Asus ul30jt

[stipalgl]

I know that Anandtech has looked at the UL80VT just a short while back and recommended it as the lightweight laptop to get. With the UL30VT acting as its miniaturized brother, this seems like another winner. It appears now that in light of the continuing praise and acclaim towards the UL30VT-X1 and UL30VT-A1, Asus has decided to come out with an improved model.

http://zedomax.com/blog/2010/01/08/asus-ul30jt-hands-on-review-ces-2010/

This ultraportable contains much of the same specs as the VT version with an upgrade to a low voltage i7 processor, and a G310M video card, which should perform nearly identical to the G210M, although perhaps a shade better.

For those of you, including myself, who are interested in something lightweight and with a little punch, it may be worth it to wait the extra month or so.

Is anyone aware just how much more powerful an i7 620UM would be compared to an SU7300? Hopefully this doesn't eclipse the $1000 mark.

 

[CurseTheSky]

If they manage to keep the price around $850 and the battery life around 8 hours real world, it'll be a great system.

 

[jimhsu]

Wow, a revision already? The UL30VT basically "just" came out.

I really want to see a UL series laptop with a 330M ... right now I'm stuck between deciding between a UL80VT and a X83VP, both attractive laptops on different points of the performance/battery life spectrum.

 

[zerogear]

Cancelled my UL30VT order and I'm waiting for this one :]

 

[dajakal]

Wow I've been looking at a Dell XPS 13, but if this is everything it says it can be, then my purchase will be an Asus.

 

[Alienwho]

I love my UL30VT. I love the battery life, the form factor, and the power of the system. The OC'd SU7300 feels blazing fast and it is an absolute pleasure to use.

I look forward to see how the i7 compares and if it costs any battery life. I for one wouldn't get the i7 if it diminishes battery life, even if it was the exact same price. If the battery life is comparable but the cost is over $50 more I wouldn't consider it either. If the UL30Jt gets anywhere near $1000 I would save the couple hundred and stick with the UL30VT.

 

[dajakal]

I love my UL30VT. I love the battery life, the form factor, and the power of the system. The OC'd SU7300 feels blazing fast and it is an absolute pleasure to use.

I look forward to see how the i7 compares and if it costs any battery life. I for one wouldn't get the i7 if it diminishes battery life, even if it was the exact same price. If the battery life is comparable but the cost is over $50 more I wouldn't consider it either. If the UL30Jt gets anywhere near $1000 I would save the couple hundred and stick with the UL30VT.

http://zedomax.com/blog/2010/01/10/asus-ul30jt-hands-on-review-video/ says the demo model has a 5,800mAh battery, so that might give it some extra juice. Truthfully, I'm skeptical of how they can keep i7 and discrete graphics cool with good battery life in such a small system.
Either way, I was looking for a 13" notebook that was able to handle HD video transcoding for my PS3. I didn't think the SU7300 would stack up as well as the P8700 in a Dell XPS m1340, so I was going to go with the Dell, but I think I can wait and see how the UL30JT performs.

 

[Zap]

This ultraportable contains much of the same specs as the VT version with an upgrade to a low voltage i7 processor, and a G310M video card, which should perform nearly identical to the G210M, although perhaps a shade better.
...
Is anyone aware just how much more powerful an i7 620UM would be compared to an SU7300? Hopefully this doesn't eclipse the $1000 mark.

Interesting stuff!

The Mobile Core i7 620UM is 1.06GHz and the 640UM is 1.2GHz. They are dual cores built on the 32 nm process and are rated 18W TDP with 4MB cache. Assuming they have an IMC like other Core i7, then that along with the cache should mean pretty good performance over a 1.3GHz Core 2 class processor. I don't have any proof, but think about it - desktop Core i7 easily beats desktop Core 2 Quad at the same GHz, right? Additionally, the other mobile Core i7 processors have a huge turbo mode. I don't know what these have - does anyone have that information?

My big concern would be power usage. The CPUs it replaces are typically 10W TDP, though of course Core i7 Mobile should have better low power states.

The GPU is a strange one (not helped by the fact that it is likely a rebranded chip). According to Nvidia's pages on the G210M and G310M, they both have 16 CUDA cores at 1500MHz (AKA shaders). The G210M is DX 10.1 while G310 is only DX 10, which doesn't make sense because then wouldn't it be based off an older GPU like the 9400? Also, Nvidia states that both have 64-bit memory interfaces, which usually means 512MB RAM maximum. However, Nvidia lists the G210M as 1GB max while the G310M has 512MB max. Obviously Asus contradicts this by stating that their G310M has 1GB. Something else is that the G210M is stated to support DDR2, DDR3 and GDDR3 while the G310M supports DDR3 and GDDR3. Hmmm.

I do know that desktop variants of the G210M are all DDR2 with 512MB. I think if it were using DDR3 or GDDR3 even the same GPU would get some bit of performance boost. In any case, at least on the surface it doesn't look like a bad choice for a CULV-type subnotebook.

 

[stipalgl]

Okay, so after a bit of research through other sites and forums, I came across an interesting discussion regarding the UL30JT here:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=439591&page=170

According to one of the members (V00d00ley), the current CULV Core 2 + integrated offering has a power consumption rating of 24.5W. The CULV Core i7 + integrated offering coming out has a power consumption rating of 21.5W. Not sure how accurate this is in all honesty, so perhaps take it with a grain of salt.

This means that although the CULV Core 2 has a 10W rating, you still have to factor in the consumption for the integrated graphics platform. Because the i7 has the graphics on die, the 18W would be the total for the processor and graphics. Accounting for the die shrink from 45nm to 32nm, it's fairly conceivable that the CULV i7 platform actually consumes less battery power than its predecessor.

Zap, according to the Wikipedia page, the 620UM has a turbo mode up to 2.13 GHz while the 640UM has a turbo up to 2.26 GHz. Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...Arrandale.22_.28ultra-low_voltage.3B_32_nm.29

It's not apparent at the moment if Asus will provide their Turbo33 overclocking boost as they did with the SU7300, which brought it to 1.73 GHz afterwards. If that's the case, then you could be looking at 1.6 GHz for the 640UM, which is not too bad at all. I'm just not sure how overclocking affects turbo mode. Does it stay the same or does it also increase by 33%?

 

[Zap]

This means that although the CULV Core 2 has a 10W rating, you still have to factor in the consumption for the integrated graphics platform. Because the i7 has the graphics on die, the 18W would be the total for the processor and graphics. Accounting for the die shrink from 45nm to 32nm, it's fairly conceivable that the CULV i7 platform actually consumes less battery power than its predecessor.

DOH! Totally forgot about that... totally makes sense.

Zap, according to the Wikipedia page, the 620UM has a turbo mode up to 2.13 GHz while the 640UM has a turbo up to 2.26 GHz. Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...Arrandale.22_.28ultra-low_voltage.3B_32_nm.29

Thanks for the info/link. Don't know about the Asus overclocking but even without it, looks like these chips are made of win. :thumbsup:

 

[sygyzy]

Can anyone shed some light into the ASUS UL-xxxx line? There seems to be very litttle variation in price and specs for them and the naming scheme is very confusing. I read in a Fatwallet post that the A2 has two years global warranty and the X5 is one year. That's the only thing I could find. I want generalizations like the JT is the gaming system or the A1 is the one with dedicated graphics, etc.

 

[Alienwho]

Can anyone shed some light into the ASUS UL-xxxx line? There seems to be very litttle variation in price and specs for them and the naming scheme is very confusing. I read in a Fatwallet post that the A2 has two years global warranty and the X5 is one year. That's the only thing I could find. I want generalizations like the JT is the gaming system or the A1 is the one with dedicated graphics, etc.

Anything with an "A" means it has two year warranty, and has a 5600mah battery. Also, I think it means they're available in silver?

Anything without the A has a one year warranty and a 4200mah battery (or something close to that).

That's it. The only differences is a smaller warranty and a slightly smaller capacity battery and a different color. FWIW I used my UL30VT(smaller battery) yesterday for 4.5 hours non stop at school, taking notes and surfing the web with the discreet graphics turned off and the brightness turned pretty far down and I still had 54% of the battery remaining.

 

[jimhsu]

Don't forget that the A models usually have Bluetooth. Normally this is unimportant, but I just got a new Bluetooth mouse...

 

[Alienwho]

Don't forget that the A models usually have Bluetooth. Normally this is unimportant, but I just got a new Bluetooth mouse...

As far as I have noticed this depends on the model. I think most, if not all UL30 models have bluetooth (including the UL30VT), but the UL80VT doesn't have BT.

 

[CurseTheSky]

As far as I have noticed this depends on the model. I think most, if not all UL30 models have bluetooth (including the UL30VT), but the UL80VT doesn't have BT.

You have to be really careful with that part. My UL30A-A2 DOES NOT have Bluetooth, which sucks. Your best bet is to skim over the specs several times. If it's not mentioned, it probably doesn't have it.

I wish ASUS would be more consistent with their specs and product names. In general, though:

• UL series = relatively thin and light, low power, good battery life

• 20, 30, 80, 50 = screen size (20 = 12.1", 30 = 13.3", 80 = 14.1", and 50 = 15.4")

• A = general desktop use, VT = higher performance use (discrete graphics and auto-overclocking), JT = even higher performance use?

• -X = smaller battery, usually worse specs (smaller hard drive, single core processor, etc.), -A = bigger battery, better specs; any numbers afterward are usually for revisions (X1, X2, X5; A1, A2)

So, the worst of the UL30 lineup would be a UL30A-X1 or similar. Next would be UL30A-A1, then UL30VT-X1, then UL30VT-A1, UL30JT-X1, UL30JT-A1, etc. It's not all black and white, though. For example, the UL30A-A1 would have a bigger battery and perhaps a larger hard drive than the UL30VT-X1, but the VT-X1 would have discrete graphics and auto-overclocking. A UL30VT-A1 would have the best of both worlds.

 

[jimhsu]

Another data point: The X83VP (a laptop I'm seriously considering) has an A1 and a X1 model.

The X1 has:
T6600
320GB 7200 rpm
No bluetooth

While the A1 has:
P8700
500GB 5400 rpm
Bluetooth

Aside from the hard drive choice, which is debatable, the A1 is better than the X1.

 

[dajakal]

The CES photos at http://zedomax.com/blog/2010/01/08/asus-ul30jt-hands-on-review-ces-2010/ show a GS45 chipset, which according to Intel's website isn't an Arrandale compatible one. Given the lack of solid info, I wouldn't put bets on the UL30JT shipping in less than 2 months. I only say that because it just reaffirms my decision to get a UL30VT-A1

 

[Cuhulainn]

Anyone know if they're doing anything about the low quality panel used? That seems to be one of the biggest complaints with the VT series.

 

[Alienwho]

Anyone know if they're doing anything about the low quality panel used? That seems to be one of the biggest complaints with the VT series.

I doubt it. It seems to be the signature panel of the VT series.

In all honesty though the panel isn't THAT bad, especially if you are coming from an older notebook, it will likely look better than anything you've used in the past. I for one wouldn't have noticed any of the panels flaws if I didn't read all about it before the purchase. It definitely is inferior to the Asus EEE line, however. The other day I was sitting next to a guy who whipped out the EEE and his screen looked bright and vibrant with the right colors even at the extreme angle I was at. I know when he looked at my screen from his angle it was likely a mess of purple haze.

If the resolution was bumped up to 1400x900 and the panel matched that of the EEE, we would have a perfect notebook on our hands.

 

[iskim86]

bump for the ul30jt

any word on the release date?

 

[ENOTTY]

bump for the ul30jt

any word on the release date?

I heard a rumor that it's going to be early to mid March, after CEBIT. And I heard a more unreliable rumor that it will be on March 17.

 

[iskim86]

I heard a rumor that it's going to be early to mid March, after CEBIT. And I heard a more unreliable rumor that it will be on March 17.

i got the same date from notebookreviews.com forums. it's good to know that the rumors point to the same date

 

[ENOTTY]

i got the same date from notebookreviews.com forums. it's good to know that the rumors point to the same date

Lol thats where I got it from.

 

[Zap]

i got the same date from notebookreviews.com forums. it's good to know that the rumors point to the same date

Not if all the rumors have the same source. :\

The good thing is that Nvidia Optimus technology (what is used to switch graphics on/off) will be available from various vendors, not just Asus.

 

[CurseTheSky]

I can't remember if it was Anantech, but I heard reports from someone that an ASUS UL series was coming with a "full" (or "more") aluminum chassis. That probably just means more aluminum panels rather than a Macbook Pro style chassis, but it's a welcome change in my eyes. I know they at least mentioned the wrist rest / track pad area was aluminum as opposed to plastic on the current models.

Anyone know what model that's supposed to be? I'm happy with the internals on the current line-up, but better construction quality is never a bad thing (not that the current series are lacking).