ASUS UL50Vf LCD Quality

Wrapping things up, we have the usual disappointing LCD. We understand the need for balancing price and features, but the display is something you will look at every minute you're using a laptop. As such, a better LCD panel would be very much appreciated.

Laptop LCD Quality - Contrast

Laptop LCD Quality - White

Laptop LCD Quality - Black

Laptop LCD Quality - Color Accuracy

Laptop LCD Quality - Color Gamut



This is your typical inexpensive LCD panel: 15.6 inches of low contrast, low color gamut, low resolution "goodness". Considering the competition, it's difficult to get something with a substantially better LCD without compromising on other features. The question is whether you want to compromise on battery life, LCD quality, price, or features. It would be nice not to have to compromise at all, but that's difficult to do.

ASUS UL50Vf Battery Life and Power Optimus, Prime?
POST A COMMENT

49 Comments

View All Comments

  • MasterTactician - Wednesday, February 10, 2010 - link

    But doesn't this solve the problem of an external graphics solution not being able to use the laptop's display? If the external GPU can pass the rendered frames back to the IGP's buffer via PCI-E than its problem solved, isn't it? So the real question is: Will nVidia capitalize on this? Reply
  • Pessimism - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    Did Nvidia dip into the clearance bin again for chip packaging materials? Will the laptop survive its warranty period unscathed? What of the day after that? Reply
  • HighTech4US - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    You char-lie droid ditto-heads are really something.

    You live in the past and swallow everything char-lie spews.

    Now go back to your church's web site semi-inaccurate and wait for your next gospel from char-lie.
    Reply
  • Pessimism - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    So I suppose the $300+ million dollars in charges Nvidia took were merely a good faith gesture for the tech community with no basis in fact regarding an actual defect. Reply
  • HighTech4US - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    The $300+ million was in fact a good faith measure to the vendors who bought the products that had the defect. nVidia backed extended warranties and picked up the total cost of repairs.

    The defect has been fixed long ago.

    So your char-lie comment as if it still exists deserves to be called what it is. A char-lie.
    Reply
  • Pessimism - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    So you admit that a defect existed. That's more than can be said for several large OEM manufacturers.


    Reply
  • Visual - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    Don't get me wrong - I really like the ability to have a long battery life when not doing anything and also have great performance when desired. And if switchable graphics is the way to achieve this, I'm all for it.

    But it seems counter-productive in some ways. If the external GPU was properly designed in the first place, able to shut down power to the unused parts of the processor, supporting low-power profiles, then we'd never have needed switching between two distinct GPUs. Why did that never happen?

    Now that Intel, and eventually AMD too, are integrating a low-power GPU inside the CPU itself, I guess there is no escaping from switchable graphics any more. But I just fail to see why NVidia or ATI couldn't have done it the proper way before.
    Reply
  • AmdInside - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    Because it's hard to compete with a company that is giving away integrated graphics for free (Intel) in order to move higher priced CPUs. In a way, AMD is doing the same with ATI. Giving us great motherboards with ATI graphics and cheap cheap prices (which in many ways are much better than Intel's much higher priced offerings) in order to get you to buy AMD CPUs. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    Don't forget that no matter how pieces of a GPU go into a deep sleep state (i.e. via power gate transistors), you would still have some extra stuff receiving power. VRAM for example, plus any transistors/resistors. At idle the CULV laptops are down around 8 to 10W; even the WiFi card can suck up .5 to 1W and make a pretty substantial difference in battery life. I'd say the best you're likely to see from a discrete GPU is idle power draw that's around 3W over and above what an IGP might need, so a savings of 3W could be a 30% power use reduction. Reply
  • maler23 - Tuesday, February 09, 2010 - link

    I've been waiting for this article ever since it was hinted in the last CULV roundup. The ASUS laptop is a little disappointing, especially the graphic card situation(the Alienware M11X kind of sucked up a lot of excitement there). Frankly, I'd just take a discounted UL-30VT and deal with manual graphics switching.

    Couple of questions:

    -Any chance for a review of the aforementioned Alienware M11X soon?

    -I've seen a couple of reviews with display quality comparisons including this one. How do to the Macbook and Macbook Pros fit into the rankings?

    cheers!

    -J
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now