Alienware M11x R2: A Legend Reborn
by Jarred Walton on July 9, 2010 4:05 AM ESTBattery Life Takes a Hit
In many cases the R2 refresh of the M11x has proved beneficial. So far we haven't had any areas where the R2 is clearly inferior to the original, though Linux devotees may take exception to that statement. Battery life on the other hand isn't a clear win. Arrandale CPUs have generally compared favorably to Core 2 Duo processors, but it's always been tight on battery life and many times we've seen results that suggest a properly optimized (for power) Core 2 system can outlast a similar Core 2010 system when unplugged. We can't say definitively whether that's the case, but we can say that the CULV M11x offers better battery life.
In every test scenario, the R2 falls short of the standard set by the M11x. The original lasts 12% longer in Internet testing, 20% longer at idle, and 24% longer in x264 playback. This is using the Power Saver profile on both laptops, with the display at 100nits (60% brightness, or three steps down from max), and CPU performance allowed to range between 0% and 100%. Perhaps further tweaking of the power settings would improve the result of the M11x R2, but the same is likely true of the original. We did kill off all extra tasks/services for the battery life tests as well, so if you enable the AlienFX lighting, Bluetooth, and the other processes and install an Internet security suite, you can count on battery life dropping even further. The above results are essentially a best-case scenario, but at more than seven hours of mobility the R2 should satisfy all but the most hardcore mobility enthusiasts.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
55 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link
It's going to come down to whether you value Optimus and regular driver updates from NVIDIA. I suspect the i5-520UM will be slightly faster in applications but that's about it. I do, so I'd go for the Fast Track R2; Linux people will want the original though. Another thought: grab the original and buy your own SSD for about the same price as the Fast Track... would be nice. :-)SlyNine - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link
I wish you guys would test for throttling on the CPU and GPU under load. After the whole XPS16 Studio deal. When plugged in it was slower then on battery, it could clock down as low as 300mhz while trying to play a game. Turning almost every game in to a studdering mess. Then it turns out this is COMMON practice for Dell. Other systems have done this as well.Throttlestop by unclewebb is the easiest way to check for it.
Shadowmaster625 - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link
Intel is really dropping the ball here with arrandale ULV. There is no compelling reason to not choose a SU7300, up until Intel stops making SU7300s.Roland00 - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link
all evidence points towards the fact that Intel wasn't quite ready for 32nm due to the canceling of the notebook version of nehalem 45nm (Auburndale) and the mainstream dual core nehalem 45nm (Havendale). Now when Intel announced they were canceling Auburndale and Havendale they were doing so for is 32nm replacement Arrandale (mobile) and Clarksdale (desktop) were comming around nicely and they didn't need a 45nm version.The evidence points to the contrary, there is too much leakage on 32nm thus you can actually get better battery life with the 45nm chips. Then again Intel is doing 32nm so much better than TMSC is doing their 40nm bulk (not really comparable, but TMSC really messed up with this one) and there 32nm chips are still awesome just not as great as they looked on paper.
cjl - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link
Not at all. Intel's 32nm is definitely lower leakage and power than their 45nm. The problem is that the Nehalem architecture is more power hungry than Core. This more than offsets the advantages from changing processes to 32nm.If you need proof that 32nm is more power efficient than 45nm, just look at the i7-980x vs the i7-975. Same clock speed and 50% more cores, and it doesn't use any more power.
HexiumVII - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link
I had the R2 for about a month. It was pretty nice and turned heads with the dancing lights. Overall its quite nice for the road warrior. The trackpad was surprisingly good after playing with the M17. A few things made me return it. First battery life I could only eek out about 5 hours at most, with internet browsing in todays world, you can get a little over 4. Its quite heavy for it's size, a lb or so less would be awesome, any lighter and it would be hard to balance. It really has room for a bigger screen. Viewing angles, contrast, are all very acceptable compared to most other models under $2k out there. The Geforce 335 is a bit dated and slow, need something a little faster. Needs USB3.0/eSata/gigabit to get things on this bugger faster. I had an Intel G2 in there and it felt a tad bit faster, battery life didnt improve much. Its hard to do that many things on an 11inch screen.Probably going to get a new Acer TimelineX or Sony Z. Or a new Tablet if something exciting comes out in the next two months.
bakareshi - Thursday, July 15, 2010 - link
"The Geforce 335 is a bit dated and slow"The GT 335m that your R2 sported was by no means dated or slow for this category of notebook. In fact, the GT335m debuted in the m11xr1 that began shipping in the second quarter of this year. As for GPU speed, there is nothing faster offered under a 13" form factor. The 13" Vaio Z is the closest competitor, which still sports a slower GPU for about a thaousand dollars more.
fire400 - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link
This laptop is a piece of junk.plewis00 - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link
Sounds like jealousy from not being able to afford this 'piece of junk', strange because maybe 80-90% of the people who use or see this machine either want it or buy it...erple2 - Saturday, July 10, 2010 - link
You'll need to provide sources to back up that 80-90%.:)
However, it's just as much hyperbole as fire400 put forth, so that's ok..