Our Enthusiast tests, which run at 1080p with maximum settings and 4xAA enabled, makes the GT 555M look pretty bad—Portal is the only result over 30fps, though overall the results weren’t too much worse than the GTX 560. Even low amounts of anti-aliasing seem to really kill the framerates and overall smoothness of gameplay, so I’d definitely recommend disabling it. 

Razer Blade, Enthusiast Settings

Batman: Arkham City—Enthusiast

Battlefield 3—Enthusiast

Civilization V—Enthusiast

DiRT 3—Enthusiast

Elder Scrolls: Skyrim—Enthusiast

Portal 2—Enthusiast

The Blade wasn’t meant to be a GPU monster, only to offer adequate gaming performance in a portable package. And the GT 555M holds up the adequate side of that bargain, with reasonable performance in mid-level gaming modes . I’d liked to have seen a GTX 560 instead to provide more consistent performance at 1080p, but it’s likely that a higher end GPU wouldn’t have fit within Razer’s thermal design constraints. 

It's also worth mentioning Kepler here. Though much of the new 28nm GPU is still under wraps, we did benchmark the GT 640M earlier in the Acer TimelineU M3. It's about 5-10% slower than the Blade's GT 555M but that's with DDR3 vs. GDDR5. Without being able to share more details about the graphics core, clock speeds, or anything else, it's not a comparison that we can shed too much light on. Kepler is the next generation of NVIDIA's GPUs, so as such, performance and efficiency are expected to improve. I'd like to see a midlife refresh of the Blade with a Kepler-based GPU inside; it would go a long way towards quelling the fears about GPU performance especially in the long run. 

Razer Blade - Gaming Performance (Value and Mainstream) Razer Blade - Application Performance
Comments Locked

95 Comments

View All Comments

  • The Ugly Truth - Saturday, March 17, 2012 - link

    http://www.change.org/petitions/anandtech-forum-en...

    Freedom of expression and freedom to have an online life outside of AT forums reach is all we ask.
  • santiagodraco - Sunday, March 18, 2012 - link

    I'm very dissapointed in one aspect of this review. It seems that you were actually trying to protect the Razer from looking bad by not including the Alienware M17x in the review. You post it in the matrix, at almost 900 less, but don't compare it?

    I'd think your readers would be very interested in seeing the top gaming notebook on the market compared to this new Razer.
  • Rogie - Sunday, March 18, 2012 - link

    Got wrong numbers for Razer's relative battery life for idle and h.264.
    5.35 and 3.28.
    That, or the actual minutes are wrong.
  • KaRRiLLioN - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link

    I think the form of this thing is sweet. The touchscreen/touchpad stuff is a bit gadgety and I'm no fan of chiclet keyboards, but I might snag one of these things just because it looks so cool.

    At the very least, it'll be better for typing/web browsing than my Dell Latitude 13--and people will probably think I'm a hitman.
  • asdfzxh - Friday, June 14, 2013 - link

    idts

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now