Alienware M11x R3: Portable Powerhouse
by Dustin Sklavos on July 22, 2011 1:15 AM ESTBattery, Noise, and Heat
We've already established that the updated Alienware M11x offers substantially more processor and graphics performance than its predecessors, enough to hang with and oftentimes even beat last generation's mainstream notebooks. With the same battery as the previous two generations, is it more frugal in power consumption as well?
While we would've liked to see a healthy improvement of battery life across the board, only the idle running time gets a big boost; everything else is status quo. That's not necessarily a bad thing, though, as the M11x line is capable of a respectable 6+ hours of running time surfing the internet and 4+ hours of high definition movie playback. The R3 is at least on par with the Penryn-based first-generation model, and the slightly reduced battery life of the Arrandale-based R2 is nowhere to be found. In two years we've basically doubled performance in the M11x without increasing power consumption.
Thermal performance is frankly excellent, too, and unlike the troubled M14x fan noise isn't as big an issue as long as the intake's noise is muffled by the table. The M11x R3 isn't as powerful as the quad-core-equipped M14x and doesn't enjoy as nice a screen, but it runs cooler, lasts longer on the battery, and is quieter. Gamers looking for a portable solution are going to have to seriously consider whether or not they want the added size, noise, and performance of the M14x against the M11x R3; personally I'm not even sure which one I'd go for.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
55 Comments
View All Comments
ouchtastic - Friday, July 22, 2011 - link
forgot to say that 720p would work great too when output via hdmi, can game on any hdtv out there. Although I suspect nvidia settings might require you to play with overscan settings if you do this.Thermogenic - Friday, July 22, 2011 - link
I have an m11x R1 and generally like it, although the CPU really holds me back trying to watch MLB.tv.Can anyone comment on the webcam quality of the R3? I find the R1 to be exceptionally poor in low light situations, and not great even with good lighting.
rufwork - Friday, July 22, 2011 - link
"The R3 is easy to recommend over the R2. It's absolutely worth the money, definitely the best one Alienware's released thus far, and an easy sell for the portable gamer. The $999 stock configuration can easily be left unchanged..."CNET's running a deal now with the R2 (I believe) with i3 for $599.
Windows 7 Home Premium, 64Bit
Intel Core i3 330UM (3M Cache, 1.2 GHz) - Overclockable
11.6-inch WideHD 1366x768 (720p) WLED
1GB NVIDIA GeForce GT 335M
Alienware M11x a/b/g/n 2x2 MIMO Wireless
Is it really worth two-thirds the cost to move to R3 land? What games am I missing at R2 for $600 that I'm getting with R3 for a grand? Which doors can't I open? (Honest questions here; if the difference is a PS3, the answers should be pretty convincing ones, though, don't you think?)
redchar - Friday, July 22, 2011 - link
I wouldn't buy the stock for $1000. I've been waiting, and just recently the r3 has come out on dell's refurbished device website. I had seen the stock version for as low as $800, and the high-end i7 version for $900. Also, dell gives out coupons monthly to give discounts on the already discounted refurbished devices, usually between $100-200 off. So, before tax and shipping you might be able to get the stock version for $700 or something similar. Compared to the r2, you'd be getting better performance, usb3, and slightly better battery life. It might be worthwhile.Also, the refurbs get a 1 year warranty which covers free in-home repairs, so I really don't see a point in buying them new.
tzhu07 - Friday, July 22, 2011 - link
Does this company put any effort into industrial design? That thing looks like puke.dhiiir - Friday, July 22, 2011 - link
it doesn't look as ugly as I used to think. A small, mostly smooth black laptop if you think about it - a lot less uglier than some of the previous alienware designs with crazy ribs on the lid. It reminds me a bit of a ferrari, actually. You know - overall it will certainly stick out, but as long as you don't go out of your way to enable all the LEDs to make it look like a kids civic, the curves aren't too bad, or at least I can put up with them since the m11x has so many other great features.By the way, I would like to share a website with everyone, you can try clicking into perspective,-.www.upsfashion.com- there are many things we need, I often buy things here. Now share it with everyone. Can not miss it, or will be very unfortunate.dhiiir - Friday, July 22, 2011 - link
good ,i want to buy itmschira - Saturday, July 23, 2011 - link
my Lenovo t420s weights 3.94 pounds that is with a 14" screen. I wouldn't call it ultraportable thought....not that the t420s can compete in graphic power, unfortunately...
M
Luke2.0 - Saturday, July 23, 2011 - link
Forgive me if this sound noobish, or OOT.Taken from ark.intel.com for i7-2720QM
Memory Type: DDR3-1066/1333/1600
# of memory channels: 2
Max memory bandwidth: 25.6 GB/s
Could I put in a pair of DDR-1866 or 2000 modules and run them at said speed, thus more bandwidth?? 32 GB/s, anyone?
FYI I ask because I read Llano provides users with max 51.2 GB/s (some) thanks to the generous 128-bit bus, making me feel "why not,Intel?!"
You know, Ivy Bridge would get the same 25.6 GB/s of max bandwidth on paper, at least for now.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4318/intel-roadmap-i...
Thanks.
erple2 - Saturday, July 23, 2011 - link
The answer is "yes, but it's only worthwhile where memory bandwidth is your limiting factor". Nowadays, I can't think of many situations where memory bandwidth (beyond a certain level, that is) has any significant play in the overall performance of the machine. Sure, if you're compiling large quantities of java code in parallel, or maybe certain tasks while manipulating large data files might be faster, I'm willing to bet that the additional cost of DDR1866 or 2000 memory modules would not translate into a reasonably measurable (> 5%) increase in performance. Unless there's no additional cost to fancier memory.Though that's more or less been the norm for the past 5 years - faster memory generally doesn't make a reasonable (considering it's price premium) choice. Note that overclocking can slightly justify better memory (faster, tighter timings, etc), but even there, the gains aren't necessarily in line with the resultant price premium.