Dell XPS L501x: An Excellent Mainstream Notebook
by Jarred Walton on November 10, 2010 12:01 AM ESTDell XPS L501x Gaming and Graphics Performance
After so many 768p "midrange" laptops, it's strange to have a different native resolution, especially in light of the GPU performance. We've run our low, medium, and high detail tests at our standardized 768p, 768p, and 900p resolutions. We've also added in 1080p results for those who want to upgrade to the better quality LCD. We're putting all the graphics results on one page, because honestly this review isn't really about gaming and graphics, but we still wanted to see what the L501x could do. We'll start with the easy stuff first.
Low detail is playable in most titles at 1080p, with the lone exception being Mass Effect 2. In keeping with our recent reviews, we also ran Mafia 2 and Metro 2033, but we don't have enough comparison points to make graphs meaningful. Both titles are far more demanding than the rest of our test suite, perhaps an indication of things to come. Mafia 2 tops out at just 32FPS, running minimum detail settings and 768p; at 1080p the frame rate drops down to just 19.3FPS. Metro 2033 is even worse, starting at a less than impressive 24FPS at 768p with DX10 "Low" settings and dropping to just shy of 16FPS at 1080p.
As for comparisons with the GT 335M, the GT 420M gets one tie (BFBC2), several titles where it loses by around 10%, a massive 30% deficit in Call of Pripyat, and then to cap it all off there's a 35% lead in StarCraft II. It's possible the 260.89 driver is the culprit with SC2 (and perhaps some of the other titles as well), as the N82Jv was tested with the now-outdated 258.96 driver, but the general consensus of gaming results is that GT 420M is roughly 10% slower than GT 335M at low settings (give or take).
The move to our medium detail settings drops performance a bit, but nearly all of the tested games stay above 30FPS at 768p. Only Mafia 2 (27.5FPS) and Metro 2033 (22.9FPS) fail to reach playable levels. Of course, at 1080p more than half of the tested games fall under 30FPS (including Mafia 2 and Metro 2033, naturally). L4D2 is the least demanding game in our test suite, and it's joined by STALKER (barely) and StarCraft II. That last is an important win, as SC2 looks pretty awful at low settings but improves dramatically when you switch to medium, so it's good to see it stay above 30FPS.
Looking at the N82Jv comparison once more, things get a bit more interesting. We now have two ties, a ~10% lead by the 335M in two other titles, and a still-large 27% lead in STALKER; however, L4D2 now favors the 420M by nearly 40% and the SC2 lead drops to 25%. Looking at the low and medium detail results as a whole, if "mainstream gaming" means 768p low to medium quality, the XPS L501x (and GT 420M) will do the trick. However, if you want medium to high quality at higher resolutions, you'll need something with a bit more potency.
Wrapping up the gaming and graphics charts, we've got the high quality 900p comparisons and 3DMark—both comparisons equally "useful". Three of the games (DiRT 2, L4D2, and Mass Effect 2) come close to the 30FPS mark but fall just short. All of the remaining titles are far below the playable mark, with dips into the teens and even single digits. The 420M can get a few of the test games to break 30FPS at 768p and high detail settings, but it's simply inadequate for 1080p—or even 900p—gaming with the most recent releases. 335M maintains a slight lead at high settings, but it's mostly academic as neither GPU is really able to handle our high settings.
As for 3DMark, take the results for what they're worth. We've stopped including the charts for 03 and 05, since they're quite outdated, but if you just want the numbers the L501x got 15552 in 03 and 12275 in 05 (about 11% lower than the N82Jv in 03 but just 2% slower in 05). 06 gives the 335M a 21% lead, which is a bit more than our gaming suite, and 7% in Vantage (at the awful-looking Entry Level setting). Vantage also scored 3364 at the "Performance" (1680x1050) defaults.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
95 Comments
View All Comments
Evil_Sheep - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
Great review. My first impression of the rebooted XPS series was "meh" but this review has helped change my mind. I can't remember the last time seeing such an enthusiastic review from Anandtech for a laptop PC (or a gold medal.) Dell IS doing a lot of things right here (for once) and they deserve to be recognized.Still I think there is some real criticism that needs to be made of the XPS 15. The main one, and this may be perceived as being unfair, is there is no good reason for 15" notebooks to exist, aside from niche applications. The XPS 15 is a case in point: 6.1lbs (6.5 w/ the 9-cell), 1.5" thick, 3-odd hours on the standard battery is no longer mobile: the farthest I would want to transport this is from my bed to my couch. And if it's not going to leave my house, why not upgrade one step higher to the XPS 17 which for $100 more gets me valuable screen real estate, a faster video card standard, and more powerful options?
There is a user category that is going to be well-served by this overweight powerhouse, but their numbers are quite small. Most people looking for a mobile computer are much better served by sub-13" / 5lb laptops, where there is a lot of good choice in that category these days. Otherwise a home-based computer is better off as 17". The 15 is too big to be portable, too small to be useful. It's stuck between two product categories but serves neither adequately.
So personally this review leaves me very interested in the XPS 17. I'd love to see how the new Asus N73Jq matches up (also features brand-name audio, also runs the new GT400M parts) ....any chance of a forthcoming review? My guess is that it's completely inferior (unless the rumoured 1080p panel finally shows up) but it looks exquisite and I'd love to read Anandtech's always-thorough verdict.
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
We're working to get the XPS L701x and L401x for review as well, but I don't know how soon that will happen. One thing that does concern me is that while the L501x has a standard 768p display, the thing that really makes this a winner is the 1080p B+GR (WLED) high gamut panel. There's no upgraded LCD on either the L401x or the L701x. Perhaps the stock panel is already good, but without testing I have no idea. I've seen far too many lousy LCDs to assume that just because the 1080p L501x panel is good, the other XPS panels will follow.Perhaps the above explains the existence of the L501x. I actually don't mind the 15-16" form factor, but it does come very close to the 17" laptops. Keep in mind that we're really looking at 15.6" LCD vs. 17.3" LCD, though, so in terms of total size you're looking at 1.3" wider and .9" deeper on the L701x (or roughly 8.5% larger). It's also a substantial 23% heavier, but then it has the ability to use a much more powerful GT 445M GPU in the L701x and comes standard with the 435M... perhaps the cooling accounts for most of the difference?
Finally, while you consider 6.14 lbs too much to carry around, keep in mind that the oh-so-amazing MacBook Pro 15 checks in at 5.6 lbs. Perhaps being thinner makes it feel lighter, but really I have no issue carrying a 6 lbs. laptop around. It's the 9 lbs. with a 1.5 lbs brick and 2 hours of battery life that causes me grief. I'm still perplexed at the poor battery life of the L501x in the Internet test, so I'm going to run that same test with the LCD set to 768p to see what that does and test my theory of the resolution hurting it. With only the IGP active it should have done better, as the idle results indicate. We'll see....
Evil_Sheep - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
I just learned the 17 doesn't have the B+GR panel, and frankly I'm surprised as it seems a natural home for it. I thought I saw in some of the initial coverage that both the 15 and 17 would be offered it. Maybe it will be coming later. I hope so otherwise the 15 is a much better choice (for my needs anyway.)My personal cutoff for weight is 5lbs. I spent years carrying around 6-10lb laptop bags (including AC) all day...it's something I can do but it's something I will no longer choose to do when 13-inchers are cheap, fast and give all-day battery life.
Once they get under 5lbs I often forget they're even there. It feels like going back to the dark ages with a +6lb 15-incher - I mean seriously I was using a similar form factor from Dell in 2000! That's history, or at least it needs to become history real soon.
So yes by that metric I would also eschew the Macbook 15 (Amazing? Maybe. Good value? Hell no.) There is a small subgroup of people who can't get enough specs in a 13" package but still want to attempt to be mobile, but those people are few and know who they are. Most are better off with 13's or 17's (go big or go home.)
Once the 400M parts start showing up in the Asus U30 refresh (and other 13-inchers), it's going to make relative heavyweights like the Envy 14 and XPS 14 look less interesting (you're gonna get the same power but twice the battery life, and of course the same crappy screen.) I'm surprised I haven't seen any announcements yet on the doorstep of the holiday season and considering how sku-happy Asus is.
rorthron the wise - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
Good review with a lot of encouraging info. I'm awaiting delivery of an XPS L701X with Geforce 445m and Intel I7 740QM.Jarred, are there any plans to review the L701X?
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
Yes, we've asked Dell for the L701x. When/if that will come, who knows?warden00 - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
It's too bad they don't offer more options with the video devices. If this had a mobile Radeon 5650 in it it would be -perfect- for me.KommisMar - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
The specs seem reasonably good for the price, but why is Dell still advertising laptops that look like they belong in 1999? I know you make some nice looking laptops, Dell. Stop hiding them in the business section of your website!TEAMSWITCHER - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
Sure you can save a lot of money, but if your gonna use the computer for many years do you really want to lug around something so fat, heavy, and ugly? Remember that something is a bargain only if you get what you wan't. Why can't this thing be 1" thick, 1 pound less, and bit easier on the eyes. Also, why can't they put in a big battery without having it bulge out the bottom of the laptop. WHY!!!!If Apple can do it, why can't Dell? What the hell is going on here? Has Apple patented thin, lightweight good-looking laptops with non-protruding batteries? Dell - get a fu#&ing clue!
JarredWalton - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
Apple tends to run hot, they have a slower GPU, and OS X is far more optimized for power than Win7. Controlling software as well as hardware certainly gives you some advantages. And if they went with squared edges like the MacBook rather than rounded corners, a bunch of people would be saying it looks boxy. This weighs half a pound more than the MBP 15, and it's about .3" thicker. That .3" should help with cooling quite a bit. Could they improve the design? Sure, there's always stuff that could be better, but the old Studio XPS 16 was worse in many ways in my book -- all that glossy plastic was horrible!mrmbmh - Saturday, November 13, 2010 - link
Does this high quality LCD exist only for 15" Models? How about new 14 Dell XPS? (I don't mean resolution.... ? I mean contrast &.... )