ASUS UL80Vt-A1 Review

The ASUS UL80Vt is a 14” thin-and-light laptop with 10 hours of battery life, an overclocked processor, and switchable Nvidia graphics. Read on to find out if this battery-friendly powerhouse is worth your money.

Our ASUS UL80Vt-A1 has the following specifications:

• 14-inch 720p (1366x768) display with LED backlighting
• Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
• Intel Core 2 Duo SU7300 Ultra Low Voltage processor (1.3GHz/3MB L2/800MHz FSB) overclocked to 1.73GHz/1066MHz FSB
• Switchable graphics: Nvidia GeForce G210M w/ 512MB GDDR3 dedicated and Intel GMA 4500MHD integrated
• 4GB DDR3-1066 RAM
• 320GB 5400RPM hard drive (Seagate Momentus 5400.6/ST9320325AS)
• 802.11n wireless (Atheros AR9285)
• DVD Super Multi drive
• Two-year warranty w/ one year accidental damage coverage
• 8-cell Li-ion battery (5600mAh)
• Weight: 4.8 lbs
• Dimensions: 13.5” x 9.6” x 1.1”
• MSRP: $849.99

It's also worth mentioning that ASUS informed us that Amazon.com has a rather attractive promotion going on after November 1, 2009. Anyone who purchases the UL80Vt-A1 from Amazon gets a $100 Amazon gift card.

The same promotion also applies to the ASUS UL50Ag-A2. Additionally, if you purchase an ASUS UL20A-A1 Amazon will include a $75 gift card. Details regarding this promotion were not available at the time of this writing, but you might want to check out Amazon.com for more information.

Build and Design
The UL80Vt has a classy design. With a height of only 1.1 inches it is certainly a thin machine, and the inward chiseled sides make it look even thinner. The lid is the most visually attractive part of the notebook with its brushed aluminum back and angled hinge design. The island-style keyboard also adds to the visual appeal; it sits flush with the surface of the notebook. Although the UL80Vt's 8-cell battery is large the designers cleverly integrated it between the display hinges for a flush appearance. The UL80Vt has an understated look and fits in both home and work environments.

The UL80Vt has a plastic construction with the exception of the aluminum-backed lid. All visible surfaces are glossy which means dust and fingerprints show up easily; keeping this notebook clean is a chore. The plastics themselves are of reasonable quality.

Unfortunately the good news ends here. The UL80Vt's build quality and construction are subpar. I was able to visibly twist the chassis using only modest pressure, and pushing down on the touchpad literally causes the chassis to sag and touch the surface it is resting on.

This unusually high amount of flex indicates that the notebook's internal frame is not strong enough. The lid also twists easily despite the aluminum back. Furthermore, the plastic screen benzel below the lid is very flimsy and can easily be pulled away from the screen about a half centimeter. Pushing on this area causes the screen to bend outward uncomfortably far. Lastly, the plastic trim above the keyboard is unsecured and has a few millimeters of up-and-down play. Overall while the build materials themselves are of reasonable quality the strength and construction of the UL80Vt are disappointing.

Screen and Speakers
The UL80Vt has a 14-inch display with LED backlighting, a 16:9 aspect ratio, and a 1366x768 resolution. Its glossy coating makes images look clearer at the expense of glare. The display has plenty of brightness but the contrast is low, making pictures look slightly washed out. Side-to-side viewing angles are adequate however are limited vertically; the display needs to be tilted just right to get an accurate picture. A better quality display would have been appreciated on a multimedia notebook like the UL80Vt.

The speakers are poor despite the Altec Lansing branding. They do not get loud enough and are very tinny. The headphone jack is fortunately static-free and the best way to get audio out of the notebook.

Keyboard and Touchpad
The UL80Vt has a chiclet/island style keyboard with extra space between keys. The keyboard is unfortunately mediocre and does not do anything well. While typing the keyboard feels loose as if it were merely resting on the chassis rather than being secured and has a cheap rattling sound, especially on the left side. Flex is also a problem on the left side. The tactile feedback is limited at best; there is not enough of it and key travel is too short. Moreover the keys are noisier than we prefer. As a result of these deficiencies typing is uncomfortable especially for extended periods.

The touchpad is also below average. Its glossy surface is difficult to track on and the single-piece button is somewhat noisy and difficult to press. I had to apply pressure at the far left and right edges of the button to get clicks to register.

Ports and Features
The UL80Vt has an adequate selection of ports, including HDMI. The notebook strangely does not have a Kensington lock slot or built-in Bluetooth. All picture descriptions are left to right.

Left Side: Power jack, exhaust vent, VGA out, HDMI, 2x USB, microphone and headphone jacks

Right Side: DVD Super Multi drive, media card reader (MMC/MS/MS-Pro/SD/xD), USB, 1000Mbps Ethernet

Front: Speakers

Back: Battery

<!--nextpage--><!--pagetitle:ASUS UL80Vt-A1 Performance, Benchmarks and Conclusion-->

Performance and Benchmarks
The UL80Vt has a unique ability to overclock its Ultra Low Voltage (ULV) Core 2 Duo processor from 1.3GHz to 1.73GHz, giving it a significant performance advantage over competitors with ULV processors. Coupled with 4GB of RAM and a quick 320GB hard drive, the UL80Vt is more than capable of handling everyday tasks and more intensive applications, and the Nvidia graphics card allows for casual gaming. All benchmarks were run with the processor overclocked to 1.73GHz.

Wprime processor comparison results (lower scores mean better performance):

PCMark05 measures overall system performance (higher scores mean better performance):

3DMark06 measures overall graphics performance for gaming (higher scores mean better performance):

Crysis gaming benchmark (1024x768 resolution and high settings):

HDTune storage drive performance test:

The Nvidia GeForce G210M is a mainstream graphics card and unable to play newer games like Crysis well. I tested an older game, Counter-Strike: Source, informally and it ran at all high settings without difficulty. The reality is that there is only so much that can be done with just 16 shader units and a 64-bit memory interface. For older games (~2005) the G210M will suffice but for newer games look for a notebook with a more powerful graphics card.

Heat and Noise
At idle the UL80Vt is essentially silent for all intents and purposes. Under full load the fan speeds up but is still muted; there is no fan whine or annoying tone. The fan exhaust is located on the left side of the notebook and does not expel a lot of heat unless under full load &ndash; this system simply does not produce much heat to begin with. The chassis manages heat well; the palm rests stay near room temperature and only on the left side does the notebook get slightly warm.

Battery Life
The UL80Vt lasted an extremely impressive nine hours and fifty minutes while surfing the web in power saving mode with low screen brightness. The large eight-cell battery is certainly a welcome feature. The switchable graphics and ULV processor greatly helped power efficiency.

Operating System and Software
The UL80Vt-A1 comes with Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit and too many pre-loaded utilities. Several of these pre-loaded "bloatware" utilities (shown in the image to the right) are startup items which increase log on time whenever you turn on the laptop. If ASUS could consolidate all of these utilities into a central control panel then this would not be such an issue. The sheer number of them at present is unnecessary.

Since one of the key benefits to using Windows 7 is faster system startup, there's really no reason to slow down the computer with this much bloatware.

Conclusion
The ASUS UL80Vt is a notebook we really want to like but has too many drawbacks to overwhelmingly recommend. While it has a stellar ten-hour battery life, sleek design, and good overall performance, its weak build quality, abysmal keyboard, and unfriendly touchpad prevent us from signing its praises.

Pros:

• Sleek design (see cons)
• Stellar battery life
• Switchable graphics
• Good overall performance
• Runs cool and quiet
• Good warranty coverage

Cons:

• Subpar build quality
• Abysmal keyboard
• Unfriendly touchpad
• Screen needs more contrast
• No built-in Bluetooth
• Too many pre-loaded utilities

Related Articles:

• ASUS UL30 Review

 

Great review Charles. Very disppointed on the keyboard and touchpad. Is a killer on the deal no matter how much battery life it has. If you can't use the thing properly, then stuff it!

 

WOW! That is terrible from Asus!
I mean, this laptop could be a win easily, but the BQ is too low...

THanks for the review Chaz!

 

Wow...Kevin gave very high marks on the keyboard for the UL30 in his review and the entire UL line seems to share the same keyboard, how come there is such a sharp constrast in your review? Are they produced by different suppliers or someting?

 

That could be the case, but based on Kevin's review I can only conclude that ASUS did not engineer the UL80 the same way; the UL30 by contrast:

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=5263
And if Kevin said that, as a ThinkPad user, then that says something. He's probably more of a stickler than me when it comes to build quality/keyboard feel.

I am no stranger to notebook keyboards; this is one of the worst I have used to date. It sounds horrible to type on since it rattles. Key travel is simply too short; it is about half of what a normal notebook keyboard has and I found it difficult to touch-type quickly on. I found myself making an unusual amount of errors at my normal typing speed. The keyboard has a vague and cheap feel. It is out of place on a modern notebook.

Additionally, the reason I hit so hard on the build quality front is because with a chassis and screen that exhibit significant amounts of flex, that is likely to weaken the internal circuit boards and could case stress fractures and weakened solder joints. Take a look at the ThinkPad T42 flex issues to see a real-world example.

Quite frankly I am surprised none of the other review sites mentioned any of the flaws I found.

The concept of the UL80 is great but it did not pan out IRL. Like I said in the conclusion I really wanted to like and recommend this notebook but I can't be honest and recommend a notebook that lacks competence in fundamental areas.

 

I truly believe you got a bad model from Asus for this review. My keyboard as well as the ones of many others has zero flex. Also I have not had any of the same build quality issues you had. There is no give in the wrist rest or touchpad on mine and I am sure there wasn't in any of the others reviewed which is why it wasn't mentioned. Honestly I find it most shocking that after having seen the other review from Laptopmag and users on this site you would have posted this review without at least asking Asus for a replacement. I don't disagree with you on everything, the screen isn't great especially vertical viewing angles but the contrast can be helped a bit by lowering the gamma in the windows color adjustment menu and then lowering the brightness in the video card drivers.

 

We give all manufacturers the opportunity to send us review units that have been "cherry picked" to meet their highest possible standards. This review unit of the ASUS UL80Vt-A1 was a retail production-level unit supplied by ASUS and had been opened and checked by representatives from ASUS prior to being shipped to our office.

There was no reason for us to believe that this system wasn't up to the standards that ASUS establishes for their production-level notebooks.

While we're on the subject, this wouldn't be the first time that a laptop manufacturer suffers from "sample variation" on the production line. When Kevin reviewed the ASUS G51VX-A1 he noticed that the keyboard didn't fit properly into the tray area of the chassis (it wiggled around and was easy to pop out). Two months later, Kevin reviewed the ASUS G51J (which uses the same chassis and keyboard) but the keyboard in that notebook fit absolutely perfect.

If our review unit of the UL80Vt-A1 had an "obvious" production flaw (such as a crack in the chassis, bent components, or unusual benchmark numbers) then we certainly would have contacted ASUS about sending us a replacement review unit. That's something we do for all manufacturers that send us review units.

 

Understood and I figured that might be case. To me it looks like Asus really dropped the ball on this one. Not on the unit itself but on not checking it before sending it out to you. Makes me wonder about their quality control as mine (which I am sending back for exchange on Monday) has a dead pixel right near the middle of the screen. I hope after reading this review Asus will realize their mistake and offer to send you another unit for review because I truly don't believe Asus sent you a good example of the UL80VT.

 

Well I think I am still going to give this laptop a shot - there doesn't seem to be any other options out there for this mobility/graphics combo/price point in the US right now. I need a laptop now so I really can't wait around (though I am going to wait for the amazon deal).

 

To fix the keyboard I believe putting a couple of pieces of double-sided tape under it would get rid of the rattle and also get rid of the flex. I am not about to try that with a review unit however.
Apparently it is risky to remove the keyboard since it is held down by plastic clips, which may not go back correctly. It's up to you. If this was my notebook I would do it since the rattle is annoying.

 

It is the only one they sent you?
That is terrible how the KB is...I mean, c'mon, it is sent to be reviewed lol

After this, I am not recommending this until it has been fixed or updated.

 

I prefer Apple laptop hardware and OS above and beyond Windows any day but have both. For consumer level PC laptops Asus gets my first look. But they have a puzzling level of inconsistency in quality between models even in the same price range. I think they have way too many models of laptop and would probably do better to cut the number of models and focus a little more on quality.

 

I wanted to like this computer so much. It has sweet components in what seems to be a crap case, which sucks. I really like the idea of a CULV and switchable graphics for playing all my Source games. Just waiting for the perfect one I suppose. I can't stand chicklet style keyboards or crappy touchpads, and I demand something that at least feels like it's solidly put together. I still use my Asus G1s for light gaming, and it certainly has enough horsepower to run older games, but I worry about it's furnace-like 8600GT and the subpar cooling that the computer came with stock. That's why something like this sounds great; battery life and performance when needed.

As far as Asus quality, I was under the impression they were top of their class when I got my G1s. After owning it for two years I know that the cooling sucks, the paint wears off just as fast as any other HP or Dell I've had, and the plastic slots over the heatsink have become so brittle from heat that they've all broken off. The lid feels like crap too. My parents have a Lenovo IdeaPad and Dell Studio15 and both feel a lot more solidly constructed. I won't buy another Asus unless I can personally pick it up and mess around with it.

 

Hmm...after reading this review I'm thinking of heading over to a U80V-b2.

 

I made this post in the UL80VT-A1 Owner's lounge, but I think it should also be posted here:

I would also like to add that either 1) Charles has too high of a standard for build quality, 2) The other reviewers have far too low a standard of build quality, or 3) Charles just got a bad unit.

I was also disappointed by lack of gaming benchmarks + the lack of emphasis on the gaming aspect of the laptop. If you compare this review to the review that Charles did of the dv5t, the review of the dv5t was far more thorough and detailed in the gaming department. And as far as gaming expectations go, we all know that we can't run the latest games at the highest settings... But it certainly can run the latest games on low-med settings. I would imagine that it could run COD4 at native resolution perfectly (30+ constant FPS, maybe more). TO ME, that would be GREAT gaming performance. the laptop shouldn't be docked because Charles had too high of expectations on the gaming performance. Most users just want to be able to play games (even older games on high settings + newer games on low settings) while on the road (especially Source games, which should run fantastic on this lappy). There are very few other laptops out there that can switch between great battery life + decent gaming performance.

 

Which I noted, in the review:

Here's my reply to the other posts in the ASUS forum but copied below for reference:

I think a lot of this boils down to our personal experiences with different machines; everything is relative. Did you try pushing in on the ASUS logo below the display? The display on mine flexes outward a half-centimeter. Additionally, try putting your fingernail between the benzel and the display at the bottom and pulling away. On mine it comes away several millimeters. That's not good.
Also, grip the chassis at the front corners and try to twist it with the back of the notebook remaining flat. Notice the flex? That's what I see on my unit. Compared to most other notebooks I have tested that indicates weak build quality.

Understand that the reviewer's job is to inform the reader of what the laptop is capable of. I noted the G210M was okay for casual gaming but not ultra-modern gaming. Crysis not going to run well on this laptop period. If I stated that 'this laptop can handle modern games fine', then I'd be creating the wrong image. You guys in the forums are in the 99.9% percentile for technical knowledge but most readers are not. Giving them the wrong impression can be accomplished in a single sentence; it would be a critical error on my part.

I appreciate though, that you realize I gave my honest impressions on it.

NotebookReview.com is not like other review sites and I don't say that just because they let me review a laptop here and there. What makes NBR unique is that all its reviews don't sound the same. We try to be as in-depth and descriptive as possible and we believe we give the reader a better idea of what to expect that other sites. All of our editors have different styles.
In reviews I place a high(er) level of importance/focus on the input devices (keyboard/touchpad/screen). Reasoning: the input devices are the sole connection between you and the computer and will greatly affect your computing productivity/experience. For this review I felt that merely saying "the keyboard has minor issues such as rattle and lack of tactile feel" would not have created an accurate picture. I have tested over 40 notebooks over the last five years from $300 netbooks to $6000 gaming laptops, and this laptop's keyboard is one that strikes me as being significantly below average as far as input device quality is concerned. My judgment may be sharp-tongued but is the truth from my perspective. Recommending a notebook with the issues this notebook exhibited would be a bold-faced lie in my book.

That said, I feel I have accurately defended my position on this notebook. The critical response is a refresher so any comments are welcome.

 

I understand that you have to be as neutral as possible and in-depth too, I do agree that the cons make the laptop look bad, but seriously, using a crappy keyboard, a bad touchpad and a terrible screen are (isolatedlye [spelling?]) deal-breakers for most of us.

There is nothing worse than having an unresponsive touchpad, or a keyboard that is terribly to type on. And the screen, well, that is more subjective, but considering that Charles has seen tons of screens, we can be confident that the range covered and the experience he was is enough to judge this screen. The same applies to the KB and touchpad.

It is very important to highlight these defects in particular, since it is the things we use the most. A low performer can be solved, but a bad KB or touchpad is something you are stuck with.


One thing I want to notice, in the response above me, it seems like (IMHO) you are slightly offended. It sounds as trying to prove you are right. Sorry, I may be mistaken.

 

Regardless of this particular notebook's flaws in build quality, it is good to see switchable graphics making more of an appearance in more laptops. It really gives the best of both worlds

 

This is not what you said. You said in your review that:

Most causual users will take that statement and assume that it means that the UL80VT is not able to run Crysis or other newer games smoothly at all, which is simply not true...

Just because it cannot run Crysis on high settings, it doesn't mean it can't run Crysis and other newer games smoothly. Obviously, Crysis on high settings is going to kill any graphics card with 64-bit memory because the 64-bit memory can't handle that high of resolution of textures, but just because it can't play Crysis on high settings doesn't mean you can't get a "good" gaming experience out of the 210M by lowering the graphics settings to low-medium.

Again, simply not true. Crysis would run fine on lower settings, and most people would be just fine with running Crysis on lower settings...

You are misleading the public the way you wrote the review. The way you wrote the review would make people think that the 210M was incapable of running newer games, which just isn't the case. You said:

But the 210M should be able to play Call of Duty: World at War significantly better than my Dell Studio 14z with the (9400M integrated), and my Dell Studio 14z can play it at (40+ FPS) at lower settings and 800x600. The 210M should be able to play COD: WOW at near native resolution very smoothly since it outscored the 14z by nearly 55% in 3DMark06. The recommended specs for new Call of Duty: Modern Warefare 2 hasn't really gone up that much, so I would expect similar performance in that game as well... and that game is just coming out! I also was able to play Batman: Arkham Asylum on my Dell Studio 14z at 800x600 with 30+ FPS. Again, the UL80VT is going to be able to play that game even better and an even better resolution...

Therefore, the 210M is able to play many other newer games at native/near-native resolutions and decent settings as well. I am confident that the majority of casual gamers would find the performance of the 210M to be more than sufficent as long as they are okay with running the games on lower settings + lower resolutions. But that's not what your review would indicate... your review would indicate that the 210M would be incapable of even running those games on at playable rates period, and that just isn't the case. You wrote off the UL80VT's gaming ability after doing one test on the most graphic intensive game out there currently. To me that just indicates lack of thoroughness on your part... no offense.

I do think you gave your honest review; albeit, a rushed one...

 

A notebook with a graphics card like the G210M can hardly be considered a capable gaming notebook. My analysis here is spot-on:

Again, a technical user like yourself understands how to get games to run better on lower-spec systems. A non-techie would not. Most users pop in the disc and expect to play. Crysis defaulted to "high" settings on my machine - obviously that is not playable.

Saying the machine is okay as a casual gaming platform is one thing, as I specifically noted:

. . . but saying this system is capable of handling the latest games with any confidence is not accurate. It does not even meet the system requirements of many newer games. If you want to recommend a card with 16 shader units to someone for gaming when some modern games are requiring cards with 96 shader units, then you can do that.

 

You could have mentioned that it can at least play the latest games just fine on lower settings. I am currently not aware of any game that the 210M could not play at least on 800x600 on the lowest settings. Can you name one?

And the majority of PC gamers understand that you need to lower the settings to get smoother game play. It is a clear minority who do not understand that.

 

Futuremark's Shattered Horizon. Minimum requirement: desktop-class 8800GT.

And unless you can back up your second statement, which I bolded, with verifiable data, then it only enforces my reasoning for not recommending this unit for modern gaming.

 

Can I make a suggestion here?

Is there any way to try out a few modern games, and post the settings necessarily (if possible) to hit 30FPS? Maybe a little more technical detail in the discussion thread would not hurt.

 

.....can not play modern games/crysis well, simply means that it CAN play it but not WELL. He did not say that the laptop can not play it at all!#@

Why are you guys being so defensive? He just reported what he observed, the truth. Did he not say the good points too, that the laptop has great battery and runs very cool and silent?

This may be a defective unit from ASUS but we can't blame Charles for that. If you still want to buy this laptop, at least Charles is asking you to be careful. I really hope someone will buy this defective unit then we'll see who gets to laugh.

On the other hand Charles, could you give a little more details next time? Don't say that it can not play Crysis well, but say that at this resolution/with these settings, i got that amount of frame rate.

Thanks Charles.

 

First of all, Shattered Horizon isn't even out yet so it doesn't count as a current game that the 210M can't play. Second, it is more of a side game that is being made by a Futuremark, which hasn't even made any games yet... I don't think that very many gamers are even going to buy it. Third, because it requires a desktop-class 8800GT, 95% of ALL gaming laptops out there to date are not going to be able to run Shattered Horizon, only gaming laptops with a Nvidia 260 and better are going to be able to run it... and those are the 7+ lbs bloated monster computers... so if Shatter Horizon is the standard for being able to play games, then you're going to have to rule out the Macbook Pro 15", the HDX16t, the majority of Asus' GAMING laptops... pretty much everything except a couple 17" monster laptops... Basically, Shattered Horizon isn't a concern of anyone who would be interested in a UL80VT for reasons stated above.

The majority of gamers today are buying consoles; the few that remain on PC usually know how to at least change the basic settings. As far as my second statement goes, even if the few users do not know how to change their settings, most modern games automatically read what hardware a computer has and adjusts the graphics accordingly. [Though it doesn't always work very well... but it usually does okay..]

 

You guys are right. I'm sorry for getting so defensive. I apologize Charles.

A big part of this discussion is what constitutes playing a modern game "well". I guess I have a different standard than you do Charles.

Yes, more details would be good.

Agreed.

EDIT: Sorry for the double post... just wanted to make sure both posts get read...

 

Again, saying this machine is good enough for modern gaming is an inaccurate statement. It is not able to meet the system requirements of many games now, let alone games that are going to come out in the future. You asked for an example of a game that it didn't meet the requirements for and I provided one; if you want another, try Need for Speed: Shift.

And again, your second statement needs to be backed up with data.

Just so we're not confused here - my argument centers around this notebook not being aimed at gamers. I stated in the review that it is fine for casual gaming, and it is. This is not a notebook I would recommend for gaming because the graphics card simply lacks horsepower. It can barely play many modern games. Even Nvidia does not say anything about the G210M's gaming capabilities, but places emphasis on it being a viable multimedia processor:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_g210m_us.html

I'm going to decline arguing this point any further.

 

I think the problem here is people have two different definitions of gaming.

First being: Actually capable of producing image quality and frame rates that mean something. These low end cards are designed to play back HD movie files, not game. IMO it is merely a coincidence that they can do so. To finish up this point he never mentioned that the computer was not capable of playing games, merely that quality and settings had to be sacrificed.

Second: To me it appears that Charles was referring to gaming in a sense where this notebook could be used to actually play and enjoy these games, not just as something do in class or at work. This was never intended to be a gaming notebook so why bother and benchmark it as one. We all know it can play games on low, why take it a step further and prove it.

IMO anyone who purchases this notebook with idea of playing games made past 2007 would be sorely let down. This notebook would be unrewarding for anything beyond the source engine. However, that is not to say a casual gamer would not get enjoyment out of it.

 

It's nice of you to decline arguing while arguing.

I don't want to get into an argument either. I just want the review to honestly represent the laptop. That's all. What you said wasn't "wrong" perse, but I think that it would mislead a lot of uninformed people to think that it wasn't capable of playing modern games at enjoyable frame rates/resolutions when it can play the majority of modern games just very enjoyably.

I also wanted to point out that you say that I need to back up my statement about most gamers knowing how to modify settings. But the same is equally true for you. You haven't backed up your statement that most gamers don't know how to change their settings. The simple fact is that (to my knowledge) we can only speak from our experiences, which aren't very scientific, because there has been no official survey done. So let's drop that point as it's really moot.

 

Yeah, things got heated. I'm letting it go.

I think that is very fair. Anyone who buys this notebook for gaming may not be satisfied, however for casual (read: time to time) gaming it is fine. Those who buy the notebook and regard its gaming capabilities as a bonus will likely be satisfied.

-----------------------

The UL80Vt is a great concept. Fantastic battery life, good overall performance, very thin, and very pretty. From my perspective I can't recommend it due to the unusually flexible chassis and less-than-satisfactory keyboard/touchpad. To some this could be a deal-breaker but for others, you can try your luck with it.

 

Compared to most other notebooks under 5lbs and capable of 10 hours of battery life, I'm actually pretty sure that the UL80Vt offers scintillating gaming performance.

I don't know, I'm seeing a lot of overwhelmingly positive reviews elsewhere on the UL80...You might want to try another unit just to see. AnandTech said that it literally redefines the playing field for portable notebooks, PCMag gave it an EC award - that's not idle chatter, those are some pretty legit sites giving it some impressive awards. Just going to put this one out there: either you got a bad unit from a large production run, or Anand's a complete idiot and PC Mag has no idea what it's talking about. Take your pick as to which the more likely scenario is.

I'm not saying anything wrong about your review, it's entirely possible that you got a bad unit and are reporting your findings based on that. However, I feel that it might be irresponsible to not follow up with Asus about your concerns about build quality when other reputable sources can write glowing praise about what should be the same notebook.

 

Having had some hands on with this unit myself I can say the build quality did seem a bit sketchy, which is sad. The 12 hour battery life and sleek design would have sugested it be better. I am not saying it isnt durable, it might be. Although it just doesnt feel like it would be which kind of works against the portabillity aspect.
It is however hard to argue with the price/performance ratio of this laptop. If things like flimsy keyboards don't bother you, then this is probably the perfect laptop. To each his own.

 

I had been looking at a similarly built ASUS U50AG from Best Buy a while back, when I was hunting for a notebook. The touchpad was absolutely horrid, though it was not the same design as the UL notebooks for sure. The keyboard was not that great either, and the chassis did feel a little cheap. Next time I'm in Best Buy I'll see if there is any flex in the display model. For the $650 it would have cost, I get the feeling you could do better with other notebooks.

After reading this review though, I'm certainly glad I got my E4300 and decided to stick with it. Cost about $850 from Dell Outlet, which isn't that much more than this notebook.

 

As a UL80VT owner, I agree with Charles on the gaming aspect of this notebook. I bought the UL80 as a replacement for my EEE 1000HE and for that purpose, it far exceeded my expectation, but if you're expecting to run current games with any sort of eye candy or framerate, you're in for a disappointment.

For example, Resident Evil 5 will average 35 fps, but you need to run at 800x600 with all settings at their lowest. Can I play the game? Yes. Would I want to play the game with those settings? No.

I've also tried Dawn of War 2 and it runs, but also not very well. Mini Ninjas will also run, but freezes early either due to not enough hardware or a compatibility issue with Windows 7.

Basically, only 2D games (Audiosurf/Tales of Monkey Island/Puzzle Quest Galactrix/Galactic Civilization 2) and possibly some older 3D games will run well. I'll play some Overlord 2, Sins of a Solar Empire and Demigod this week to see how those run.

I've used several Asus notebooks in the last few years (U3S, G2S, U6ep, EEE 1000HE) and would only rate UL80 better in build quality when compared to the EEE. In terms of usability, I'd rate it first.

I'm starting to get used to typing on this keyboard, but it's still mush when I compare it to my Thinkpad T61. To some extend even the EEE keyboard feels better. I have a pretty light touch when typing, so the flex issue doesn't bother me much and the loose area near the left ctrl key seems to have settled in for now.

 

The obvious problem is the word "well". Since it is a subjective word it may be interpreted differently depending on who reads it.

I do think most people who know what Crysis even is has an understanding of game settings, so by mentioning Crysis as your benchmark for gaming prowess, you are not speaking to the layman.

It would obviously be more accurate if in the review it was stated that Crysis was playable at X setting (low) but not at Y (medium, high).

I do not know what to tell you with the build quality discrepancies. I tend to follow what the everyday user says and in the Owner's Lounge and there are one or two people that echo the keyboard experience while some others did not.

I am considering the Sony Vaio CW right now and this review put the UL80 in a slightly different light.

 

Charles did say:

Crysis gaming benchmark (1024x768 resolution and high settings):
[/I][/p]

I think that was specified at the beginning.

 

I couldn't disagree more with the people who are criticizing the UL80VT. I've owned 2 gaming laptops in the past both had 8600 GT M graphics cards, one with the DDR 2 and another with the faster DDR 3 RAM and this laptop blows both of them out of the water. I can run Dead Space at Medium settings and easily get 30 to 60 FPS. I can run RE 5 at Medium settings and easily get 30 FPS even in the more zombie filled areas.

In response to the review this laptop is way more capable than a casual game laptop. If I wanted to get a casual game laptop I would buy an acer aspire one and play all the casual games I want: Plants vs Zombies, Peggle, Bejeweled, you know CASUAL GAMES. Crysis is a terrible example to do benchmarks on this laptop as it barely ran well on my 8600 GT M and those computers were both core 2 duos 1.8 GHZ with plenty of ram, ect. Everything I throw at this computer it runs amazingly. To say that only games from 2005 or previous will run well is simply false. To limit this laptop to 2007 games is false as well. Make sure you change your nvidia settings to high performance in the nvidia control panel, that might be your problem. Also make sure you aren't running other programs while you run games, this makes a big difference as itunes and torrent downloaders are resource hogs. I don't have need for speed or I would test it on my computer but I can say that despite anything regarding system spec requirements this machine should probably be more closely compared with Class 2 graphics cards. I couldn't run dead space on more than a mix of low and medium settings on my old 8600 GT M DDR 3, now I can play the game with better frame rates than before at all Medium settings. I think everyone who likes this laptop is busy enjoying the latest games and maybe everyone who got a dud is complaining about it here. About the settings thing, all of my "Casual gamer" friends (Plays games like viva pinyata and the sims and such) understand that if the game is stuttering they need to lower the settings. I don't know anyone who wouldn't lower the settings in such a cercumstance.

 

For the record, I got my UL80VT in the mail a couple hours ago. I like it very much and it does not seem to exhibit the issues described in the review (or at least not near as bad...).

I like the trackpad very much. The build quality seems very adequate. Charles, mentioned that if he pressed in the middle of the keyboard that the entire chassis sagged so that it touched the surface the computer was resting on. I can assure you that my UL80VT does not exhibit that sort of flex whatsoever. I laid into the middle of my keyboard and the chassis underneath did not bend at all, and certainly came no where close to touching the bottom. I feel pretty confident that Charles got a bad unit that exhibited unusual flex.

As far as the noisy keyboard, in my opinion, most keyboards are noisy, and the UL80VT is like most, and certainly better than some. I just got the dm3, and its keyboard is far more noisy than the Asus.

The keyboard does flex if you lay into it and apply tons of pressure, but under normal typing pressure I cannot detect any flex that would cause me any discomfort while typing. I am typing quite comfortably on it now, and I do say that it is quite a bit better typing experience than on my Dell Studio 14z.

As far as the bezel near the Asus logo being pulled away, I tested this and it is true. My does pull away about 1/4", but I don't see how that should affect anyone's view of the laptop. It's not like you are going to be pulling it away under normal usage. I also tried this on my Dell Studio 14z, and the 14z's bezel definitely pulled away further and easier than the UL80VT.

Also, I benchmarked the UL80VT in CS:S it got 149 FPS at native resolution in the video stress test. (With 4x AA on, it got 99 FPS. ANd with 16xQ CSAA it got 35 FPS.) I am currently downloading Call of Duty: World at War and will see what resolution is playable, etc.

I will be returning the dm3z and selling the Dell Studio 14z, but I will be keeping the Asus UL80VT because it has outstanding 3d performance for an ultraportable, an excellent trackpad, a good keyboard, and outstanding battery life--at least those are my initial impressions.

 

Well if there is one thing this whole exercise has shown us is the build quality in the eyes of the owner is inconsistent.

 

That could be true, or Charles could have just gotten a extra bad unit.

Don't get me wrong; this laptop should not be bought if you are looking for Macbook Pro unibody like build quality. I would just say that (as far as I can tell so far) the UL80VT just has average build quality + excellent performance.

EDIT: I just got done trying out Call of Duty: World at War. It played the game pretty smoothly at 1366x768. I was typically getting about 25-35 FPS. I dropped the resolution down to 1280x720, which is still very clear on this size of monitor, and my FPS went up to 35-45, which played perfectly smooth. The recommended specs for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 are identical to the specs for COD: WOW, so you should expect near identical performance from the UL80VT in that upcoming game. The gaming experience on this machine (at least in COD:WOW and CS:S is outstanding for an ultraportable). Definitely a win in my book as far as gaming goes...

My settings were: 1366x768, Normal Texture resolution, the other options were off. You could probably squeeze by turning some of the extra options back on at 1280x720, but things got a little to choppy for my blood having all the settings turned up on 1366x768.

I am downloading Batman:AA as we speak.

 

Not to jump of Charles review, but I also found it rather sparse and lacking. The person who said only three lines about battery life??? The whole laptop is designed around battery life and you gave it a few comments. That is a really crappy review just based on that information. Asus comes out with a 14" long battery life, and you have three sentences on battery life. That is the 'crappy' I am referring too here. I don't want to sound disrespectful, because any review is typically better than no review. Unless, of course, your review is dishonest. Not someting I would be willing to say. I would just say the review is lacking overall, but especially over any of the battery life test. Now, on the side note, writing a review is hard work. I don't envy having to write them nor would I consider myself much better.

I also agree that you should clarified the gaming capabilities of the machine. No one would buy the machine as a desktop replacement. However, many people would buy it if it could play games while having incredable battery life. You certainly would not use it for eye candy, but the point is that when you are on the road and not near your desktop (as am I) then you want to be able to play the game with lower settings over not being able to play it at all. I think you should update the review with some more thorough testing like anandtech does.

To clarify one thing here, no laptop and I mean no laptop can compete with a desktop in terms of gaming. So if we start defining gaming as 'highest' settings, then pretty much all the game laptops are out in the cold too. Currently you can build a desktop at least 3 times faster than any current laptop in gaming and the laptops that come the closest are 18" monsters that realisticly are never designed to be portable. Counting those is both silly on the portable end and silly on the performance end since any desktop destroys them.

So back to portable gaming. Lets find a new AAA game currently on the market than this laptop cannot play at native resolution at 30fps average. Find it... I am pretty confident this laptop would be able to play any current game out there at 30fps average, even if it means lowering the settings down.

 

I'll give Dragon Age Origins a spin once it unlocks tomorrow.

Any other games people want benchmarks or at least a general playability impression from?

 

Team Fortress 2 / Left 4 Dead please

 

Please stop saying this. The UL80Vt has a lot of flex relative to other notebooks I have tested - that is a fact. The chassis has an abnormal amount of flex, which I emphasized in the review for a reason. You may not think so but I do - and I'm rather confident that I have tested more notebooks than you.
Also, I emphasized the keyboard for a reason (which I stated a few pages back). Your unit may not have it - that's fine. But don't justify yourself by pointing out that I may have a 'bad unit'. I know a bad build when I see one, and this UL80Vt isn't a bad build. It's a standard quality ASUS notebook.

I allocated what I determined to be a fair amount of attention to gaming. This isn't a gaming notebook and I didn't emphasize graphics for the same reason I don't emphasize graphical capabilities of other notebooks with low-powered graphics cards.

The review is descriptive and to-the-point. The longer the review, the less it is read. Sufficient detail was included to give the user a picture of the notebook.

I am under the impression this review is being looked up in a negative light because I accentuated the keyboard and build quality flaws while other review sites failed to do so. This isn't the only notebook review site on the net but it is certainly the only one that gives as through of analysis. I treated this notebook no differently than other notebooks and I will stand behind that.

Edit: And if you guys want to talk about something other than what was included in this review, go do it in the ASUS U80Vt owners lounge:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=428368
Thank you.

 

Charles, perhaps a video review will do the trick. Let them see you push down on the laptop till it screams!!

 

I would like to see that too to be able to compare the flex with my UL80VT.

I took playing Batman: AA out for a run at native resolution and on VERY HIGH settings (which were the default settings). The benchmark averaged 26 FPS, which is fairly playable in Batman: AA (similar to Crysis in that 24 FPS is smooth). When I was in game, things dropped to around 19-25, so I tried lowering the settings from Very High to Medium to see if I could get better FPS. I got 40 FPS average and completely smooth gameplay at native resolution (about 30 in game). With performance like that playing the latest games, it sure sounds like a gaming computer to me--you know, since it can play the latest games. *Wink *wink

That seems to me to indicate, along with its ability to play COD5 at native resolution 30-35 FPS, that it handles modern games quite fluently, which is fundamentally contrary to how the review represents the laptop (I do not mean to say that you misrepresented the laptop on purpose... only that you came to a quick conclusion based on incomplete information).

Yes, there are going to be some modern games that this will not able to play fluently at native resolution, but those are few and far between (Need for Speed: Shift, Resident Evil 5, I'm sure there are a couple more), and even those games should be playable at lower settings.

I normally recommend this website without any hesitation to people searching for information on laptops, but I am afraid I may not be able to do that in the future (at least certainly not this particular review...). This is very disappointing to me. All I am asking for is a small revision that states "While it may struggle to play some of the more graphically demanding titles on higher settings, the UL80VT is capable of playing many of the latest games at native resolution fluidly on high-low settings depending on the title." As opposed to what was written:

The Nvidia GeForce G210M is a mainstream graphics card and unable to play newer games like Crysis well. I tested an older game, Counter-Strike: Source, informally and it ran at all high settings without difficulty. The reality is that there is only so much that can be done with just 16 shader units and a 64-bit memory interface. For older games (~2005) the G210M will suffice but for newer games look for a notebook with a more powerful graphics card.

I do not mean to offend you, Charles, (I seriously mean that... I do not want to offend you. I write this without being angry or trying to instigate another argument). I am trying to write everything in regards to your review and whether or not the review has represented the UL80VT accurately. I must conclude that it has not. Please consider revising at least the gaming section so that us UL80VT fanboys can get off your back about it. lol

 

Quadron, his statement about it's gaming capabilities was spot on, especially after I looked at what that GPU can do. Chaz asked you to drop it. I think most everyone is going to take his word for it on this one, so why argue? He's a damn good reviewer.

Honest, unbiased, intelligent, and thorough.

 

I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with you.

Absolutely. I agree 100%. And a "damn good reviewer" shouldn't have any problem making a couple edits to his review when he realizes that he's missed something.

Typically. I agree 100 percent. I have nothing against Charles. I've always found his reviews to be tremendously helpful in the past (dv5t review especially! That one was extremely well done...)

No offense, but if I was alone in my criticism of this review, I'd be quiet and shut up, but so far, I've heard criticism from at least five other users with similar complaints about 1) misrepresenting the gaming potenital of the laptop, 2) brevity in regard to the laptops finer qualities (great battery life while at the same time being able to many of the latest games well), 3) the fact that he should add to his review that he may have gotten an unusually poorly built unit and that his review may not reflect all UL80VT's.

EDIT: I downloaded the Need For Speed: Shift demo, and I was able it was playable at 1024x768.

EDIT: I feel like I am repeating myself. I don't think I have anything further to add to the discussion here, except for maybe commenting on whether my UL80VT flexes like the one Charles has got when he puts his video up here tomorrow.

 

Seeing this conversation between Charles and Quadron is very interesting. On one hand, Charles is completely strong in his belief that every he has said about the laptop is correct. On the other hand, Quadron (ul80vt owner... could be biased) has tried to counter some of charle's opinions on the laptop.

From what I can see, I feel that Charles' review is definitely spot on for the most part. I appreciate the fact that there is a difference in opinions for him regarding the keyboard flex, etc. If people truly feel that he has a defective unit, then just know that in your own mind. The truth is.. He received a unit for review, and therefore his review is based on that unit. Whether it is defective or not is entirely not Charles' fault.

However, that being said, although most of the points you have hit are accurate, I have posted before with the same concerns that Quadron had regarding the "gaming" review. Many of the points has been reiterated about the fact that this is not a gaming laptop and therefore much detail should be refrained from your review. However, although i feel you make a good point about it "not being able to run crysis well" as well as "being able to run CS:S on high easily" are great, I think a lot of readers may read your comments and come out with the impression that the ul80vt is "incapable of running nextgen games" AT ALL.

As a previous reader has stated, it is almost ALWAYS possible to run a next gen game on the ul80vt if you tweak the res and detail + effects. I understand thats not the point you were trying to show. However, I think it would be more accurate if you leave a little note saying that "it is definitely POSSIBLE to run nextgen AAA games at ~30 fps on low detail and perhaps lower resolution". The only reason I truly push for this edit is because I know that a lot of people do not bother to research about reviews unlike most of the NBR community. Thus a lot of the readers end up making a snap judgment based simply on what you have stated and therefore those same readers may be missing out on a laptop that may fit EXACTLY their needs. They will never know simply because perhaps a small detail that you may have left out.


That being said, I feel that your 98% of your review is A+. Just that 2% is missing due to perhaps a little misleading information.

Again, thanks Charles.

 

I'm finding Charles' and Quadron's debate very interesting - albeit that Quadron is coming off very fanboyish (to the point where I am wondering if he is an ASUS employee) and Charles.........well, he could have written the review better and is being defensive about it.

Charles' comments on build quality concerned me greatly to the point where I called Amazon and got them to promise me a refund if the laptop is as bad as he is saying (it arrives Wednesday). However, for the unique qualities this laptop has at $720 (the price I got from Amazon), the keyboard would need to be almost unusable or practically falling apart for me to return the computer. Sure, Charles may be worried about problems down the line, but (a) the warranty here is quite generous, mitigating the point; (b) the price is dirt cheap for what the computer is offering, to the point where I would be able to afford another laptop if the laptop broke outside warranty; (c) there is nothing similar on the market at anywhere near this price point, perhaps making this laptop akin to a hot, intelligent, yet crazy girlfriend - you knowingly take the negatives with the positives and it is worth the risk that it may all work out.

This leads me to my second point - I think I agree that (admittedly not having received the laptop yet) Charles understated the positives of this laptop. Along those lines, I ordered this laptop fully expecting it NOT to run 2009 games at high settings (which it can't do in any event with only 1366x768 resolution). However, it has a similar 3DMark06 score to my two-year-old Sager2090, which can run plenty of recent games at normal settings - well, not Crysis, but that is in a league of its own ;-). Most of the thin and light laptops with their intel graphics can't even do that. Charles' review implicitly groups this laptop as almost an integrated-chip class notebook, which from Quadron's and other reviewers tests, seems at best irresponsible.

I further agree that Charles paid insufficient attention to battery life and price in writing the review. Once again for emphasis - if I pay $1720 for a laptop, the build quality better be tip-top. If I pay $720 for a laptop with $1720-laptop qualities, the laptop better just work while not breaking on me. We'll see if this laptop lives up to this standard.