Choose: 13.3" UL30VT vs New i3/i5 CULV 13.3"

I've been lurking here trying to absorb what I can.

From what I have gathered from these threads it seems like the new CULV i3/i5 lineup might not have much performance upgrade from the older CULV C2D lineup. And it also appears that the new CULV i3/i5 line might have less battery life, increased temperatures and increased loudness.

So what should I do? Is the new line going to be worth the roughly $200 upgrade? From what I have been reading probably not.

Right?

 

Anyone interested in discussing this? Or am I crazy here.

Its okay to call me crazy.

 

Over 50 views and no discussion?

Let's get this thing started! I know that I am not the only one visiting this forum with this dilemma.

 

I would assume the UL30JT thread, and the U30JC thread is where most discussion takes place.

As for performance and numbers, its up to you really. While the numbers don't lie, but are there hard solid evidence of the 'downgrade'?

 

Thanks for the reply.

Those 2 threads are huge - I've tried to gleam as much insight as possible from them. I have searched and haven't found where a thread exists that discusses this question specifically.

 

ul30vt > ul30jt. nuff said
the performance increase is MINIMAL.

 

This.

I almost bought the UL30VT, but I waited because I heard news of the UL30JT. After reading some Google Translated reviews of the JT's performance, it seems clear that if there has been improvement...its negligible.

Now the real choice for me has come down to finally buying the VT or waiting (again, more waiting...haha) for the Acer Timeline X 3820...or possibly even the HP Envy 14 (the performance of the Envy would have to be substantially better in order for me to sacrifice the portability of the other two though).

 

Also, its worth mentioning that the $200 you save would be enough to purchase a quality SSD (ala Intel X25M-G2 80GB) and drastically improve the notebooks real world performance.

 

Forgive my ignorance but is Acer even in the same ballpark as far as build quality as the ASUS?

And I thought the Envy 14 was about $1000. Like you said, do you think it would be worth the upgrade?

 

Generally Asus tops Acer on build quality. With that said, the reviews of the new Timeline series (and the old Timeline series actually) have been quite positive. Here is a review:

Notebookcheck: Review Acer Aspire 3820TG Timeline X Notebook

(Though keep in mind they reviewed a model with the i3 + ATI 5470 rather than a model with the more powerful i5 + ATI 5650 combo...which would net substantially higher performance)

As for the Envy...I believe its priced about right if you get the i5 + ATI 5650 for the advertised $999...depending on your specific needs of course. But to have that powerful CPU + GPU combo, BT, backlit keyboard, slot loading DVD burner, superior display, and USB3 / eSata while remaining relatively thin, all for that asking price is a good deal imho.

 

I own the UL30VT and find the CPU more than adequate especially with Turbo mode. So far the only stutters were from 1080p Youtube playback on an HD Projector without flash 10.1. CPU was getting up to 100%. With 10.1 it went down to 43%... Otherwise I love this computer. It has handled virtually every game I have thrown at it. Now with my SSD installed this thing is really really fast. Sooo my point is core i3/i5 ulv = not worth it.

 

Excellent. Thanks for the info.

 

Just wanted to thank those of you who have commented thus far.

 

For me, the extra $200 does not justify the minimal increase in performance. I'd say stick with the UL30VT and purchase a SSD for a smarter investment.

 

Hey guys - UL30VT price drop at J&R plus 5% bing cashback for those of you who are interested.

$684 total.

ASUS UL30VT-A1 13.3 @ JR for 684 after 5% CB - SlickDeals.net Forums

 

A link to a UL30vt thread I started I found randomly on the internet = too much time spent surfing


mitt

 

thnx for the topic. it is very helpful for me. i had the same question in my mind and still i have
i m doing research on the internet about this discussion for a long time..

actually i wanna buy ul80vt and i am not sure about the su7300 1.3ghz cpu.
i read the cpu benchmark results.

The numbers says it s a really big difference between su7300 1.3 ghz and i3 m350 2.27 ghz..

PassMark Software - CPU Benchmarks - List of Benchmarked CPUs
u can see the su7300 at rank 431 with 982 passmark
PassMark CPU Lookup

and the i3 m350 at rank 182 with 1992 passmark
PassMark CPU Lookup

but some guru brothers wrote;
BlazingSkies
ul30vt > ul30jt. nuff said
the performance increase is MINIMAL.

jordanpatrick
its negligible.

Sanmanatoo
Sooo my point is core i3/i5 ulv = not worth it.

so i trust them and decided to dont spend an extra 200$ for i3 cpu...

i think i will buy ul80vt at this weekend..

but if u have time pls can u read that bencmark results and write your opinions again ?

 

I suppose the impact of the upgraded processor is all relative to what you are looking to do with your laptop.

The ULxxVT can basically do all day to day tasks (word processing, internet, multitasking, HD video playback, simple video / photo editing, etc...+ a bonus of lower resolution gaming) exceptionally well. So the benefit of an improved processor is largely wasted if this is what you intend to use your notebook for, therefore making the ~$200 upgrade unnecessary.

If what you are needing your laptop to do is more processor intensive (such as video encoding perhaps) the increased processor power may appeal to you. Although, if this is your intended use I would probably suggest a different laptop altogether, one with a full power processor.

In the end, yes there is a definite increase in processor power, but to many this is irrelevant for their use (at least when it costs ~$200) and therefore the saved money is best spent elsewhere.

Hope this post helps with your decision.

 

Also - The benchmark results are also misleading, as the SU7300 in the ULxxVT can be factory overclocked through performance settings, allowing it to run at 1.7GHz, narrowing the gap in performance with the i3

 

You missing one point - ULxxJT has UM (1.06GHz) CPU series, not M (2.27 GHz).

 

I'd drop another 200$+200$ and get a N82JQ with i7 + 335m for 1.9kg optical drive included.

 

The SU7300 actually runs fine at 1.9GHz

 

the offical asus website says Intel® Core™ i3 Processor 350M/330M : 2.26 GHz - 2.13 GHz, for u30jc

 

i just checked the n82jq.. it looks perfect except it's battery and price i think it s over 1000$?

where did u buy it my friend and how much was it?

 

Personally, I tend to not buy untested technology or products.

The VT has been a bit on the market and you hear only good reviews... The new i3/i5 laptops might have some issues that will be know after a few months.

 

I'm buying the UL30VT (black X1)... cheaper price... relatively same performance.

 

I think the black version has a shorter battery and also shorter warranty.

I could be mistaken though.

 

Looks like these are the differences...

http://forum.notebookreview.com/asus/462236-asus-ul30vt-x1-vs-a1.html

X1 = Black, 1 year warranty, smaller battery, intel wireless card
A1 = Silver, 2 year warranty, bigger battery, atheros wireless card

 

I really wasnt very specific with my last post. I was comparing the VT and the JT models. And i was also refering to gaming performance really. Since the performance boost from the 310m video card is, as mentioned, minimal, I dont think its worth waiting AND $200 more.

About the X1 and A1 though, the X1 is definitely the one i want, black is my favourite colour and the laptops looks is actually one of the reasons why i want it. As for the warranty... i dont really mind as i live in the Dominican Republic and sending the laptop back to the US or any other country would involve paying lots of taxes so its not worth it really. For me that is !

 

Please do little more research. i3 m350 is not a CULV chip.

 

I would choose i5 CULV processor over SU7300 in UL30Vt. i3 CULV processor provides minimal performance increase over SU7300 at the cost of battery life.

 

Raising this back from the dead. I know it's been almost a year, but with the i3 processors having been out in the real world for a while now, does everyone still agree that it makes sense to save some money by going with an older SU7300-powered ULXXvt, vs. one of the newer Asus models with an i3 CPU? Or have the i3's proven to be just as efficient (battery life) with noticeable gains in performance vs. the Turbo mode (1.7 GHz) of the older CPU design?

 

I have an acer aspire one 752 (Celeron @1.2ghz, CULV) and it's about on par with the thin EEE pc - since they're in the same price bracket, I'm not particularly surprised. My n10 was much nicer, in terms of build quality, but was half as fast and twice as expensive. In the same performance range, and price range, they're not significantly different. Though, asus is generally easier to take apart.