Ivy Bridge Zenbook with FHD IPS screen UX21A UX31A UX32A UX32VD

[Croak]

Did a little more research on the GT620M. It's GDDR3 vs GDDR5, and it has half the fill rate of the 640M.

Sadly, I'm thinking it still may not be enough GPU for my needs, especially trying to drive 1920x1080.

[Spiral Man]

Did a little more research on the GT620M. It's GDDR3 vs GDDR5, and it has half the fill rate of the 640M.

Sadly, I'm thinking it still may not be enough GPU for my needs, especially trying to drive 1920x1080.

my thoughts exactly. At first I was excited, because I confused its performance with 630m but 620m is quite a step down. Really a shame.


What I hate about ultrabooks, like netbooks before it is that almost all of them tries to shoehorn the same things in. They all want to be macbook air, it is so obvious. All the spec videos on YT and other places. they seem to care more about the thinness than anything else. And everything else suffers because they are so thin.

I understand the need to have light and small footprint, but thin, thin, thin is not everything. Because like with Netbooks you end up with a over satured marked that will die.
There should be more ultraportables that want to give power and battery now that we have technologies like Nvidia Optimus.

[Croak]

The thing is, the UX32 is a bit less thin and less light than the UX31, ostensibly to accommodate more potent hardware and/or to keep costs down.

I suspect they went with the 620M for power consumption issues, since the '32 lineup has a smaller battery than the refreshed '31, and there may be issues mating up a faster GPU with the ULV IB.

[Petrov]

What would you guys guess would be the 620M 3dmark06 performance? I only really want this laptop to play Civ V, Path of Exile (potentially D3, etc) at native res... so the new Clevo 11.6' with the 650M might be overkill...?

Any tips appreciated!
Petrov.

[Daishogun]

According to Asus Zenbook Prime UX32VD Review - Watch CNET's Video & Read Our Review, the 620M is quite good, pulling around 60fps in Street Fighter IV at 1080p. Not exactly an intensive game, and we don't know the settings, but still, it ran at 17fps or so on the HD4000. As long as it can play Diablo III, I'm a happy camper.

[Petrov]

According to Asus Zenbook Prime UX32VD Review - Watch CNET's Video & Read Our Review, the 620M is quite good, pulling around 60fps in Street Fighter IV at 1080p. Not exactly an intensive game, and we don't know the settings, but still, it ran at 17fps or so on the HD4000. As long as it can play Diablo III, I'm a happy camper.

This is impressive, isn't it, for the 620M?

I found a recent review of the Lenovo Y480 with a 640M, and they also got 57fps in Street Fighter IV at the Lenovo's native resolution of 1366x768 - it seems that either the Asus review or the Lenovo review are wrong, as there's no way a 620M can do more fps for the same game at higher resolution, than a 640M...?

Review: Lenovo IdeaPad Y480 (Core i7 3610QM Processor 2.3GHz, 8GB RAM) - Notebooks - CNET Asia

Petrov.

[Daishogun]

That's confusing... it was 57.2 FPS to be exact on the 620M. Maybe Nvidia is hiding a trump card in a Kepler 620M for Ultrabooks. It doesn't make sense, what so ever, but hey, we can always hope can't we :P This is presuming the 640 in the Lenovo is a Fermi 640 and not a Kepler 640. Even then, this is extremely unlikely speculation, but then again, he says 57.2FPS in both the video AND the review. Surely they didn't it up that badly.

EDIT: Or maybe ASUS was lying, and it really is a 640M? (Once again pure speculation for the sake of speculation.)

EDIT2: That Lenovo has a 1366x768 resolution as well. Looks like CNET has made a relatively large blunder.

[BigNerd]

I wanted the 11" 1080p too but since it has no SD card... probably go for the 13".

[Croak]

Well, I have a Kepler 640M in this Samsung I'm typing on right now. It's right on the edge of what I consider acceptable at 1600x900 (which is why I bought it).

I don't see a Kepler 620M being faster.

[CompUG]

Well, I have a Kepler 640M in this Samsung I'm typing on right now. It's right on the edge of what I consider acceptable at 1600x900 (which is why I bought it).

I don't see a Kepler 620M being faster.

Even though its 620M shouldn't there be a difference because the Zenbook prime is full HD?

I was leaning towards the series 7, but this look just as good, discrete graphic card, HDD, Full HD, light and thin. Its basically on par with the series 7.