Thin and fast: how ultrabook performance stacks up beside largerlaptops - Prepaid Calling Card

To cut through the hypeabout Ultrabooks and their performance we ve decided to use thebenchmark data we gather from our laptop reviews to perform aby-the-numbers comparison of Ultrabooks with your average laptop. We ve taken a look at the hardware before, but from a broad perspective . Since then we ve reviewed several production Ultrabooks equippedwith both Core i5 and Core i7 low-voltage processors. Now that wehave these results we can compare them to normal Intel Core i5 andi7 processors to gauge the real performance difference. Processor performance One of the benchmarks we use to gauge processor performance isSiSoft Sandra s Processor Arithmetic benchmark.

It is optimizedfor multiple threads, which is good, because all of Intel s mobileprocessors support Hyper-Threading. So, how does the low-voltage processor found in an Ultrabookcompare to a standard Intel part? Let s have at the graph below. These are the real numbers pulled straight from the benchmark.Normally we only report the Combined (GOPS) figure forsimplicity s sake, but here we ve presented the whole enchilada.Intel s low-voltage processors are designated by their odd modelnumbers, while standard processors have even model numbers. As you can see, the fastest low-voltage model, the Intel Corei7-2677M, is slightly slower than the slowest standard model, theIntel Core i5-2410M. But while our benchmark picks up on thisdifference, it s not perceptible in real-world use.

However, the Core i7-2677M is a rare processor that s onlyavailable in some extremely expensive Ultrabook configurations. Amore realistic battle is the Core i5-2467M against the Corei5-2430M. Here we see that the performance difference is much morenoticeable. The Core i5-2430M offers a combined score that s about30 percent higher than the low-voltage model.

This performance gapwill be noticeable in any demanding application (such as Photoshopor Windows Live Movie Maker). Graphics performance All processors built by Intel now have the integrated graphicsprocessor (IGP) on the same die. This means that every single Intelprocessor currently produced automatically comes with an IGP.They re inseparable. Intel uses the name Intel HD 3000 to refer to the integratedgraphics processor in both its low-voltage and standard processors,but the base clock speed of the IGP in a low-voltage processor isalmost half that of the base clock speed in a standard processor(350MHz vs. 650MHz).

The IGP can overclock itself automatically to make up for thatdifference, but is this truly effective? Let s find out by havinga look at performance in 3DMark 06. Here we see results that are more varied than those in theprocessor performance graph. As it turns out, laptop design seemsto have some impact on Intel s HD 3000 IGP. We ve found thatlaptops with the same processor almost always offer identicalperformance, but the IGP is not as predictable.

This makes the results a bit difficult to parse, so let s useaverages. The four Ultrabooks we ve tested offer an average 3DMark06 score of 3,703, while the four standard laptops shown abovereached an average score of 4,027. Though this is another win for standard laptops, the overalldifference is only 10 percent, which isn t much to brag about. Wealso see that some Ultrabooks are quicker than some standardlaptops.

The Toshiba Z835 and Asus UX31 offer better scores than the Lenovo ThinkPad T420s and HP EliteBook 2560p . Battery life We ve now demonstrated that Ultrabooks are indeed slower thanstandard laptops. However, slower performance may not be an issue and in fact may even be desirable if it results in betterbattery life. Manufacturers have been claiming some serious batterylife figures for Ultrabooks, with some (like the HP Folio 13)shooting for eight or nine hours.

Are these results achievable, orare they exaggerations? Let s have a look. Ultrabooks are in the top group, whileultraportables with standard processors are in the bottom group. Results here are a bit mixed. The blue bar represents the Standard Test which is an all-out attack on the battery. Thisprovides an idea of what endurance might be if you tried to rundemanding applications, like games, without being plugged in to awall socket.

It s clear that the Ultrabooks have an advantagethere. When we look at the Reader s Test, however, the standardlaptops take the day. The Reader s Test is a much less demandingworkload that replicates endurance in near-idle situations (such aslight Web browsing or document editing). The normal Core i5processors never have to ramp up performance, giving room for thebatteries to stretch their legs. Your exact battery life will always depend on your workload, butour benchmarking and our experience indicates that Ultrabooks haveno advantage here.

This may seem strange, but the results makesense. Slim-and-sexy Ultrabooks have less space to devote to thebattery. This negates the power savings provided by the use oflow-voltage processors. It s clear that you should not buy an Ultrabook solely for itsendurance.

They have no advantage over standard ultraportables. Infact, they are at a disadvantage while battery life is about thesame overall, their batteries are not meant to be user serviceable.That means you will have difficulty replacing the battery yourself.It also means that extended life batteries are rarely available. Beyond the numbers By the numbers, we see that standard laptops do offer betterperformance than Ultrabooks. In a worst-case scenario (a processorintensive application that can use all available threads) thelow-voltage processor is significantly behind the standard part.

Most of us don t constantly use demanding applications, however.The performance numbers above must be tempered by the fact thatyour use will impact perceived performance greatly. No modern Intelprocessor is daunted by Microsoft Office, Google Chrome or WindowsMedia Player. On the other hand, the advantage held by a standard processor canprovide an extremely noticeable improvement in the correctsoftware. For example, let s say that you want to save a movie to1080p in Windows Live Movie Maker, a free program that does a goodjob of using multiple threads. In this situation the standardprocessor could save you five or six minutes if you re workingwith a long recording.

The impact of the solid-state hard drives should not be forgotten.An SSD-equipped Ultrabook will boot in under twenty seconds, whilelaptops equipped with a mechanical hard drive usually take overforty. Gaming performance will generally be better on a standardprocessor, but the difference will not be noticeable unless a gamerelies heavily on the processor rather than the IGP. This is truefor some strategy and MMO titles, but not for most other games. Alllaptops lacking a discrete graphics processor from AMD or Nvidiawill have difficulty with demanding new 3D games, such asBattlefield 3.

Conclusion While Intel s bluster about Ultrabook performance perhapsrepresents an enhanced version of reality, the general idea thatconsumers will be as happy with an Ultrabook as they are with astandard laptop is correct. Only demanding applications reveal the advantage of a standardlaptop. As a consumer, you have to ask yourself How do I usemy laptop? If you surf the web, watch streaming video and useMicrosoft Office, an Ultrabook can serve you well. On the otherhand, consumers who produce YouTube videos, edit images and developwebsites will enjoy the extra power provided by a larger laptop.

We are high quality suppliers, our products such as Prepaid Calling Card , China PVC Membership Card for oversee buyer. To know more, please visits Contactless Smart Card.

Related Articles - Prepaid Calling Card, China PVC Membership Card,

Email this Article to a Friend! Receive Articles like this one direct to your email box! Subscribe for free today!