ASUS UL80Jt—Battery Life

The UL80Jt has a mediocre CPU and a mediocre GPU, but the real question is, can it match its predecessor’s amazing battery life? Sadly, no.

Battery Life—Idle

Battery Life—Internet

Battery Life—x264 720p

Relative Battery Life

It’s not too much better than the U3x models that we had in the labs previously. Not to complain about 10.5 hours of ideal case battery life, but that’s significantly worse than the previous generation UL80Vt and only about 45 minutes more than the U30/3/5Jc trio. Given the cut in processing performance, I’m seriously disappointed.

I’ve been hearing some things spoken in hushed tones, mostly alleging that the Core 2010 ULV processors aren’t nearly as power efficient as the previous generation CULV processors, and our experience with the i3 and i7 ULV chips is proving this correct. If there’s only 45 minutes to be gained by switching to the ULV processors, it’s far more worthwhile to go for the regular i3-based system, especially if we’re talking about the difference between 9.75 and 10.5 hours of battery.

This isn’t to complain about having 10.5 hours of battery life, which is awesome in its own right, but it’s just not as impressive when viewed in context of the UL80Vt and the U30Jc. Things get not happy when we turn on the overclocking though, as we end up seeing less battery life than the U3x series.

ASUS UL80Jt Gaming Performance ASUS UL80Jt Display
POST A COMMENT

47 Comments

View All Comments

  • erple2 - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link

    Nonsense. Those 12" screens are still 720p screens, just like these exceptionally crummy 14-15" screens in the mass market. For that, the 310m is just fine. Crummy dGPU for crummy screens.

    One of these days, people will figure out that resolution counts, not screen size. Which is why my 32" TV (720p) isn't nearly as nice as my 1080p 15" laptop screen.
    Reply
  • mmsmsy - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link

    If the case is lack of additional performance you should definitely try UL80Jt with Core i5 520UM. Unlike the i3xx UM this one's got the turbo boost up to 1.83GHz, which should boost performance significantly, while, at the same time, powering the notebook almost just as long as the Core i3xx UM. Even if i5 costs a little extra, going for i3 is definitely not a good idea performance wise. Try it and I think you'll probably change your opinion. ;) Reply
  • fokka - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link

    @ vivek & jarred: a commenter posted a link to asus' upcoming u-series models:

    http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=qcgJ2RirwkZL...

    have you any idea when they will hit the market? probably q1 2011, i think?
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Monday, November 22, 2010 - link

    I don' t know the ETA for all of the new 400M models, but I can tell you that all of the newer models need to ship sooner rather than later (i.e. Sandy Bridge is coming). One of the new ASUS models is the 15.6" (I know....) N53JF, which has i5-460M, GT 425M, a 1080p LCD, and Blu-ray for under $1000. I just got my N53JF review sample, and first impressions are that the aesthetics will probably please quite a few relative to the Dell XPS 15. Unfortunately, the 1080p panel isn't a high contrast option and it comes with a 48Wh battery. So, ultimately it's looking good but not stellar.

    As for the new U-series, like I said, they need to come out soon because of the pending launch of SB. I guess SB is quad-core though, so that means Core 2010 dual-core options can still continue for a bit, but if pricing and battery life is good on SB I don't know why anyone would opt for Arrandale after January 2011. We'll have to wait and see. Since ASUS has the U-series updated on their site, I would expect them before Christmas at least.
    Reply
  • freespace303 - Thursday, November 18, 2010 - link

    PLEASE REVIEW THE ENVY 17 3D!!! Reply
  • Hrel - Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - link

    Sub 2GHz CPU, less than 900p screen, non DX 11 GPU? Hmm, guess I don't need to read any further.

    Seriously, there's no reason at all they can't use a slightly faster Core i3, the GT430M GPU and a half way decent screen. 1600x900 or greater.

    I'm really really baffled by the GPU choice, it's damn near 2011 people, DX11 or GTFO.
    Reply
  • Hrel - Wednesday, December 01, 2010 - link

    Also, anything with a sub 900p screen and a Core i3 shouldn't cost any more than 750 at the absolute max; really under 600. The U33Jc at 970 is asinine. 700 sure, ok, as long as they get a 400 series GPU in there. with at least 32 SP or Cuda cores or whatever the fuck they wanna call em. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now