :|
hondaman - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link
After upgrading to the new bios from MSI that made the laptop stable, did you try the generic ram again to see if it fixed it?JarredWalton - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link
Yup, still no POST. Should have known better than to buy Gigaram. Heh. Still, it will make for a nice "worst case" test of other notebooks. If a laptop can boot with the Gigaram, it can probably boot with just about anything! That or the SO-DIMM is just bad, which is always a possibility.Patrese - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link
Have you guys seen a huge ANATEL sticker inside the notebook? It is from the Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações, the regulatory agency of telecomunications here in Brazil. Kinda funny to see that on a notebook meant to be sold in the US market, as I have never seen one of these in any PC or notebooks sold in Brazil... :)randomas - Monday, October 16, 2006 - link
I would really like to see a Linux test using 64bit distribution and a 32bit distribution on the same machine and then compare it to an Intel machine, which if I'm correct still doesn't support x86_64 instructions on its portable line of cpus.Seeing the results of the 64 vs 32 bit Linux tests already published here on Anandtech it would make for interesting reading, especially as IMHO this machine has a strong appeal for Linux users who can take advantage of its full potential.
Personally I own a MSI M635 (turion mt34 atix700) which I'm very happy with.