Application Workloads: Overclocking FTW

Wrapping things up with our performance testing, we have results from the Futuremark PCMark suites as well as some of our own application benchmarking. When it comes to running your office, multimedia, and Internet tasks, most modern laptops are more than fast enough. What follows are a few of the more strenuous application benchmarks - 3D rendering and video encoding - that put more of an emphasis on high CPU speeds. If you don't do that sort of thing on your computer, you will probably find that just about any current dual-core processor is sufficient.

PCMark Vantage and CINEBENCH have 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the test suite available, with performance typically being 10% higher in CINEBENCH and 5% higher in PCMark Vantage. We have pulled the 64-bit results out of the graphs to clean things up, and since this is a 32-bit system we won't bother reporting the 64-bit results. You can find them in our last review, if you're interested. The Alienware m15x using the integrated X3100 is once again shown in gold on the PCMark tests, where the GPU still has an impact.

Futuremark PCMark05

Futuremark PCMark Vantage 32-bit

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R10

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R10

Video Encoding - DivX

Video Encoding - QuickTime

Video Encoding - x264

Video Encoding - x264

Stock performance places the GT627 near the bottom of the PCMark Vantage results (though admittedly only 16% behind the Gateway P-7808u), while it does better in the PCMark05 tests. PCMark05 represents a more "typical" usage scenario for most people, while Vantage stresses the system quite a bit more. Also note that the Toshiba X305-Q725 includes an SSD, which improves performance substantially in PCMark Vantage.

In the video encoding and 3D rendering tests, the GT627 places near the middle of the pack in performance, which you would expect from the P8400 processor. Not surprisingly, for all but the most demanding users the MSI GT627 is plenty fast - in fact, if you don't play games it's probably overkill. For CPU intensive tasks, the stock clocked GT627 is 22% to 23% slower in QuickTime and DivX encoding, but a far more substantial 75% slower in x264 encoding (the second pass, which is far more time consuming) and 64% slower in multi-core CINEBENCH.

Where things get interesting is in the overclocked results, where performance scales almost linearly in some applications with the 15% overclock. It's not enough to get the GT627 past quad-core options in highly threaded workloads, but it does surpass all but the fastest dual-core laptops. The P8400 is quite possibly the perfect CPU for such a laptop, coming in at a low price of around $210 for just the CPU but matching the performance of the T9400 when overclocked, a CPU that costs about $340. The final clock speeds and heat output at the overclocked speed of ~2.6GHz also appear to be well within the cooling capabilities of the chassis, as we never experienced any instability when utilizing the Turbo mode.

Synthetic Gaming: 3DMark Results Battery Testing – we need Hybrid Power, please!
Comments Locked

47 Comments

View All Comments

  • crimson117 - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link

    1366 x 768 no thank you.
  • tviceman - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link

    I'd be more than fine with it. I'm using a cyberpower laptop with a 9600m gt @ 1280x800 and I'm more than happy with the resolution. On a laptop, since performance isn't going to be equal with a similarly priced desktop, I'll take a slightly lower native res if I can still run the game at higher graphical settings. If the game runs smooth, you can always crank on AA to negate the "lower res" disadvantage.

    After all, this is what these laptops are designed for - gaming.
  • tviceman - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link

    I have been anxiously waiting on a review from a legitimate site of this laptop as well! The link you provided though is for their older model. The newer model, which in fact is not much different, is here:

    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9173...">http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp...&typ...
  • Hrel - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link

    Yeah, I agree. I'd really like to see a review on both of those laptops; the Asus and MSI. Though I'm more interested in the "older" model with the P8400 than the 7450... And it'd be nice if instead of that crappy 1366x768 resolution they gave us a screen with a resolution of 1520x855 or at least 1440x810; especially since the 16:9 aspect ratio already reduces the height of the screen; they shouldn't also reduce the vertical resolution.

    I think that Asus with the P8400 and 8800GS GPU is the best laptop you can get for the money; good blend of battery life and size and performance. I'd like to see how that MSI notebook with the HD4670 stacks up.

    Anything beyond an 8800GS notebook GPU is overkill for a laptop and uses too much power for a notebook. And 1366x768 is just not a high enough resolution; minimum on that aspect ratio should be 1440x810!!
  • Hrel - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link

    I meant 9800GS, not that it makes a difference really.
  • sc3252 - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link

    He did mention it in the second link. Not really sure there is much difference in the two. From what I read one has a bigger battery and and lots of colors on the case, while the other has a faster cpu.

    Another laptop I would like a review of is a even cheaper msi model that has a 4670.
    MSI Ex625-227us
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
    looks pretty nice for $750, but really haven't seen many(any) reviews.
  • tviceman - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link

    Woops I thought that was one big link!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now