MSI X610: Supersizing the Netbook?
by Jarred Walton on October 6, 2009 10:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
X610 Application Performance
You can read about our testing setup and the other laptops used in our previous GIGABYTE M1022 review. As an amalgamation of netbook and notebook designs, the MSI X610 straddles the fence between those two markets. Considering the suggested price of €500, the X610 is going to compete more against entry-level notebooks (i.e. Gateway's NV52/NV58 models) than it will against netbooks, although certainly there are users that will be interested in a multimedia netbook that doesn't weigh a lot and the X610 fits that niche nicely.
We will start our performance comparison with general application testing, including PCMark, CINEBENCH, and video encoding tests. Since MSI ships the X610 with Windows Vista (32-bit), we are also able to run PCMark Vantage this time around. As we have discussed elsewhere, PCMark05 has some odd results under XP in some of the tests that skew the overall score. We will include detailed PCMark05/PCMark Vantage results where applicable so you can see the individual test scores.
 |
The general application performance results establish a trend that we will see repeated in many areas. Compared to netbooks, the MSI X610 is faster than any current Intel Atom offering. That's not likely to change until Pineview/Pine Trail at the very earliest, and even that isn't a guarantee that Intel Atom will surpass a reasonably fast single-core Athlon (or Core 2) processor. On the other hand, the Gateway NV52 with its QL-64 processor easily beats the X610, and the NV58 is anywhere from 2-3.5X as fast. You might say that's not a fair comparison, but keep in mind that the Gateway NV58 is a $600 laptop, the NV52 is a $500 laptop, and X610 is currently targeting a €500 price tag. It weighs less, but it's also substantially slower.
Turning to the detailed PCMark results, outside of a few tests that clearly favor Windows Vista, the general pattern remains the same. The two Gateway laptops are usually first and second place in the MSI is third, followed by the various netbooks. There are individual cases where that doesn't hold true, but most of the time that's related to hard drive performance. Only two tests have the MSI X610 clearly in the lead, and it should come as no surprise that both tests involve graphics. In PCMark05, the 3D Pixel Shaders and 2D 64 Line Redraw tests have the X610 leading by 200% and 50%, respectively. It's also interesting to note that PCMark Vantage Gaming suite still has the X610 trailing the Gateway laptops by a significant margin.
All of the above tests focus primarily on CPU performance, and they take advantage of multi-core processors. That definitely puts the Neo MV-40 at a disadvantage, and we will see if the discrete graphics can turn the tables in other benchmarks. It looks as though the HD 4330 GPU in the X610 potentially offers three times the performance of the HD 3200 in the NV52. However, games also require CPU performance at times, so depending on the game engine we may or may not see the HD 4330 flex its muscles.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
41 Comments
View All Comments
AnnonymousCoward - Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - link
1366x768 sucks.You can get a Dell 15.6" 1600x900, dual core pentium T4200, 6-cell battery, with DVD drive for $514. Or with the HD4330 for $614. The X610 is $735. The Dell weighs 1.5 pounds more, though, so you'll need to hit the gym.
Mint - Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - link
That's a pretty big "though". 4.5 lbs is just about the limit for fairly comfortable portability, and comparing it to a 6 lb notebook is ludicrous.1366x768 on a 15.6" is similar pixel size to most desktop monitors, and 1440x900 isn't that much better yet it's the highest resolution you get in a 4.5 lb notebook, AFAIK. Compare it with the top rated notebooks at this weight, like the Timeline 4810 (same res) and MacBook Pro 13" (1280x800).
AnnonymousCoward - Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - link
Comparing 4.5 pounds to 6 pounds is ludicrous? If you're that picky about weight, you'd better go for a 2 pound netbook. I would gladly take the 1.5 pounds for the high res screen and fast CPU.gstrickler - Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - link
Actually, Dell lists it at 5.54 pounds with 6 cell battery and DVD drive. It's under 6 pounds no matter how you configure it. Yes, the extra pound will make a difference, but anything under 6 pounds is very portable.Certainly, the Dell Studio 15 sounds more interesting than the MSI X610, and I would like to see how a Dell Studio 15 and/or 13" MacBook compare in performance and battery life. The Dell has the Intel X4500HD IGP standard, offers HD4570 discrete GPU as an option. The MacBooks uses the Nvidia 9400M G chipset. Both IGPs are slower than the HD4330, but they're not terrible and they use a lot less power. Both use C2D (the Dell base price has the dual core Pentium T4200, which is a C2D with less cache and slower FSB, but that's still a big step up from a single core 1.6GHz Athlon).
Mint - Thursday, October 8, 2009 - link
The market has proven both of you wrong for many years now. Why do you think Vaios and Lifebooks cost so much? Or why Apple charges more for the Air than the Pro 13"? Why do you think the M1330 was such a hit, despite costing much more than 15" Dells? Why do you think the X60/X200/X300 Thinkpads sell for so much more than 15" Thinkpads?5 lbs really is where it starts getting uncomfortable for the majority of people. 4 lbs is nice, 3 lbs is desireable. Netbooks took off when they weren't any cheaper than much faster value notebooks.
sxr7171 - Friday, October 9, 2009 - link
Ha Ha, that's what I was thinking the whole time reading this article. I'm sitting here with a 2.4lb Thinkpad X200s laughing in my head wondering about in what parallel universe would a 4.5lb laptop be considered light.This thing weighs 2.4lbs and packs a Core 2 Duo. There is no way they will allow these "netbooks" to cannibalize the sales of ultraportables hence the awkward netbook form factors as this machine. The only netbook that could even tempt me is the 1.4lb Vaio-P or actually now the Vaio-X. There could not possibly be a better machine made for surfing the internet while lying on the couch.
Also that Dell E4200 - great specs, nice 2.2lb weight.
Mint - Saturday, October 10, 2009 - link
If you're laughing at me, then what do you think about the guys that I replied to who are suggesting a 6lb notebook is light enough and comparable to this?Regardless of screen size, you can rarely get more than 1366x768 in a 4.5lb notebook for less than twice the price. No Apples, only two Dells (the 14z's), no IdeaPads (Thinkpads are way too expensive), etc.
AnnonymousCoward - Thursday, October 8, 2009 - link
I don't really understand your last sentence. I think netbooks took off since they were dirt cheap and ultra portable.Weight-aside, at 15.6", 1600x900 is a must.
Bull Dog - Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - link
I recently owned a MSI GT735 laptop and it too had the integrated GPU disabled. On the other hand, my family has a couple of old Asus laptops with 2.0GHz Turion 64 X2 CPUs and Mobility Radeon 2600 GPUs and x1250 integrated graphics and Asus gave users to option in the bios to switch between the two. And this was long before AMD was talking about doing this.Additionally the 1366x768 LCD screens are just fail. 800 vertical pixels is bad enough, now I'm supposed to step down to 768? No thank you. Why didn't MSI include AMD's dual core Athlon x2 Neo cpu instead? Probably cost reasons but it would have made the laptop far more convincing. Personally, I'm loving my HP dvz2.
dingetje - Wednesday, October 7, 2009 - link
"If MSI could keep the price close to $500 (€500)"eh, 500 Euro is about 735 US Dollar ... oops?