Optimus V-13.3" Review

Ananke

New member
Ordered Specification
Optimus V 13.3"
i7-4700MQ (2.40-3.30GHz)
8GB 1600MHZ (1x8Gb)
240GB Intel 335 series SSD
Wireless Intel AC-7260
Windows 8.1x64
(Nvidia 765m)
(IPS Matte 1920*1080 display)

u_10_overall.jpg

Miscellaneous
Specification choice
I was looking for a small and powerful computer, with emphasis on available power over battery; provided a minimum usable battery life; to replace an aging Lenovo S205 Ideapad. This older computer offered too little performance for the tasks I required - image and numerical analysis, preferable with the option for light gaming while travelling. A high quality screen was a hard requirement. The whole package should be powerful enough to survive my PhD - a lifespan of 3 years or so.

Other options (to PCS custom build) were ultrabooks, such as the Asus Zenbook, Samsung S7 or Apple Air; although these latter were both too expensive (even if importing one from the US, with consonant power supply and keyboard problems); and offer too little computational power. PCS built me a solid desktop a little over four years ago, still going strong, and have a decent reputation both for their hardware and for their support. So, PCS it was.

Thus: the cheapest quad core processor (my heavy duty tasks are all fairly well parallelised, and general computing will only become more so in the next few years); 8GB of RAM (the minimum I would consider ordering a computer with) in a single stick (upgradeable if necessary); and an SSD. The Intel was, at the time, best value.


Ordering Process
Not much to say here, really. The computer arrived in the morning three weeks to the day after ordering. It seems like a long time when you're waiting for something shiny, but it was not urgent, so I have no complaints to make. It's still a lot faster than computers are provided by my University's IT provider (on whom an entire rant could be written).


Packaging
On arrival, the laptop was well packaged - a notebook case inside a larger heavy-duty PCS box, packed in with foam. Odds of getting damaged certainly seem low. Inside the inner cardboard box, the laptop is held away from the box skin by expanded polystyrene spacers, the battery is bubble-wrap, etc. Well packaged to survive a potentially turbulent journey.

The laptop was supplied with a standard PCS manual, a quick start guide (including keyboard symbols, which can be a little cryptic), a Driver dvd, and an OS dvd. If you order with no OS, the latter will not be included, obviously. Although the laptop does not have an optical drive; either an external or networked optical drive will obviously suffice.

u_2_opened.jpg u_3_packaging.jpg


The Computer
Physical Build Quality
The Optimus shell is hard plastic. There is a tiny bit of give on the surfaces, but no worse than even aluminium cases. On the bottom there are a few odd plastic protrusions. that can catch on things.

The screen has a small amount of warping if closed with one hand, although no colour change is visible. The upper surface is smoother, but not glossy, almost velvety in feeling - this surface holds fingerprints very well, and due to the texture, these can be harder to remove. The hinges are stiff: too stiff to open the screen onehanded.

The port layout is fairly average, with most on the right hand side. I would have preferred the power input to be closer to the rear of the computer (in space actually occupied by the Kensington lock), as that area can get quite warm during charging: moving it back would cool the keyboard slightly.

The computer appears to have no indication of whether the Nvidia Optimus technology is switched to integrated or dedicated graphics, which would be a nice addition, as larger models have. As it is, you simply have to guess.

Weighing in at 2.0kg - not including power brick - the Optimus-V is not exactly a lightweight: I can hold it in one hand and type if I have to, but I wouldn't want to do so for long. I've no trouble with carting it to and from work, although others might. If you're looking for ultra-portability, this is certainly not the laptop for you.


Keyboard and Trackpad
This was my primary reservation about ordering the Optimus-V: I could find no photographs of the 13" model with a UK keyboard layout. So few manufacturers - or resellers - provide much or any information about the primary input device. It's really quite frustrating - but hopefully the below photograph will help anyone else considering this model.

The keyboard's highlights include physical Home/End/PgUp/PgDn keys, full size navigation arrows, and a half-size right-Shift (to allow space for the up arrow). The left Ctrl and Fn keys are in that order, respectively - this is taking me some getting used to, as my previous Netbook used the Lenovo Fn, Ctrl layout - which I prefer for using the thumb on Ctrl.

The keys with additional functions seem fairly well planned - the standard assortment of multimedia, video out, brightness, etc. Wireless and keyboard backlighting are controlled by Fn-F11, F12 respectively. I'd prefer a hardware wireless control - and I'd prefer it was actually labelled as such, rather than "Airplane Mode", but it's a compromise I'm willing to accept, given the difficulty of finding good laptop keyboards.

The keys themselves are a standard chiclet design, with a flat top. Perhaps a little mushy, but overall, it's a keyboard I'm happy typing on. Moreover, it's a keyboard I'm happy writing code on; and there's plenty of keyboards I cannot say that of.

The trackpad is a good size, with separate hardware buttons - the buttons are NOT integrated, Apple-style (thankfully). It's recessed slightly into the surface, and seems well placed: I have yet to accidentally trigger a mouse click while typing. The pad has a tendency to miss light touches and taps, which can be a little frustrating when trying to move the pointer finely. It is also supported by Synaptics drivers, who could best be described as having a dubious reputation: the only consistent system stability problems I have ever experienced on a series of Win 7 and Vista laptops has been due to Synaptics drivers. However, I have seen no sign of trouble yet.

u_9_Keyboard.jpg


Display
The selling point of this model: it comes without the long obsolete 768p display, offering instead a high quality matte 1920x1080 IPS panel. I can make no criticism of the display. No colour warping visible either vertically or horizontally, to extreme angles (i.e., the point at which the bezel blocks the screen from view). The following photo compares the colour warping at various angles between the reviewed Optimus V, and my old Lenovo S205 (with a plain TN 1366*768 display).

The improvement of the IPS panel cannot be understated. Of particular interest to me is the reduced colour shift from off-angles - the TN screen of the S205 must be at exactly the right angle for any sort of a decent image - making it difficult to type in instances such as a train or coach seat (with their extreme forward/back cramping). The IPS panel allows the screen to be brought forward and the body of the laptop pushed back, giving more space for the arms to rest comfortably while typing. Due to my height - coach seats in particular tend to be too close together to allow me to sit straight in a single seat - this is of great value to me.

u_4_Comparison.JPG

(Continued below (when moderator approved) due to 10k character limit: Battery life, Networking, Benchmarks, and Summary)
 
Last edited:

Ananke

New member
Battery Life
The one weakness of this laptop. As mentioned at the top, I decided to prioritise computational power over battery life. The battery has a 62WH capacity. I conducted the following tests. All tests were run on modified power settings, that prevented the display from turning off or hard discs from going to sleep. As the laptop was configured only with an SSD, the latter option will make minimal difference
  • Minimum: 4h45 (CPU idle, half brightness, wireless off)
  • Heavy: 2h10 (CPU 50%, full brightness, wireless on)*
  • Maximum: 1h35 (CPU 100%, full brightness, wireless on)**
  • Minimum + wireless: 4h


*Running Prime 95 Torture test on all threads.
*Running Folding at Home: an entirely unrealistic power load that required some degree of tweaking to even run on battery power.

Even with Haswell, Optimus, and Windows 8; all of which have been engineered with improved battery life in mind, this most definitely cannot compete with an ultrabook for battery life. While I did not expect it to reach the 8-10 hours that some ultra-portables boast, I had hoped for 6 hours at minimum usage. Is that an unreasonable expectation with Mobile-class components, rather than Ultra-class? Maybe, maybe not.

Users who opt for Windows 7 over 8 may notice slightly decreased battery performance. Not a debate I intend to cover here; but Windows 8 does include a few improvements for power usage.

The power brick is surprisingly large, at 120W - three times larger than my previous netbook's, both in overall volume and in power provision. The brick will only draw maximum power (i.e. >110W) while charging with the CPU/GPU under heavy loading. Battery charging with the computer off draws around 45W; and 70-80W with it on, but idle. Based on the laptop drawing 20-25W while on, idle and fully charged, the battery may actually charge fastest if the computer is turned on and idle.


Benchmarks
Comparing this laptop to my 4 year old* desktop, with the following specs:
i7-960 @ 3.8GHz
12GB 1600MHz ram (6*2GB)
Crucial Force 3 120Gb SSD
EVGA GTX680
Win7x64

*A few of the components are younger than this, but the CPU/Motherboard date back to Dec '09



All tests run with the laptop plugged in, tuned to allow maximum performance.

GeekBench (Strongly CPU/Ram dependent)
Laptop:
Single-core: 2897
Multicore: 11224

Desktop:
Singlecore: 2528
Multicore: 9935


NovaBench (CPU/GPU dependent)
Laptop: 1002
CPU: 736
Ram: 172
GPU: 59

Desktop: 1962
CPU: 745
Ram: 218
GPU: 973


CrystalDiskMark (SSD performance)

u_CrystalDiskMark.png

For comparison, a standard laptop platter drive will be around 1/5th of the speed for Seq. Read/write;, 1/10th for 512k; and 1/100th for 4k and 4kQD32.


3DMark11 (GPU/CPU dependent)
Laptop: 4313
Graphics: 4195
Physics: 6399

Desktop: 9930
Graphics: 10803
Physics: 8281


There were some pleasantly surprising results here. The Haswell processor looks remarkably solid compared to the old Ivy Bridge i7 - which is clocked to significantly faster than the Haswell can turbo-charge to (3.8GHZ compared to 3.3); in addition to having significantly tighter thermal limits (47W TDP, compared to 130W for the i7-960). We shouldn;t be too surprised: even now, 4 years is a long time in computing. In addition, the laptop is not able to maintain its turbo-charged speed indefinitely - in a prolonged task, the desktop can maintain 3.8GHz for as long as desired (and is stable up to around 4.1 with the current cooling setup), while after a few minutes (on a desk - much, much quicker on a bed), the laptop must clock back down to stock frequency of 2.4GHz. The short duration of benchmarking runs thus favours the laptop considerably - although this may be a more valid representation of a typical workload pattern.


There are no surprises that my desktop's GTX680 leaves the laptop's 765M in the shade. The 765, however, did better than I expected in the 3Dmark tests, typically producing around 20fps - not exactly gaming quality, but it will hardly be expected to run Crysis at maximum settings. For the curious, yes, it can run Crysis. I simply choose not to.

RAM - no surprises from Novabench. The laptop has a single channel 8GB stick, the desktop has triple channel 2GB sticks, of slightly higher quality (I have not had a chance to look at timings of the laptop memory... but it's laptop memory). This will probably remain the weak spot of the laptop for most heavy duty work (the GPU would be the weak spot for 3D/CAD work, but I do very little of that).

The Intel SSD puts my 18month old Crucial SSD to shame. The Crucial one scored around 20% better when it was brand new, but that still leaves it nowhere close to the Intel, barring in frequent, small read/write cycles. Given my pattern of usage, I'd actually swap the two if I could: but I'd not be happy with a smaller drive in the laptop, nor do I know whether it would physically fit.


Other remarks
One area I have not yet covered is network performance. I opted for an 802.11ac capable card in the interests of future proofing the laptop. Thus far, this has... not lived up to expectations. On my home WiFi network (with a theoretical cap of 54Mbps), the laptop manages 15Mbps sitting in my room, and only 31Mbps sitting 2 metres from the router in line of sight. In the latter case, I would have expected 40Mbps or so, at least.

However, as the router is the usual cheapest-option-possible freebie from the ISP, it is entirely possible that it is the limiting factor - my old netbook can just manage 35Mbps in the same LoS configuration, and my backup WiFi antennae for the desktop manages a shoddy 11Mbps in the no-LoS (i.e. former) position.

I intend to try and run some tests using the WiFi networks around the University - I suspect that the equipment installed there must be at least 802.11n compatible (450Mbps cap), if not ac - however, it remains to be seen whether I can design a reliable and repeatable test for that to make much sense. If and when I manage such tests, I shall update this review.

Consequently, I have no idea whether this component is working as intended or not. I cannot quantitatively say one way or the other.

The wired gigabit ethernet port appears to behave itself acceptably - test files of 3GB were transferred between the SSDs in the laptop and my desktop at between 500-650Mbps. While this is actually a lower fraction of the theoretical peak speed than the wireless, the fact that it is still an order of magnitude faster does rather make up for that. That is to say, it is "fast enough" to not worry about further.

The laptop has a pair of Onkyo speakers. No bass speaker as the 15.6" and 17.3" models can boast, but these are significantly better than those of my Ideapad. Nothing to rival a decent pair of independently powered desktop speakers or headphones, but rather better for deeper sounds than usual, in combination with the Soundblaster Cinema drivers


Summary

The Optimus V seems like a pretty solid computer all round. For my purposes, it's chief weaknesses (weight, battery life) are more than eclipsed by my use patterns and the combination of computing power and screen quality. This is not a tradeoff that will suit everyone, certainly, but I'm definitely happy with it.

There are a couple of design choices that puzzle me. First is relabeling WiFi controls as "Airplane mode", rather than just "Wireless on/off". Secondly, the placement of the power input close to the middle of the right hand side, rather than at the rear - thus causing minor discomfort when typing, due to heat dissipation, as well as potentially obscuring the ethernet port (due to a right-angle power plug)


The Good
IPS display
Option for heavy duty internals
Keyboard layout
Independent track buttons
Onkyo speakers are better than typical laptop speakers

The Bad:
Screen is not quite as rigid as it might be
Power brick is fairly large
Trackpad often misses light movements

The Ugly:
Heavy for a 13" laptop
Battery life is mediocre at best.


To be recommended to those who value power over a thin and light notebook computer.
u_10_overall.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top