Dell Studio XPS 16: the Eyes Have It
by Jarred Walton on April 2, 2009 6:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
Test Setup
Below is the test configuration for the Studio XPS 16. We will compare its performance with other recently tested notebooks, although if you've read the review so far you probably already know whether or not this will fit your needs. We still need to put the overall performance in perspective, though, so we'll be comparing the XPS 16 with a selection of previously reviewed notebooks. (Please look at articles in our Mobile section for the specifications of any other notebooks.)
| Dell Studio XPS 16Test System | |
| Processor | Core 2 Duo P8600 (Dual-Core 2.40GHz, 3MB Shared L2, 1066FSB) |
| Memory | 2x2048MB Hynix PC3-8500 @ DDR3-1066 7-7-7-20 (Hynix HMT125S6AFP8C-G7) |
| Graphics | ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670 512MB Driver version 7.14 GPU/RAM Clocks: 680/1600 MHz (128-bit) |
| Display | 16.0" 1080p (1920x1080) RGB LED Glossy Seiko Epson M077D/160HT (?) |
| Hard Drive | Seagate Momentus 7200.3 320GB 7200RPM 16MB (ST9320421ASG) |
| Optical Drive | 4x DVDR/BD-ROM Slot-load (Sony Optiarc BC-5600S) |
| Battery | 6-Cell 54Whr, 9-cell 85Whr |
| Operating System | Windows Vista Home Premium SP1 64-bit |
We used ASTRA32 to collect information on the monitor, and the best we could come up with is that Seiko Epson makes the LCD panel. The model number is given as "M077D€160HT", but we were unable to find any additional information for that part on the Internet. It could be that ASTRA32 is reporting incorrect information. More likely is that Seiko Epson just doesn't make information on their displays readily available to the public - I spent over an hour searching their sites to no avail. If anyone has a link with additional details I would like to see it. (Seiko Epson also appears to be leaving the small to medium LCD market, which may account for some of the difficulty in finding information.)
We run all of the standard application tests at the native LCD resolution - 1920x1080 for the Studio XPS 16. For the gaming tests, we will compare the Dell Studio XPS 16 to other notebooks using a standard resolution of 1680x1050. We will also include results at 1280x800 and 1920x1080 to show how the XPS 16 scales to lower and higher settings. This will allow us to provide an apples-to-apples comparison with other laptops while also showing the performance range you can expect by lowering or increasing the resolution.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
79 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Friday, April 3, 2009 - link
All 3DMark scores are at the standard 3DMark resolution, so I connect an external LCD where necessary (i.e. laptops with 1280x800 LCDs can't run 1280x1024 in 3DMark06 and Vantage). So the scores are definitely apples-to-apples in that department.I don't know what WoW is really like in terms of GPU needs, but the HD 3670 should be faster than the 8600M GT by a fair margin. If you need more power, though, Gateway's P-7808u FX should do the trick (review in progress), and MSI's GT627 is even more powerful in the GPU department (9800M GT). The only caveat is that neither LCD is anywhere near as good as the Studio XPS 16, and I really dislike the MSI keyboard (it's flimsy).
jiggpig - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link
You should add the lenovo x200 or x300 to the battery life charts, I bet they could challenge the macbooks in battery life/battery size charts.JarredWalton - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link
I would if Lenovo would send me a laptop to test. I've heard good things from some people, and I would love to verify the results. Without doing the testing myself, however, I can't come to any firm conclusion. (What brightness level do they test at? What's the test like? That sort of stuff can make a difference.)erple2 - Tuesday, April 7, 2009 - link
Also, I see that you've posted the minutes/WHr results for the Apple notebooks. However, what are the "at the wall" measurements for power consumption?Is it that OSX is that much stronger optimized for low power usage? I wonder if there would be any difference running Linux vs. Vista vs. OSX on the same laptop (granted, you'd have to run them all on a Macbook I suppose to get that result) at least for power consumption, and wall outlet consumption.
Hrel - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link
Which GPU does it have in it? Sometimes you list the HD4670 and sometimes you say HD4650???Hrel - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link
I meant HD3670 and HD3650... ah typing mistakes that are made significant by barely different product naming schemes.JarredWalton - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link
Sorry about that... it's an HD 3670, but somehow in the process of writing I started saying 3650. The two chips are the same, other than clock speeds, but I'm not sure on the clocks for the 3650. Anyway, the incorrect part numbers have been corrected. Thanks!Hrel - Thursday, April 2, 2009 - link
"This will allow us to provide an apples-to-apples comparison with other laptops while also showing the performance range you can expect by lowering or increasing the resolution."YAY anandtech! Good job, now if only you would do this on every single review that has anything to with GPU's. Oh, I'm not done with the article yet, but if there aren't 3D Mark scores, there should be.
LoneWolf15 - Friday, April 3, 2009 - link
Yes, because 3DMark scores are SO indicative of real-world performance.[/sarcasm]
cheetah2k - Saturday, April 4, 2009 - link
It would be nice to see 3Dmark06 scores across the whole Dell range in these reviews, including the hefty XPS1730.For those wanting to know, an XPS1730 with 2 x 8800GTX in Sli gets 11,490 marks in 1280x1024 with a T9300 CPU @ 2.5Ghz