Conclusion: So Close, Yet So Far

I went into reviewing the Razer Blade 14-inch skeptical, and I came out of it largely a believer. Razer has done a million things right with this notebook design, and I actually have a very hard time understanding why a user would spend up for the 17-inch Razer Blade Pro. This 14-inch unit has almost everything you want and very little you don't, and it is the definitive gaming ultrabook. There simply isn't anything else out there like it that can compete, and impressively, Razer did a heck of a job with it right out of the gate.

Performance-wise, the Blade is hanging out in a very comfortable space. 8GB of DDR3L is the sweet spot for Windows and gaming, and the quad-core processor and GeForce GTX 765M are able to produce a well-rounded performance profile. The Blade will play any and all modern games at high settings at the notebook's native resolution. While heat is a constant compromise, Razer has handled it with aplomb. I appreciate the attention to acoustics, and I think they actually have a bit of wiggle room in bumping the CPU fan speed without significantly destroying the otherwise solid noise profile.

As much as I enjoy ribbing Vivek for waxing philosophical about industrial design, with the Razer Blade 14-inch, I absolutely get where he's coming from. This is a gorgeous notebook, top to bottom. The fit and finish is stunning, and the only real downside to it is that the black aluminum picks up fingerprints like no other. After reviewing this notebook, it's damn hard for me not to want one of my very own.

But it's not perfect. I'm actually not going to grill Razer too hard on the price tag; the $1,799 model isn't, I think, really an option for most users as the 128GB SSD is pretty inadequate. If you want to try your luck with a torx screwdriver and an aftermarket mSATA SSD, be my guest. At $1,999, the review system isn't cheap, but it's mostly competitive. Razer has to fight the Alienware 14 here; Alienware's offering is much larger, but for $1,799 you can get a slightly faster CPU, the same video card, a 1080p IPS display, a slot-loading DVD writer, 802.11ac wireless, and a 750GB HDD to go along with the 256GB mSATA SSD. But you pay in portability: the Alienware 14 is also two pounds heavier, and frankly, it's just not as aesthetically pleasing.

Where Razer threw the game is the display. Almost everything else about the Razer Blade 14-inch goes so, so right, and then there's the dismal 1600x900 panel. The resolution isn't the issue; 1600x900 is actually just right for the GTX 765M. It's the panel quality that kills. After loving up on the fit and finish of the Blade at every other step, paying attention to every detail, they turned around and seriously crippled the notebook with a lousy screen that threatens to undermine the whole operation. I can't fathom what the thought process was behind this decision, but it wasn't worth it. We're at a price point where an extra $100 for a display that doesn't suck wouldn't be a big deal.

I really like the Razer Blade 14, and I'd be sorely tempted to try and hold on to the review unit as long as humanly possible. On any other notebook, a mediocre display would just be par for the course, but on a system that's otherwise so well-designed, it's an offense that borders on blasphemy. Razer's designers made the Mona Lisa of gaming notebooks, and then drew a moustache, goatee, and monocle on her. The price tag means it's a luxury item and I honestly don't have much of an issue with it, but if you're going to make a luxury item, why the hell would you make this cut? As it stands, the 14-inch Blade still has a lot going for it and if you want the thinnest, sleekest gaming notebook out there, this is your one stop shop. I just can't understand how a company would get this close to nailing a design, only to blow it to save a few bucks.

Display, Battery, Noise, and Heat
Comments Locked

108 Comments

View All Comments

  • Dustin Sklavos - Tuesday, July 2, 2013 - link

    If you think the rest of the industry is any different, I have a bridge to sell you. We review what we're sent, same as anyone else.

    But that doesn't make us a mouthpiece. I'd like to think we're pretty critical; we may review what we're sent, but we put the screws to it.
  • bji - Tuesday, July 2, 2013 - link

    Why do you review only what you're sent? Can't you have a budget where you buy hardware, review it, and then re-sell it? Every review would cost a couple hundred bucks to produce but that can't be much averaged over the time you spent writing the review (if I spent 20 hours writing a review, the time cost would far exceed a couple of hundred dollars spent on the hardware), and also, you make advertising revenue ...
  • p1esk - Tuesday, July 2, 2013 - link

    Very good point. Besides, it would easy to resell when you have a huge audience of potential buyers.
  • resination - Tuesday, July 2, 2013 - link

    Heh. "This laptop is overpriced junk. Click here to buy ours."
  • MySchizoBuddy - Tuesday, July 9, 2013 - link

    point well made.
  • kevith - Tuesday, July 2, 2013 - link

    Seriously? Should Anand Lil Shimpi run around, shopping for hardware to review? And after reviewing it, they should spend time trying to resell it?

    I really don´t think that would work...
  • flyingpants1 - Tuesday, July 2, 2013 - link

    Yes.

    Have a donation/kickstarter system to fund the hardware review budget. Once something is reviewed, slap a fancy Anandtech logo on it and sell it for a 20% loss.

    Anything would be better than sitting and waiting for a manufacturer to send you a cherry-picked sample.
  • MySchizoBuddy - Tuesday, July 9, 2013 - link

    the purpose of a reviewer is to test honestly what was handed to them. whether it is given to them or bought is irrelevant.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, July 2, 2013 - link

    A few hundred dollars isn't much less than what most hardware reviewers get paid to begin with. "Hey, can you go buy that $900 laptop, review it, resell it for $700, and we'll pay you the standard $400 for your review?" Reviewing hardware is nice, but when a full review can take 20-40 hours to put together (sometimes more), you can see that investing even four or five extra hours starts to really cut into the revenue/income.

    Then there's the fact that outside of Lenovo, we generally get most of the laptops that are really worth reviewing. We don't need to review every budget laptop, and we don't have the manpower to do so -- and the readership would get really tired of seeing multiple laptop reviews each week where 90% of the laptops are "average" -- okay for a certain price point, but with various flaws.

    Should we need to essentially pay for the privilege of reviewing a specific manufacturer's hardware? Now add in the time it requires to resell a laptop, and the risk of fraud, and it's a big can of worms I'm not really keen to open. In fact, I know one site that tried to do this with desktop systems some years ago so that they could really see what the end user experience was like, including calling tech support to troubleshoot a problem. The reviews ended up not generating enough revenue to cover their cost, the section basically got axed, and the reviewer in question ended up working for one of the big tech companies.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, July 2, 2013 - link

    I should also note that buying your own review units means your reviews will be, at best, several weeks after everyone else. That's not the end of the world, but it does mean about one third the traffic as being one of the first reviews.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now