Intel Core 2 CULV Roundup: Who Needs Atom?
by Jarred Walton on February 4, 2010 4:00 AM ESTCULV: Great for Mobility
If we just limit ourselves to a discussion of long(er) battery life laptops and netbooks, the rundown simplifies a lot. Your choices are between Atom and CULV, with better battery life and lower performance on the Atom side. NVIDIA's ION platform offers better graphics and video support, but you're still saddled with a slow Atom CPU. Pricing is closer to $500 on most ION netbooks, and opinions on the size are split between those who feel 10.1" is fine and those that feel it's too small - I'm in the latter camp. Battery life, incidentally, is slightly worse with ION than CULV laptops. As an alternative, the ASUS 1201N goes for dual-core Atom 330 and ION, further reducing battery life but improving the form factor if you're not a fan of 10.1" keyboards. CULV is still faster in non-gaming tasks, but gaming and video playback work quite well on the 1201N. CULV is a great way to balance performance, battery life, and cost while keeping a small size. Given the choice, we'd either go with one of the CULV models or we'd move up to CULV with switchable graphics; Atom remains more of a secondary (or tertiary) computer. Sure they cost more, but we feel the cost is justified.
Which is the "best" of the above options we just listed? Honestly, that's a question you need to answer for yourself, and hopefully we've given you enough data to determine where you stand. Right now, I'm going to recommend CULV for most users looking at a decent laptop, simply because it fits my mobile lifestyle. If I were in need of a new laptop and only had $300, I'd skip Atom and save my pennies until I could afford a CULV laptop instead. They may be almost twice the cost, but in my book they're more than twice as good. With CULV I feel I can do everything I need without serious compromises; Atom is just too slow to be my only PC. We're very curious to see if the new Arrandale CULV offerings can improve on current CULV or if they'll be a case of two steps forward, two steps back. We should know some time in the next month or two.
We looked at three CULV laptops today, and unfortunately we had some fundamental complaints with both of the 11.6" units. We didn't like the Acer AS1810T keyboard much, and the Dell 11z touchpad was, in a word, horrible. There's another option that we can recommend for those that want to stay close to netbook sizes: the ASUS UL20a. The chassis is essentially the same as the 1201N, which we liked quite a lot, with battery life listed at 7.5 hours. It includes an SU7300 CPU, but memory is cut to just 2GB compared to 4GB on competing offerings. Still, 12.1" is close enough to 11.6" that few would complain. The only remaining drawback is that you lose HDMI output, which the Dell 11z, Acer Timeline, and Gateway EC5409u all provide. Overall, we feel the best current CULV designs priced at $600 or less all come from Acer and Gateway.
 |
The Gateway EC5409u is an excellent choice if you like the larger keyboard and LCD, and subjectively it's my favorite of the bunch. The Acer Timeline 3810TZ and 4810TZ are close behind, with keyboards that are fine for typing (but unfortunately no aluminum cover unless you buy one of the more expensive models). We've tested the EC5409u, and we've looked at the Timeline 3810, 4810, and 5810 at local stores. Frankly, we're impressed with what Acer and Gateway have put together, and we're happy to award all four models our Bronze Editors' Choice award. The 11.6" Acer and Gateway models have quirks (specifically, the keyboard), but the 13.3", 14.0", and 15.6" offerings are all very good and worth a serious look. The only caveat is that we only recommend the versions with dual-core CPUs, so make sure you order the right model - the Pentium SU4100 or Core 2 Duo SU7300 are both much better than the Pentium SU2700 or Core 2 Solo SU3500.
Why only a bronze? Because there's still room for improvement; think of this as an "A-" award rather than an "A+" - and if you're keeping score, that means the ASUS UL80Vt is still our preferred solution. Give us a better LCD panel and more of the aluminum shell on the EC5409u and we're looking at a Gold award. Now we just need to wait and see what companies can do with Arrandale CULV. It took a couple years for Core 2 CULV to hit its stride, but hopefully the Arrandale laptops will build on the good (low price and great battery life) rather than returning to the CULV of old (underpowered and overpriced).
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
62 Comments
View All Comments
yyrkoon - Thursday, February 4, 2010 - link
Jarred. Without even having to read the article/comparison here, I could have told you this would have been a no brainer.Last year I purchased a Toshiba Laptop with a T3400 CPU in it for less than $400( barely ) with free shipping. Now technically, this CPU is labeled as a "Pentium dual core. What that means exactly, I am not sure. But what I can tell you about this complete system is that at max load, it draws less than 40W( 17W light duty / idle ), and will play all but the most intense games reasonably well.
Now what really surprised me about this laptop, after the fact that I did not think it could even play Hellgate: london( and it does, well, mostly ). Was that it encodes h264 video at close to the same speed as my desktop. Granted, my desktop is somewhat aged, but is no slouch. A P35 based system running an E6550 with 4GB of ram. Over Clocked to run 1:1 with the memory( 2.8Ghz ). Now perhaps I am missing something here, like perhaps Handbrake is not the best app to use to encode h264 ( x264 ), or maybe I am missing something else. Either way, I am fairly impressed. Which as I get older is something that is not as easy as it once was to do.
So my point here, is that if an older system based off older technology can do well in this arena. I can see why newer technology can put the Atom to shame for a slightly higher price, and slight higher power consumption.
One thing that does have me confused. Is why vendors/ OEM's have not implemented low power / performance parts for the common desktop. There certainly is an interest, all one has to do is search the web for a while and find 1000's of people out there trying to do different various things along these lines.
For instance. Many of us possibly know that getting a low power desktop is not much of a challenge(read: ~50W full load, including an LCD ). However, popping in a discrete video card that has any sort of decent performance will more than likely triple your load at the wall. Why nVIdia/ATI insist on bleeding us dry with costs on the cards, and then insult us further by requiring us to buy an even bigger power supply. Not to mention the first born children we're obligated to give our local power companies for powering such beasts. Is it too much of a stretch of imagination to put a mobile graphics processor on a PCI-E 16x PCB ? I think not.
With the above said. No, this does not imply gaming. Discrete graphics vs. integrated / onboard is a huge performance gain on its own. There are many different application out there that could benefit from this, and gaming is just a minor part of that.
Souka - Thursday, February 4, 2010 - link
My brother bought a HPmini netbook for our Mom, she hated how slow and unresponsive it was.All she did on it was read her hotmail, look at some gardening sites, and read the news... She was quite disappointed how slow it was compared to her 8 year old Pentium4 thinkpad laptop.
I tweaked it best I could for performance, cpu typically wasn't very busy, 200mb+ free ram, hard drive not too busy... just plain sluggish.
I even removed the Antivirus and all unecssary runtime apps... no noticible difference
Ended up getting her a cute little used Sony Vaio ULV book... she loves it...and I paid just a bit more than the netbook.
Oh yeah...the Vaio gets 5-8hrs run time on used battery... nice
Mumrik - Thursday, February 4, 2010 - link
The display is "11.6" LED Glossy 16:9 768p (1366x768)" in the box for the Gateway. It should be 15.x...aglennon - Thursday, February 4, 2010 - link
I always wondered, Would battery life when playing videos be longer if you played the videos off of a flash drive rather than the hard drive?You could put the hard drive to sleep to save on the battery draw. Or would you?
JarredWalton - Friday, February 5, 2010 - link
My experience is that powering of the hard drives may not occur as frequently as you would expect. Even when idle for over an hour, if you look at a running laptop you will often see the HDD activity light blinking periodically. I can try to test this, but I'd be surprised if the results change much. They could even become worse because of all the USB activity.... Hmmm, this could be interesting. Would USB flash drive model make a difference? Most of my flash drives are pretty old/slow, but they should handle movies fine.aglennon - Friday, February 5, 2010 - link
It seems it may. I think it would depend if you could truly put the HD into standby mode. In the specs I've been able to find, USB flash drives pull about 60-80mA compared to WD 2.5" Hard Drives which pull about 500mA when running, 400Ma when idle, but only 50mA when in standby.I would think it would expand battery life considerably for those long airplane flights.
JarredWalton - Friday, February 5, 2010 - link
Testing is underway. I had to use DivX, since my largest USB device is only 4GB and my x264 video is larger than that. Either way, it should be enough to tell if things have changed at all. (I also need to verify the result with the HDD, since I think I have a different DivX codec doing the work now. I used Win7's native support initially, since it's lower CPU use and better battery life than ffdshow.)JarredWalton - Sunday, February 7, 2010 - link
So here are the results (bearing in mind that I am not using the built-in Win7 codec because the ffdshow codec has taken priority and I didn't want to take the time to figure out how to fix the problem):DivX from USB: 268 minutes
DivX from HDD: 291 minutes
So, by my testing using a USB flash stick reduced battery life by around 8%. Ouch. Or put another way, it looks like USB increased average power use from around 12.8W for the HDD to 13.9W (based on battery capacity).
My best guess is that the HDD isn't powering down, and/or the USB traffic is creating a lot more CPU usage than SATA HDD accesses. It's also entirely possible that the USB device I used is less than optimal - read/write speeds are nowhere near what you could get with a modern USB 2.0 stick, let alone USB 3.0. I think it can read/write at 13MB/s at best.
crimson117 - Thursday, February 4, 2010 - link
How does the recently released Alienware m11x stack up?synaesthetic - Friday, February 5, 2010 - link
Hardware Heaven has a review of the M11x already up. They're claiming that it's the best Alienware system yet.I'm on the fence. I don't like the design much and I think the screen's too small for the weird form factor. Really I think they should have bumped the chassis size up slightly and tossed in a 13.3" display.
The price is very tempting though... entry-level configs starting at $800 and directly competing with systems like Asus's UL30Vt, but with a LOT more graphics muscle.