ASUS X72D/K72DR: Three Cores, No Waiting
by Dustin Sklavos on October 25, 2010 12:01 AM ESTAn Odd Value Proposition
To look at the ASUS X72D, you have to wonder who ASUS was gunning for with this build. The X72D seems aimed at basic users who just want decent all-around performance and an attractive if understated multimedia machine, and on that front we can say it's fairly successful. The Blu-ray reader, fast hard drive, and reasonably good screen are all signs that point to "yes" for this notebook, and with the HDMI port it can legitimately serve double duty as a media center for home users.
The problems start to creep in when performance metrics are taken into account. While it's true the X72D performs at least decently, seeing the Phenom II N830 in action starts to explain why most manufacturers are hesitant to send out AMD-based notebooks for reviews. The N830 isn't terrible, but at some points it even struggles to catch up with Intel's ultra low-voltage chips. At the same time, it draws substantially more power, and the chipset it's paired with only exacerbates things.
This only points to something that's been a continual problem for AMD for years now: they need to seriously step their game up in the mobile market. Intel is competing on power, price, and CPU performance, and with Sandy Bridge on the horizon, AMD's last foothold—integrated graphics performance—is going to disappear. AMD has their Bobcat, Bulldozer, and Llano cores all coming out next year, but for now we've got the old K10.5 designs and they're looking very long in the tooth.
Likewise, the Mobility Radeon HD 5470 just doesn't make sense—in general, and as a dedicated GPU here. The clock speed may be ramped up about as high as it can go, but that doesn't change the fact that the chip is still an underpowered dog incapable of offering a solid gaming experience even at 1366x768. Can you game on it? Yes. But I can push the 380 MHz Radeon HD 3200 in my ThinkPad X100e to deliver playable framerates in some of the games I play, so that's not really the point. The 5470 does not add enough value to justify its inclusion, and this is one point where ASUS could've done a lot better.
Of course, at the end of the day, the big question is price. Can ASUS deliver the X72D at a price point attractive enough to make up for its issues? Well, for starters, our unit is labeled the X72D, but you won't find it anywhere on ASUS's site or in retail (at least not in the US--it looks like the X72D might be a special European model). The K72Dr, on the other hand, is fairly easy to track down, and it's the same model less the Blu-ray and with a 5400 RPM hard drive. At $725 on NewEgg, you can make a fairly convincing case for it as a desktop replacement notebook. For Mom and Pop, I'd definitely choose it over competing Acer notebooks: build quality is better, and unless Mom's planning on fragging noobs in Modern Warfare 2 she's not liable to miss having a faster GPU. Finding the Blu-ray-equipped model is a lot harder, and the best price we've seen of around $950 online is frankly just too much.
And that's really what it's going to boil down to. This is a budget notebook in the performance and features arena, but it's well-built, flexible enough to handle most tasks, and ASUS' standard two-year warranty is still one of the best in the business. If you can find it for a good price—we think about $800 is right, including the BRD Combo drive—then it's definitely worthy of consideration.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
37 Comments
View All Comments
debacol - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
Except it isn't useful. The i3 compares to it in performance yet destroys it in battery life. Plus you can get a similar laptop with an i3 in it for cheaper than this. I'm really hoping bobcat competes, because Intel has completely mopped the floor with AMD in the mobile sector.Malih - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
+1this cries for Zacate, I'm on the market for 12"/13" new notebook right now, but until Zacate is released and reviewed here on AT i'm not gonna make any decision, my 3 years old 12" acer 2920z will still be around.
xxtypersxx - Monday, October 25, 2010 - link
Holy thermals, that is high for even an intel chip and all the guidance I have ever seen with AMD's 45nm chips reccomends 60-70C as the top end.blackshard - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
60-70°C are reccomendations for desktop chips.mobile chips have far higher tolerances (up to 100°C and more).
mino - Monday, October 25, 2010 - link
Reasons for 5470 to exist:1) Crappy/incompatible Intel IGP drivers (counts for Intel platform)
2) 3x the performance of IGP's (RS880/Arrandale)
3) Hybrid Crossfire anyone ??? You mention the uselessness of IGP and yet you not even bother mentioning whether Hybrid crossfire id available ...
Sorry Dustin, but your bashing of HD5470 is just a spoiled kid's talk not worth of this site.
This issue aside, thanks for an interesting revue.
JarredWalton - Monday, October 25, 2010 - link
Take your comments in light of the laptop being reviewed and you'll see the problem. Intel IGP is a different platform, 3x slow is still slow, and ASUS didn't use Hybrid CrossFire--or switchable graphics. The bigger problem is that there's just not much utility in these low-end parts anymore.If you were talking about the old Core 2 GMA 4500MHD IGP, I'd give you point one, but the Intel HD Graphics has had very few problems, particularly with the latest drivers. It is, as far as I'm concerned, essentially equal to the HD 4200 IGP. Yes, there are a few areas where I'd give the 4200 the edge, but for casual users it just doesn't matter. It can handle HD video (including YouTube HD), and even if you wanted to argue about audio bitstreaming capabilities Intel can do DTS-HD and DD TrueHD if I'm not mistaken (though it may require getting a setup with proper BIOS support).
Anyway, I'll give you the existence of the HD 5470 as something the market wants, but when we say "the market" I think we all understand that it really means "big OEMs like Dell and HP". Any consumer that knows their stuff understands that entry-level discrete graphics chips are a joke. The "midrange" stuff only costs a bit more, typically doubles performance and allows improved quality, and it doesn't even use that much more power. If you have switchable graphics thrown in, then there's really no reason to bother with 5470.
NVIDIA's GT 415M looks to be more like a low-end 5650 competitor based on the specs, so hopefully the next-gen AMD mobile parts will finally move beyond the pathetic 80 Stream Processor mark. That's our real complaint: IGP = 40 SP, entry dGPU = 80 SP, midrange GPU = 400 SP. That's a major jump in shader capabilities.
Dustin Sklavos - Monday, October 25, 2010 - link
Jarred covered me but I'd like to point out...we haven't had Hybrid Crossfire since the 3400 series.BaronMatrix - Monday, October 25, 2010 - link
If you notice the Asus i7 has an 84Wh battery where the AMD has a 48Wh battery.JarredWalton - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
Which is why we have the "relative battery life" chart.orionmgomg - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - link
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...about 1,000$
I would say a little too high for this computer.
For 1000 you can get a better set up, or better hardware (better GPU) and performance
I dont understand why you did not have a price chart necx to overall performance chart - that way you could clearly see what you get for your money, system to system,
but oh well - hooray for AMD and their ability to get any traction in the laptop marketshare catagory