Articles: Mobile
 

Bookmark and Share

(12) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 ]

Performance

As usual, we will first run synthetic benchmarks.

The SiSoftware 2007 suite features an updated enhanced-functionality interface, runs on three platforms (Win32 x86, Win64 x64, WinCE ARM), contains 13 tests and 34 informational modules, and supports a large range of devices thanks to the developer’s collaboration with Intel, AMD, ATI, SiS and VIA. The program is supported in six languages and has a free Lite version for personal and educational purposes. SiSoftware Sandra measures the overall performance of the system as well as that of each of its subsystems.

PCMark benchmarks the computer performance in office and office-related applications and also produces performance scores for the main subsystems (CPU, memory, graphical, and disk subsystem). PCMark 2005 carries on the tradition of complex benchmarks of the series and uses fragments of real-life applications as tests. This makes it somewhat more relevant for end-users as opposed to fully synthetic benchmarks. After running a series of 11 tests on the different components of the system, the program calculates an overall performance score in units called PCMarks. PCMark 2005 can check a computer out at processing HD video and encoding audio, and offers enhanced tests of the CPU and hard disk under multi-threaded load. The overall score is calculated by the formula: PCMark Score = 87 x (the geometric mean of the basic tests) , where the geometric mean is calculated as (Result 1 x Result 2 x…)/the number of results.

Having identical CPUs (Intel Core 2 Duo T7200), the notebooks provide similar CPU performance. Their results even coincide in some of the tests. When the notebooks switch to their batteries, their CPU performance degenerates by a half, proportionally to the CPU frequency reduction: the CPU clock rate is lowered from the default 2GHz to 1GHz in power-saving mode. The system memory tests produce similar results, too, although the notebooks differ in the amount of memory. The graphical subsystem of the ASUS G2Pb looks preferable due to its 512MB of dedicated graphics memory as opposed to the memory allotment by means of HyperMemory technology as in the ASUS A8Jp.

The Business Winstone 2004 test runs scripts of the following real-life office applications, several scripts at a time to simulate multi-tasking: Internet Explorer, Outlook, Word, Excel, Access, Project, PowerPoint, FrontPage, WinZip, and Norton AntiVirus Professional Edition.

The Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004 test evaluates performance of a computer in the following multimedia applications: Windows Media Encoder, Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Premiere, NewTek LightWave 3D, Steinberg WaveLab, Micromedia Dreamweaver MX, and Micromedia Director MX.

The following table and diagrams show the outcome of these tests:

There were certain problems with Business Winstone 2004 which are reflected in the low score (this benchmark wouldn’t even start up on the tested notebook at first). There should have been no such great difference. We guess the drivers are the possible cause of the problem. The ASUS G2Pb does better in Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004 and even outperforms its opponent thanks to its larger amount of system memory. The results of the notebooks plummet down twofold when they switch to their batteries.

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 12
Discussion started: 06/01/07 01:55:11 PM
Latest comment: 04/13/08 02:12:40 PM

View comments

Add your Comment