General Performance with the U35Jc

Our testing suite remains consistent with our previous tests, but what we're really going to want to look out for are differences between the ASUS U30Jc and the U35Jc. The U30Jc has a 133 MHz slower processor, but has an extra 300 MHz on the video memory; or more appropriately, the video memory on the U35Jc's GeForce G 310M has been curtailed, reduced to a lower clock that threatens to throttle an already slow chip's performance. We've covered general performance before in the U33Jc review, but with a slightly updated benchmark suite we'll have some new charts on the following pages.

Results are about where we should expect them to be. In the Futuremark suites, the U30Jc and U35Jc are basically trading blows, with the faster chip in the U35Jc being countered by the faster graphics in the U30Jc, turning those results into a wash. The exception is the always inscrutable Peacekeeper benchmark, where the U30Jc posted remarkably good results.

When we get to the disciplines that are more purely processor intensive, the extra 133 MHz on the i3-370M makes itself known. In Cinebench and our video encoding suites, the U35Jc posts a modest but nonetheless notable improvement, and actually is capable of hanging with the i5-430M. This isn't surprising; the nominal 2.4 GHz clock speed is one multiplier shy of the highest turbo speed on the 430M. The lack of Turbo Boost on the i3 doesn't seem to be a major hindrance; Turbo Boost on the i5's tends to be fairly conservative in general. It's only when you get to the mobile i7's that it starts to produce major gains.

With several similar ASUS laptops already in the charts, we've left the U33Jc out, but despite having the same CPU and (nominally) GPU there are several tests where the U33Jc placed higher by 5-10%, and other benchmarks where the U35Jc leads by up to 6%. Given we repeat the tests multiple times on each system, the small but measurable spread is rather perplexing, but then it may simply be a case of using conventional hard drives in place of SSDs. Our Bench database uses SSDs in part because performance results were far more consistent.

The Daintier U35Jc Gaming on the U35Jc
Comments Locked

45 Comments

View All Comments

  • pirspilane - Friday, October 1, 2010 - link

    I have wanted to buy a U35 since reading your Laptop Buyer's Guide in July, but was waiting for a full review. Now I don't know what to get.

    I like the 35s light weight and am perfectly willing to forgo lugging around a rarely-used DVD drive. The omission of USB 3.0 is a bummer, but I noticed that your Bronze Award U30Jc has the same shortcoming.

    Any suggestions in the 13" thin & light category are appreciated. Is the performance hit the U35 suffers enough of a factor to still choose the heavier U30? I wonder how much this will be notice in everyday use.
  • Sanctusx2 - Friday, October 1, 2010 - link

    Just wanted to 2nd this. I was anxiously looking forward to the U35 after the earlier U30 reviews too and am left with the same disappointment. I definitely want to dump the DVD drive for the weight and size reductions, but losing so much performance and battery life is a bit rough. I'd be eager to hear anyone else's suggestions in the same category as well.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, October 1, 2010 - link

    On paper, the only real change between U30Jc and U35Jc is the removal of the DVDR, which helps cut the weight down nearly a pound. I still have no idea why the battery life dropped so much; lack of BIOS optimizations? Luck of the draw? Performance is pretty much a wash, though the slower 1GB of graphics memory is a drawback on the U35 as well.

    If you're not worried about gaming performance, I'd say you can still grab either laptop and be happy. But then, if you're not worried about gaming performance, I have seen little reason to get more than even Intel's HD Graphics. They handle HD video offload, including Flash 10.1, with no issues that I've encountered. I'm sure there are edge cases where Intel's IGP may not decode graphics as well as the G310M, but few people actually need those edge case formats.

    I wish the battery life was the same, because it would make the recommendation a lot easier: do you value lower size, or the presence of a DVDR more? And maybe there are "better" U35Jc laptops that make up the gap we experienced.

    For my money, right now I'd be more inclined to go with something like the Dell Latitude E6410. Get it with this same CPU, integrated graphics, 4GB RAM, and a 1440x900 anti-glare LCD (hooray for 16:10!). Add a backlit keyboard and you get a final price of around $1000. I've actually got one for testing, and the keyboard and build quality are right there with Lenovo ThinkPad. Or you can find a T410 for about the same $1000. But I'm more interested in build quality and a better (at least higher resolution) LCD than in G310M.
  • Gary Key - Friday, October 1, 2010 - link

    In regards to the battery life numbers posted we are working with AnandTech to figure out what happened in their testing.

    In all of our internal testing both the U35Jc and the actual U30Jc replacement (U45Jc) have generated better battery life numbers across the board than the U30Jc.

    Unfortunately we were not privy to their test results or problem report until the article went live so we are behind the curve on problem resolution.
  • MacGyver85 - Saturday, October 2, 2010 - link

    So if I understand correctly you represent someone from Asus ?

    If so: for the love of god please send up the message that LCD quality matters. I'm still not buying any laptop because of the bad quality of the screens. And I *really* want to buy an Asus laptop...but only if the screen quality trumps whatever else is out there.

    You've done an excellent job in regards of battery life recently so please extend that same attention to detail to the screen.

    I've heard the argument that better screen quality doesn't sell but that seems a sorry excuse at best. Just put any of the existing laptops next to the newer model wherever it is sold and people will *get it*. They'll see the difference and choose the better screen for sure.

    Do I sound desperate for a quality laptop LCD or what :)
  • hybrid2d4x4 - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    I'm with you MacGyver. I want to buy a laptop and have been keeping an eye on the Asus U/UL lineup for as long as it's existed. But after dealing with several glossy-screened Acers, I just can't justify spending any money on something that annoys me to no end in a naturally-lit room or even a basement with lights on behind me (I didn't even dare to try using one outside, though I need my laptop to be able to do so).

    Unlike most people, I have no problem with the 768p resolution, but gloss is unacceptable (and low-contrast, cheap-looking LCDs are a major letdown). I'm even considering a 1005P netbook to tide me over and I really don't want to settle for an atom (and I'm definitely not paying $2k for a high-end laptop just for a good screen). When will we get laptop options with decent screens? :(
  • pirspilane - Friday, October 1, 2010 - link

    Thanks JarredWalton,

    turns out, I'm not interested in gaming. I think a lot of people are looking for a laptop that focuses on: thin & light; non-gaming; no DVD; good battery life, keyboard & LCD.

    The Dell Latitude E6410 is very intriguing, except for the 3/4 lb. additional weight. Definitely will check it out.
  • zhill - Sunday, October 3, 2010 - link

    I've been looking at the U35F-X1, which is the U35JC minus the G310M. It's cheap (on Amazon $733), and should get slightly better battery life and certainly run cooler.

    Still same lousy LCD etc, but with that extra cash you can put in an SSD for better overall performance without a weight or battery life hit. Worth a look if performance-per-dollar is important rather than outright performance.
  • pirspilane - Monday, October 4, 2010 - link

    Thanks zhill. Hadn't heard about that one. Looks like you save $80-100 and get a battery life boost by ditching a not-so-great graphics card. Good trade-off.
  • Katspajamas - Friday, October 1, 2010 - link

    I'm suprised you didn't mention the HDD is a Momentus, the Seagate hybrid SSD/magnetic.....

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now