Microsoft Surface Review
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 23, 2012 9:01 PM EST- Posted in
- Tablets
- Microsoft
- Mobile
- Surface
- Windows RT
Display: Not Retina, But Still Good
Surface features a 10.6 inch, 1366 x 768 16:9 display. The physical size is a bit unusual, although the display resolution is something we’ve seen used in affordable notebooks for years now. We already know why Microsoft picked the display size (to enable better multitasking and make for a good keyboard size), but is there room for a flagship tablet with only a 1366 x 768 display resolution?
Microsoft’s response to the resolution question is that more pixels isn’t necessarily better, and that there are a number of other factors that are just as important. It also is quick to point out that a significantly higher resolution display would have increased memory bandwidth requirements, decreased UI frame rate and required a larger battery. As NVIDIA’s Tegra 3 only has a single channel LPDDR2 memory interface, driving a 2048 x 1536 panel and maintaining Microsoft’s UI performance requirements was out of the question. Apple ran into the same issue and ended up building the A5X SoC with an insanely wide memory interface to deal with it. Down the road I’d expect the memory bandwidth problem to get solved, but that still leaves a power consumption issue. Apple moved to a 42.5Wh battery in the 3rd generation iPad, a 37% capacity increase compared to the 31Wh unit in Surface. Enabling a similar panel would have pushed size and weight of Surface more than Microsoft would have liked.
Given those constraints Microsoft chose a different route with Surface. Rather than focus on pixel density it focused on improving contrast and reducing glare. Surface laminates the cover glass and LCD panel together, removing an annoying air gap that’s responsible for some reflections/glare and a reduction in brightness. Apple’s recently announced 8th generation iMac does something similar, as do a lot of high end smartphones, but Surface is among the first to do so with a ~10-inch LCD. The effect is noticeable in a contrived photo but it also results in a display that’s not half bad to look at.
With the exception of text on web pages, the lower resolution Surface display isn’t overly bothersome. I would like something a bit higher resolution although I don’t know that matching Apple’s pixel density is absolutely necessary if Microsoft can deliver elsewhere.
Apple doesn’t just rely on resolution to sell the iPad’s Retina Display, it also happens to do quite well at accurately representing colors. I put Surface through AnandTech Senior Display Editor, Chris Heinonen’s excellent tablet/smartphone analysis workflow to see how well it did:
| CalMAN Display Comparison | ||||||
| Apple iPad (3rd gen) | Apple iPad 2 | ASUS Transformer Pad Infinity | Microsoft Surface | |||
| Grayscale 200 nits Avg dE2000 | 3.7333 | 1.3826 | 3.9881 | 3.6769 | ||
| CCT Avg (K) | 6857K | 6632K | 6632K | 6407K | ||
| Saturation Sweep Avg dE2000 | 3.193 | 6.8404 | 6.8404 | 7.3617 | ||
| GMB Colorchecker Avg dE2000 | 3.0698 | 3.8957 | 4.4177 | 5.3057 | ||
Saturation
Gamut
GMB Color Checker
Grayscale accuracy is slightly better on Surface compared to the iPad, however the rest of the accuracy metrics show Apple’s tablet ahead of Surface.
This isn’t to say that Surface’s display is bad, in fact I think it’s quite good and I’d argue that it was never a problem in my testing, but it’s definitely not the best on the market today. I’m also not sure how much of this has to do with Microsoft’s panel selection vs. software calibration. None of my calibration tools work under Windows RT so I couldn’t really tell you.
I did reach out to Microsoft and they did say that some of my values in the charts below looked a little off. I’ll be rerunning data on another Surface sample as soon as I get a chance to.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
235 Comments
View All Comments
Netscorer - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
For a corporate customer RT will never be a solution. And that touch keyboard is non-usable, period. Anand was going round and round about how you must strike with fore and precision to make it count, how you must go through the prolonged learning curve, how you don't have any tactile response. Just trying not to sound too negative on the keyboard. The only positive he said about keyboard (if you remove all the colored words) is that at the end of he day it is better then typing on glass. Big deal. Anything is better then typing on glass.As for the Surface being a hybrid between laptop and tablet and how this is a perfect match, let me agree to disagree with you. In concept, taken abstract device that can work for me in my 9 to 5 life and 6 to 10 life, yes it would be great. This particular implementation of Windows 8 RT with strained hardware and lousy screen (in part because higher res screen would strain that hardware even more) - the answer is no.
xype - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
Yeah, it felt a bit that way, didn’t it? But then, AnandTech reviews often feel like they’re written by someone who’s just excited about their newest toy and go a lot into hardware, too. While for other kinds of hardware that isn’t as big of a deal, reviewing smartphones and tablets should go into a different direction, I think.That tablet manufacturers can put in decent hardware and that a company like Microsoft is actually competent enough to produce a well designed tablet should be a given by now.
But a tablet or smartphone are not something you stuff into your PC tower and forget about it, like a graphics card or CPU fan. Is it comfortable to use on the lap, is the lack of USB charging annoying in day to day use, is Excel really usable for something like bookkeeping without being annoying after 5 minutes, does it work well as an ebook reading device, etc?
To be fair, ArsTechnica’s review is a bit better but still doesn’t go into software _at all_. That’s not confidence inspiring to me…
phexac - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
Agreed. Just look at iPad reviews. They ALL state "it's a pleasure to use" and then go into zillion reasons for why. This review spent more time raving about a kickstand (btw how do you kickstand it in your lap? so this is desktop only portable device???) than about the experience of actually using Surface. Could always be because using it is actually pretty meh and nothing to write about.phexac - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
Definitely agree with this. Anand's negative points seemed to be pretty close to deal breakers, and yet they were completely skimmed over. As was the fact that apps take 2.5-5 times longer to start than on a tablet. And a complete omission of actually using software on the tablet. Just looking at the pictures with typical desktop tiny menus in the programs and desktop interface makes you wonder how practical it is to it is as a touch device wen anything bigger than a mouse pointer would be too big for those menus.seapeople - Saturday, October 27, 2012 - link
So what is it then? Is Anand an Apple fanboi because he made the Surface seem boring, or is he a Windows schill because he glossed over the down falls of Surface?It's got to be one or the other, right? It's not possible that this review is actually accurate to the product?
WP7Mango - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
Why should you care who Microsoft are targeting with this device? Think about it for a second...If you don't know who it's for, then it's clearly not for you. But it might fit someone else's requirements perfectly, and if it does then that is of no consequence to you - so don't worry about it.
B3an - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
I had a good feeling about this tablet, and it was right. Surface RT is clearly an excellent tablet.But i would have prefered one with Intel Clover Trail. As mentioned, we need to see battery life with this SoC, but i very much expect it to be close to the ARM based Surface.
Surface would be perfect with Clover Trail. Same form factor, fanless, better performance than ARM, and the full blown Win 8. And yes i know theres the Pro version of Surface in 3 months time, but the Core i5 is overkill for many, it needs a fan too, and obviously will have much lower battery life. Clover Trail would have been the perfect balance for most people.
Such a shame, so close to my perfect idea of a tablet, but i'd happily still have ARM + Surface RT over a iPad or Android tablet for so many reasons.
Netscorer - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
Completely agree with you. Good and usable Atom-based Intel CPU, which is x86 compatible, married with Windows 8 and all that effort that Microsoft clearly made to make you feel like you own a premium product with Surface - this would have been wonderful. This is what Microsoft should have released at the beginning, leaving Windows 8 RT to the sub $300 bargain tablets from 3-rd party vendors.Clearly, Intel could not commit to the Oct.26 release date and it forced Microsoft's hand at developing this half-baked solution. We also don't know how good Clover Trail Atom will be. Because if it's really going to be good, this will be the first actually usable Intel Atom processor. Especially if they will marry it with HD4000 GPU.
karasaj - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
Honestly, if Surface had launched with Tegra 4 (not possible sadly) or S4 Pro (should have been possible) or even S4 Krait, it would be insanely nice. Performance is only barely "below" what it really needs to be to be unnoticeable - a tablet/notebook that runs office, netflix, and the occasional game (and internet browsing). An ARM cpu with better IPC would have been a better choice over 4 cores, imo.I wish Surface would re-release with the S4 Pro or something. I would completely buy that. Atm, I'm deciding whether or not it's worth it. I certainly like the idea of it, it just seems like it -might- be a tad under powered.
beginner99 - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
$699. Thats more I paid for my already overpriced Asus T91 netbook (has touchscreen and can be used in tablet form) over 3 years ago. While Surface sure has better battery life and Win RT is better suited for touch device, I don't see a reason to replace it with surface. but then I hardly ever use it anyway.$699 is the price I would pay for the version with real windows and more capable CPU. Wasn't following the rumors so don't know if that actually will be made at all?