Advertisement


UX models benchmarked

I’ve spent a lot of time compiling data from the UX benchmark thread so we can really get an idea of how the different UX models compare to each other. While none of this is guaranteed to be 100% accurate, it should give you a good visual representation of how they stack up to one another. Before we get into the benchmark results, lets look at all the different models and their specs. The models here are arranged from newest to oldest release -

Model Comparison Char updated

Take special notice that the UX490 is using the newer Core 2 Solo CPU and not the previous Core Solo versions. Also before we being, I’d like to mention that the benchmark program used for all of these results was Crystal Mark. As I said before, these test results and comparisons will not be completely accurate, unfortunately I don’t have all that much data for certain models. In some cases if there were any discrepancies in the test, they won’t have averaged out. Though I still feel like we have enough content to get a clear picture of the performance of each model, and I really wanted to get this up on the front page to people can make more informed purchasing decisions. Now what you have all been waiting for - prepare for incoming barrage of graphs!

Overall Score Crystal Mark
Open GL Crystal Mark

Vista is quite clearly the determining factor in this OpenGL test. The UX380, UX390, and UX490 are all running Vista, and it doesn’t seem to handle OpenGL nearly as well as XP.

updated HDD/SSD

I still haven’t been able to get the exact model of SSD used by the UX490, but I thought it would be the same as the UX390’s. Either it is an upgraded model, or the Core 2 Solo can handle the SSD better than the Core Solo. As you can see the UX490’s SSD performed quite a bit better than the UX390’s.

RAM crystal mark

As one would assume, all the 1GB models performed very similarly. We see a small jump in performance when going from the UX180’s 512MB of RAM to the other models.

FPU

Surprisingly all of the models performed very similarly to one another in the FPU area which is a test of processing speed. Its unclear whether or not the upgraded CPU’s on the UX380 (U1500), UX390 (U1500), and UX490 (U2200) have the same FPU performance as the UX180 and UX280 (both U1400). Its quite possible that they have such close scores because Vista dragged the scores of the UX380, UX390, and UX490 down.

ALU

Arithmetic Logic unit is a more basic processing test. As one would expect, there is an increase in the score of the most recent three models which use faster processors, it is also possible that the difference between the oldest two models and the newest three would be even greater if we were comparing one XP unit to another.

Many people want to know what kind of performance increase or decrease you’d see going from the 1.33GHz Core Solo U1500 (equipped on the 380 and 390) to the 1.2GHz Core 2 Solo U2200 (on the 490). While I haven’t been able to do a hands on test of both machines I can say that the Core 2 Solo at very least should match the Core Solo in it’s performance. It should have a somewhat greater performance, but unfortunately I don’t have enough 490 data to represent that on the graphs. In addition to the matched or better performance that the Core 2 Solo has over the Core Solo, it should consume somewhat less power. The Core 2 Solo has more advanced power saving options, and most of the new technologies that come with the Core 2 Duo line, whereas the older Core Solo represents the technology that came with the Core Duo processors.There were a few more graphs that I didn’t put up because I didn’t have the expertise to talk about them, so for those of you interested here is a graph containing all of the tests.

Updated Overall Graph

WordPress database error: [Incorrect file format 'wp_comments']
SELECT * FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = '248' AND comment_approved = '1' ORDER BY comment_date


26 Responses to “UX models benchmarked”  

  1. No Comments

Leave a Reply


Site is best viewed using

Get Firefox!