$600 Notebook Roundup - Crowning the Affordability King
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 29, 2005 10:38 AM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
The Test
For all tests, each machine was tested with a clean install of Windows and all drivers installed (the latest available as of the publication date), but none of the bundled applications were installed (with the exception of any battery/power management utilities).
All performance tests were conducted with the Power Management settings set to Always On.
All benchmarks were conducted with the display set to the native resolution of the notebook's LCD panel.
Mobile Mark 2005 battery life tests were conducted with the Power Management settings set to Portable/Laptop, but with the screen set to never turn off and with the hard disk set to power down after 5 minutes. All battery life tests were conducted with the displays set to 60 - 70 nits.
Performance testing was done using Business and Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004, as well as SYSMark 2004.
Battery life testing was done using Mobile Mark 2005.
| Test Configuration | |
| Chipset Drivers | Intel 915/855 - Intel INF Installation Utility 7.2.2.1006 ATI Radeon Xpress 200M - ATI Catalyst 5.10 |
| Graphics Drivers | Intel 915/855 - Intel Graphics Driver 14.17 ATI Radeon Xpress 200M - ATI Catalyst 5.10 |
For all tests, each machine was tested with a clean install of Windows and all drivers installed (the latest available as of the publication date), but none of the bundled applications were installed (with the exception of any battery/power management utilities).
All performance tests were conducted with the Power Management settings set to Always On.
All benchmarks were conducted with the display set to the native resolution of the notebook's LCD panel.
Mobile Mark 2005 battery life tests were conducted with the Power Management settings set to Portable/Laptop, but with the screen set to never turn off and with the hard disk set to power down after 5 minutes. All battery life tests were conducted with the displays set to 60 - 70 nits.
Performance testing was done using Business and Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004, as well as SYSMark 2004.
Battery life testing was done using Mobile Mark 2005.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
50 Comments
View All Comments
OrSin - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
No video benchmarks at all. I'm not saying test BF2, but something would be nice.I think the AMD laptops would show some definate leads in that.
raskren - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
It sounds like you want to see a benchmark where the AMD offerings *might* show an advantage over Intel so you can feel better about *your* company.These are not for gaming. Why should Anand waste his time?
Why don't we do some Geo Metro top speed testing as well?
hondaman - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
Has nothing to do with amd vs intel.Has everything to do with how well laptops do compared to desktops in games.
hondaman - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
I was dissappointed about this too. It was the first thing i looked for when I read this article today on anandtech. I wanted some game benchmarks.Anyone who buys a 600.00 laptop isnt buying it for games, however, I _am_ in the market for a laptop in the 1000.00 range, and I would like to do some casual gaming here and there on it. Severeral of these laptops reviewed share the same video processor as some laptops much more expensive, and good laptop reviews are so hard to come by.
Hacp - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
Bottom line, gaming on integrated graphics is non existant. If you want a gaming laptop, get dedicated graphics.PrinceGaz - Wednesday, November 30, 2005 - link
Gaming does not necessarily mean playing the very latest games, and at the highest graphics quality settings. Some people seem to think all that matters with a game is how pretty the graphics are, and discard it when something that looks better comes along. Gameplay is more important to me, and there are plenty of older games that are just as much fun to play as the current hits.I'm sure all of these $600 laptops with their integrated graphics (especially ATI) would be quite capable of playing the top games of the 2001-2002 era very well, and do a decent job with some later titles as well. The only likely probloem is the 256MB system memory which has to be shared with graphics-- but an upgrade to 512MB is the first thing most people would do to these laptops anyway to make them more flexible.
mikecel79 - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
Why? Who is going to try and game on one of these things?oupei - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
maybe some RTS games or something would have been nice.Hacp - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
Gaming would be horrible. WHo would wnat to play halflife 2 at 800x600 at 24 frames per second?I have a V2000Z and tried playing some games on it. It sucks. About the only "modern" game that I can play is Civ VI.
I'm pretty sure that older games will run fine on it though.
bjacobson - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link
Do you have the x300 ATi or the Intel graphics? I'm thinking of getting one of these boards too.