Centrino 2 Laptop Roundup

by Jarred Walton on October 24, 2008 3:00 AM EST

ASUS U6V - Overview

The ASUS U6V is pretty much on the opposite end of the mobile spectrum compared to the G50V. The U6V is similar to the U2E we reviewed a while back, but with a slightly larger 12.1" chassis and many other component upgrades. Still, they are both part of ASUS' "Superior Mobility" range of laptops, so we were hopeful that we would finally have an ultraportable that could compete with the Apple MacBook in terms of battery life.

The overall design of the U6V is a lot more subdued than the G50V, as you would expect. This is a laptop that would be right at home in a board meeting, and the leather palm rest is a nice alternative to the typical shiny plastic we find on many notebooks. Unlike the U2E, the leather surfacing does not extend to the exterior, but that's okay. ASUS also does a nice job with the packaging on the U6V, contributing to the feeling that this is a laptop designed for company executives.

Besides the notebook itself, ASUS once again includes some nice accessories. They give you two carrying cases, a traditional case with a strap and a second that can be used for carrying just notebook. You also get a Bluetooth wireless mouse and two batteries. The small battery is a 3-cell unit that provides a paltry 26.5 Whr of power; the second battery is twice as big with a capacity that matches the battery included with the G50V. ASUS does make a compatible 9-cell battery as well that offer 62% more power than the 6-cell. The warranty options are the same as the G50V: a two-year global warranty, one-year accident protection, and 30-day zero bright dot guarantee. Despite the reduced performance, the smaller size results in the price that's roughly equal to the G50V.

There are two panels on the bottom of the laptop. The smaller one grants access to the hard drive, and the larger panel covers the memory, CPU, and cooling system. Unlike larger notebooks, the 9300M is soldered onto the motherboard instead of using an MXM module - MXM simply requires too much extra space to make it worthwhile. Of course, whether or not the 9300M is even necessary is debatable; graphics performance as we will see later is quite poor, making gaming something of a stretch. If you're not going to play any "complex 3D" games on a laptop, you can almost certainly get by with Intel's X4500. Still, the 9300M is probably at least twice as fast as the X4500, and it may not require any more power for normal use.

ASUS G50V – Specifications and Summary ASUS U6V – Specifications and Summary
Comments Locked

27 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    I chatted a bunch with ASUS on this; there was some confusion so I may have ended up with the wrong conclusion. (Yeah, marketing wasn't positive on the specs, and engineering didn't ever pass on the exact details.) I actually had a paragraph detailing the differences between the 9800M GTS and this supposed 9800M GS. Since I don't have one in my hands, I can't say one way or the other with certainty.

    The worst case would appear to be clock speeds equal to that of the 8800M GTS (500 core instead of 600 core on the 9800M GTS), which is still going to be a lot faster than these other notebooks. Since it's also limited to 1366x768, gaming performance should be no problem at native res... but there's a lot of headroom left untapped. Certainly, gaming performance won't be lower than the G50V tested here, unless the game happens to be CPU limited.
  • Enrox - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    Take a look at the Gateway P-7811 battery's life: it's about 150 minutes regarless the task (DVD playback, web surfing, H.264 playback).
    That to me says only one thing: no power management in place.
    Is that a Vista issue or a BIOS issue?
  • JarredWalton - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    Oh, the P-7811 is definitely doing *something* - though idle battery life is lower than I'd expect relative to the others. Actually, I think it's more that the P-7811 is doing quite well in other tasks. Remember: 17" 1920x1200 LCD, 7200 RPM HDD, and a 9800M GTS put it at a much higher power envelope than most of the other laptops. Relative to the P-6831 and m15x, the results seem to be right where you'd expect. If only Gateway had implemented Hybrid Power....
  • jonmcc33 - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    Did you verify that with the Power Saver setting that EIST was working properly? Use CPU-Z or similar to see if the clock speed of the FSB and CPU does change as it should. Check the BIOS settings as well.
  • CU - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    Yes it would be interesting to know what the cpu, gpu, fsb, and ram clocks are at when in power saving mode for Vista and OSX.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    CPU speed drops to a 6X multiplier, so at least that aspect is working. Looking at the voltages (according to CPU-Z), they're all at 1.083V except for the G50V, which runs at 1.338V most of the time. (I'm still trying to figure out what's going on there and will update when I know more.) I'm not as concerned with G50V battery life, though, since it's in a different class of performance and size; it's the U6V and similar notebooks that need to do a lot better.

    Regarding RAM, GPU, and FSB, the FSB stays locked at the base speed - 1066 MHz on the Centrino 2 notebooks. RAM likewise stays at a set speed, in this case 800 MHz. 2D GPU clocks (according to GPU-Z) are 169 MHz core, 200 MHz (100 base) VRAM on all three of these notebooks. GPU-Z also reports a memory clock of 800 MHz (400 base) for the HP dv5t, which seems wrong - I though the 9600M GT was supposed to be much faster RAM, but apparently not.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    Update: The G50V was back on "High Performance" mode after rebooting (an issue with some of the ASUS software). Setting it back to "Balanced" or "Power Saver" dropped the CPU voltage to the expected voltage - though still slightly higher than the others at 1.063V.
  • fabarati - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    Asus is known for their crappy batterylife in the latest generation. When compared to equal or even better specced laptops, they fall flat on the ground. It's probably because of bad ACPI coding. My F8Sa has worse battery life than my old A8Js, despite having less powerhungry parts. And the A8Js had mediocre batterylife (I reached about 3½ hours, with hardware disabled). I can barely break 2 hours, and that's when I disable hardware.

    The HP DV5 seems to suffer from the same issue, at least that's the conclusion we came to when it was tested by NBR.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    I haven't tested a comprehensive selection of laptops by any means, but if you look at the specs for the various laptops and the resulting Minutes/Whr chart you can see that if this is bad ACPI coding the practice extends far beyond just ASUS and HP. If the MacBook Pro was around 3 or 4 Min/Whr, I'd think maybe it was just some fine tuning that was missing, but it's still literally double what the closest tested Vista laptop managed.

    The best result I've personally seen on Vista to date is the http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=328...">ASUS U2E, which manages 3.72 Min/Whr with the 86.5 Whr battery. That's a lot closer than the other laptops, but keep in mind that has a U7500 CPU (10W max TDP), X3100 IGP, and an SSD, plus an 11.1" LED LCD.

    Another 15.4" laptop I'm currently testing with T7250 and X4500 graphics (plus 4GB RAM, 250GB 5400RPM HDD) manages 4.18 Min/Whr, which is closer to Apple. Still, that's a 50% advantage for the MacBook, so it's not really *that* close. (It gets 204 minutes of battery life in our web surfing test.)
  • nizanh - Friday, October 24, 2008 - link

    Can't you just install Vista on one of the MacBooks?
    Sounds to me like the best testing methodology.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now