New Dell XPS L521X (Ivy Bridge)

Very cool - much appreciated. I'm really looking forward to it - I can't believe Dell's options for a i7 laptop w/ backlit keyboard and 8GB ram are so limited.

 

here is a gt 640m gddr5
AnandTech - Dell XPS One 27 Review: The Premium All-in-One

 

Where did you find that tag?? O.O

 

I tried inputing that service tag but it didn't work.Did you find out any more info on the warranty page?

 

Great find though! Here is the config.

GTV7DS1

Computer Model
XPS 14 (L421x)

Shipping Date
4/06/2012

Country
China

Components

Parts Number
Quantity
Description




99RFP
1
MODULE..., SOFTWARE..., DSPRT-CTR, 3.0

CGGG3
1
14.0" (35.6cm) HD+ (900p) True Life Infinity Display with Skype-Certified Hi-Def

F6FH1
1
Genuine Windows(R) 7 Home Premium SP1 64bit (Simplified Chinese)

GT35X
1
LABEL..., SVC TAG/XPRS CODE, S, ALUMINUM..., BACK...

N162M
0
SERVICE CHARGE..., SOFTWARE..., LTG, DELL-DOWNLOAD-FLAG

NCWYG
1
Daughter board for WLAN

PRK20
1
Windows(R) 7 Home Premium 32/64bit COA Label (Simplified Chinese)

V5D7R
1
Backlit English Keyboard

W753G
1
Directship Info Mod

 

let me put you guys at ease, Dell did not use the ddr3 versions of the cards as they produce more heat. DDR5 in general is a lot cooler than the ddr3 versions of cards.

 

Good to know, thanks. I think you mentioned earlier that you are bound by the NDA until Tuesday 19th, is that correct? Can we expect to hear come more details from you on Tuesday? (it is Tuesday in 1 hour and 20min in Australia )

 

Hi everybody! I've been reading here since the beginning, and finally decided to register and post...

I know that we (/you) already discussed this before, but... I'm not agree with only 2 usb ports on the xps 14... yes, I know, not everybody uses more than 2 usb ports on the go, but... if you use an external mouse it would only be 1 free usb port, and for the images (from the suposed coming xps) the 2 usb ports are too close together... (usb devices like 3g modems or some pendrives are too wide...)

Other case could be using an external HDD... some external HDD needs 2 usb ports... and this implies to unplug the mouse... and from the images we know that the xps 14 will not have optical drive... then you will say... "if you need an optical drive use an external one", ok, but with more than 2 usb ports it could be more easier... on the go and at home

I think the buyers of the new (supposed coming) XPS14 should have to buy a usb HUB, but everybody knows the issues using that in some usb devices... (probably in usb3 they works fine... someone knows that?)

Probably I would prefer to doesn't have ethernet port if this could be a 3rd usb port and when we need the ethernet port, plug an usb-ethernet card...

I love the new (supposed coming) xps line, but 2,5Kg for the 15 is more than I expect (too close to my 5-6yr old inspiron6400 - 2,9Kg), but until we see the official release I can't choose what it'll be my new notebook...14..15..??

What do you think about that? I'm the only one that thinks 2usb are less than hoped? and for the weight?

PD: Sorry for my english level...

Edit: I know that the perfect notebook doesn't exist, but the suposed new xps line is close to reach it...

 

Hey there, good to have you in the thread.

I hear what you are saying - but you could go Bluetooth Mouse which would solve most of your issues and get rid of that pesky cord in the process.

 

Is anybody still wondering why I hoped for a sub 1080P option?



The FPS drop of the 640m (DDR5) is more than massive on hier resolutions. 1600x900 (IPS) XPS 15 would have been my dream!

 

Firstly, excuse my ignorance as I am only a casual gamer on PS3 but what is an "acceptable" FPS? Obviously higher is better and there may be some personal preference but what is high enough to play without really noticing bad FPS rate? The only game I play on PC is Civ 5 and it seems to run decent on medium settings on my quite old desktop with a very low end GPU. I plan to play some Civ 5 on the new XPS 15. Would 19 FPS be good enough to play?

Edit: While I am asking questions, I'll add another (sorry if they are really stupid but I have very little knowledge of hardware). Do I need a dedicated GPU for Blu-ray playback or will integrated graphics be enough? Does the quality of the GPU have an impact on the quality of playback at all?

 

You can still just set your game resolution to 1600 x 900, while keeping your desktop at 1080P.

 

Pretty sure you can scale it down though?

 

Obviously, the native resolution doesn't matter... Besides, full hd is a necessity for reasonable workspace

Sent from my Incredible S using Tapatalk 2

 

generally 30 fps it's considered borderline acceptable, below that there is a visible "lagginess" of the game. the perfect framerate is about 60 fps. If I recall correctly it's the highest meaningful number, after that the eyes cannot keep up with the images.
Usually, the answer is a little more complex than that: the frame rate should be both above 30 and stable. Some combination of hardware and games can produce very high framerates but with a visible stuttering, often produced by very fast dips in the number of frames generated.

 

I understand what you mean, but these days, bluetooth is the way to go for mouse and keyboard...

But what I can't understand, is why most mouses and keyboard sold today are still using proprietary wireless protocols that requires the use of a USB dongle... Shouldn't everyone use bluetooth, and if they feel the need, include a bluetooth dongle in the package? I just don't understand the industry about this.

On that question, I can tell you some... I've learned a lot when I built my first HTPC (Home Theater PC) last year using the best software currently available : MediaPortal.

When speaking about multimedia in HD (as in 1080p screen), the most demanding task is the real-time de-interlacing of 1080i TV signal (ATSC where I live)... And at the time, the recommendation was to have at least a Intel HD3000 integrated GPU. A lot of people were looking at nVidia solutions, with their specially designed chips for mini-itx boards for use in HTPCs as not powerful enough for de-interlacing.

Considering the option for intergrated GPU is now the HD4000, I'd say there's no worry at all to watch blu-ray in 1080p, as the HD3000 is more than capable to do so.

 

Thanks for the info, much appreciated. Well I hope I can play Civ 5 decently on the XPS. If not, it isn't a deal breaker for me anyway. My current desktop (it was only purchased for using Word etc.) has a GeForce 8400 GS in it and it seems to play Civ 5 pretty well on medium except when I get late game it slows down but I think that may be due to CPU or RAM If I can atleast match the performance I get from my desktop I'll be happy.

 

I agree about the use of bluetooth. I am starting to browse for a bluetooth mouse and keyboard for when I get the XPS 15 and it seems that there aren't that many to choose from. I can find a mouse easily but I was more interested in getting a keyboard mouse combination which I am having difficulty finding. I am not sure why the standard wireless protocol is still so common as bluetooth seems to be a much better and easier option for any newer laptop (and they can include the dongle for everyone else).

Thanks for the help. I'll just go with the lowest available graphics option. I mostly watch blu rays on my home theatre but want to watch them while travelling as I have a huge collection.

EDIT: Oops, sorry for the double post.

 

Dustin says that the performance is fine at 1920x1080....

"Since the other all-in-ones were benchmarked using our old gaming suite, we only have results for the Dell XPS One 2710. That said, generally speaking it has the chops to game at 1080p. I wouldn't push it to the panel's native resolution of 2560x1440, but you can still have a decent gaming experience on the XPS One. This is a massive improvement over the previous generation. And for those who might otherwise complain about not gaming at native resolution, remember that 2560x1440 on a 27" panel gives a small enough dot pitch that running non-native isn't quite as disctracting as on lesser LCDs."

 

I haven't had to use two USB 3.0 ports to power a hard drive yet. What hard drive are you using!?

 

It's all about economics. The US economy drives the prices on must tech because of the demand. The production and trade trendies help with this too.

 

This may have been the case 5 years ago (and it had to do with the weak USB power by the notebooks at the time). Now, most external 2.5" HDDs use only a single USB cable. The manufacturers even note: "Connecting and powering through your USB 3.0 or USB 2.0 interface."

 

I can speak much about HDDs, since all external I've owned are 3.5 and require external power...

But I still have my external ODD Drive (blu-ray burner) that uses two usb port! Makes sense since it requires more power to spin the disc!

And with laptop loosing more and more their disk drive, an external one is becoming a requirement! So on laptops withtout an optical disk drive, they should offer more than 2 ports!

 

That's true but there is also some price gouging going on too (by all tech companies). If I can import a single laptop from the US using a mail forwarding service, pay for postage and insurance, pay our GST (VAT in other countries) on the costs of the laptop and postage and still get it hundreds of dollars cheaper than buying it from Dell's Australian website then there is an issue. Also, at the moment $1AUD=$1.01USD. This is why our Government is currently holding an inquiry into this, in particular, software and digital copies of products such as apps, music and movies.
Plus, we have very little customisation options on the Australian website which is also why a lot of consumers are importing...This I understand though as we are a relatively small market.

 

USB3 offers more power per port than USB2, and I've never seen a external drive use more than one port, you must have a really odd or old optical drive in that enclosure.

 

Doesn't medium 1080p gaming look better than a high 1600 x 900 or 720p?

 

As you said you are a relatively small market. This would make warranty costs higher, as well as other overhead.

 

comparing the results from 640m gddr5 vs 650m gddr3 for the same games
AnandTech - Eurocom Monster 1.0: Clevo's Little Monster
while it loses performance at low resolution, the gt 640m ddr5 wins in every game at 1080p =)
gddr5 realy helps alot.

 

Hey there, i looked at that link and all the charts and the 640M got beat by the 650M on every chart? Unless I missed something or the point of your post... (the 640M did have last years processor and the 650M had this years).

 

After 20000 refreshes to go throu the over 200 pages of this thread i decided to subscribe to reply to this awkward post. Now i read many times over exactly what this guy says and for this reason i decided to pass over a few laptops with DDR3 gt 650 (asus N56 anyone?). Now when i read this post i was even more convinced i made the right choice passing the awesome asus and this time around not only an opinion but even a link!! I let you imagine my extreme surprise and disappointment when i found out that the link states exactly the oppsite!! No matter the resolution the gt 650 appears to be ahead, or am i reading it wrong???? now are we sure the acer has a DDR5 version of the 640?

best

yeah what Dave says

 

guys see the results at 1080p

_________gt 640m ddr5_________gt650m ddr3
batman ______33fps_______________24fps
bf3 _________25.7fps______________18.3fps
Civ 5________16.9fps______________22.8fps loses this one (more geometry dependent)
dirt 3________51.4fps______________25.2fps dirt 3 loves bandwidth
skyrim_______44fps_______________31.2fps
portal 2______67fps________________61fps

 

Sorry, NDA got pushed back further, i will have to hold my tongue a little longer.

 

Honestly i don't know where you are getting those numbers from looks like 24 vs 17 not 24 vs 33:

 

Too bad, I guess we'll have to wait until the official release

 

my guess is dell will bring a gt650m later down by august September range
and they will be using the ddr5 version im sure
GeForce GT 650M - GeForce


but i would be happy if they match lenovo and bring the Gtx660m but then they would have strain on the cooling system in that slim package ...

 

That's the ddr3 version
This is the gddr5

 

Ah! Make sense... Now our two "sources" seems to converge on the same date range....

Maybe we should start a betting pool, on when exactly when dell will release information on the L521X.... It'll help pass the time

 

thats ddr3 650m vs ddr3 640m comparision. obv the ddr3 650mis gonna be faster -_- other guy was comparing ddr3 650m with ddr5 640m

 

i have already started on an official review when the NDA is lifted though.

 

The problem is that for the 640, Batman is played at "Medium Preset @ 1920x1080", while the 650 is played at "Medium Preset @ 1366x768" and "Extreme Preset @ 1920x1080".

How can you compare those two ?

 

I see what you are doing now...gotcha

thanks

 

Nice... I'll definitely read it!

 

Why do you say it is at medium
They have a gaming suite and they run the game all at the exact same level of detail for each resolution
768p - low
900p - medium
1080p - high
even tough they didn´t specified for xps one review.

 

I'm not that familiar with their test suite so I'm just reading it off the images. Or does the 'Medium / High / Extreme - Preset' only refer to the resolution? (And all other settings are exactly the same?)

 

It refers to the settings too
Its their way for avoiding mistakes when comparing graphic cards.

 

Hi Dave,

That comparison has the 650M paired with an i7-3720QM ( Intel® Core i7-3720QM Processor) vs the 640M paired with an i7-2637M ( Intel® Core i7-2637M Processor). The 3720QM, on top of having twice the cores, has a base clock speed 900MHz higher and a max turbo speed 800MHz higher. Additionally, since the 2637M is a ULV part, it has a much narrower thermal envelope in which to utilize "turbo" speeds.

Notebookcheck summarizes the GDDR5-equipped GT640M performance as follows: "The more uncommon GDDR5 version of the GT 640M should be significantly faster with potential speeds reaching close to that of the DDR3 version of the GT 650M." - from NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M - Notebookcheck.net Tech. As near as I can tell, this comparison is based on estimates of performance at typical notebook gaming resolutions (1366x768 being one of the most common, still, particularly with low-to-mid level parts). At high resolution, it's conceivable that a GDDR5-equipped 640M may pull ahead in some cases, depending on the specific game, clocking of the comparison 650M (since it can fall within a range of between 735 and 850), and driver optimization. Additionally, a 640M may be overclocked by 15% (to ~730MHz) if the notebook's cooling system can accomodate it, which would put it roughly in the bottom range of the 650M's clock speed.

Overall, compared to the DDR3 650M, it looks as though a GDDR5-based 640M solution may be more efficient from a power/performance perspective. I do wonder though, given the physical size of the XPS 15, if a GDDR5-equipped 650M would have been possible. Perhaps in such a case, the XPS 14 could have ended up with the kepler-based GT640M instead of the frankly baffling selection of the old Fermi-based 630M part that sees duty in significantly smaller notebooks (and is much slower).

 

So comparing those graphs is pointless then ?

640M - 1920x1080 - FPS33 (Batman) - Medium Preset
650M - 1920x1080 - FPS24 - Extreme Preset

Since the 650M has AA switched on and you don't know what the 640M had for settings, how can you compare those two ?

 

its not so much as the cpu (it is a factor tho) but also that they both are ddr3 gpus. the 640m in that case (acer ) is not ddr5

 

It is not at medium
that's what i was trying to say
if they test at 1080p they use extreme settings always so that it is possible to make fair comparisons with other graphic card without mistakes.
its their gaming suite, notebookcheck has a similar one too.
correct me if im wrong

 

As I understood the discussion, while that may be the case in the graph, there was an overall inquiry about the relative merits between the GDDR5 GT640M and the DDR3 GT650M. So, I didn't notice that the Acer in that case had DDR3 >.<

Oh well, the other information is still useful I think?