Viewing page 4 of 6 pages.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
TEST RESULTS
The Dell Studio Hybrid was able to play all the video clips in our test suite without any problems. In comparison to the comparison mini-ITX system, the CPU load was substantially higher across the board, but the actual system power draw was slightly lower. In the flat-out CPU and graphics stress tests, the Dell drew 10W less power than the comparison system.
|
Dell Studio Hybrid
|
|
Test State
|
Mean
CPU Use
|
Peak
CPU Use
|
System Power
|
|
Off
|
N/A
|
2W
|
|
Sleep (S3)
|
N/A
|
3W
|
|
Idle
|
N/A
|
23W
|
|
Rush Hour
|
45%
|
66%
|
~38W
|
|
Coral Reef
|
32%
|
45%
|
~37W
|
|
Flight Sim.
|
49%
|
61%
|
~43W
|
|
Drag Race
|
55%
|
70%
|
~42W
|
|
Prime95
|
N/A
|
58W
|
|
Prime95 + ATITool
|
N/A
|
62W
|
| |
|
C2D E7200/Intel DG45FC
|
|
Test State
|
Mean
CPU Use
|
Peak
CPU Use
|
System Power
|
|
Off
|
N/A
|
2W
|
|
Sleep (S3)
|
N/A
|
7W
|
|
Idle
|
N/A
|
35W
|
|
Rush Hour
|
14%
|
24%
|
~44W
|
|
Coral Reef
|
12%
|
16%
|
~44W
|
|
Flight Sim.
|
18%
|
25%
|
~48W
|
|
Drag Race
|
20%
|
26%
|
~48W
|
|
Prime95
|
N/A
|
68W
|
|
Prime95 + ATITool
|
N/A
|
72W
|
| |
It's interesting to compare our test results with Dell's environmental data. Two major difference exisit in Dell's test method and ours: Theirs is at 230VAC input; ours is at 120VAC. AC/DC Power supplies are less efficient with lower AC voltage input, so our numbers will be a bit higher (2~4%). Dell also uses an unnamed "Industry Benchmark" — it's likely that their test does not result in as high power demand as Prime95 and ATITool, which were both selected for the highest possible power draw.
Dell's own specs indicate lower power draw, except at idle.
CPUZ shows how the processor underclocks and undervolts at low load...
...compared to full load.
The comparison m-ITX system had a small but significant lead in all the performance benchmarks we tried. The biggest difference was in the 3DMark06 score, which is actually the least important; no one will want to play modern 3D games with either of these systems as neither are adequate for good playability. With the time and power sequences, the higher power draw of the comparison system was generally compensated by the shorter time required for completion. For example, the TMPGEnc benchmark took the Dell 24,336 WS (watt-seconds, yes, an invented parameter) compared to 22,040 WS for the mini-ITX system.
|
Benchmarks Comparison
|
|
System
|
Dell Studio Hybrid
|
E7200 / DG45FC
|
|
CPU Clock
|
2.13Ghz
|
2.53Ghz
|
|
System RAM
|
3GB
|
2GB
|
|
Boot-up Time
|
58 sec.
|
48 sec.
|
|
PCMark05
|
4176
|
5178
|
|
3DMark05
|
953
|
1514
|
|
3DMark06
|
444
|
1002
|
|
NOD32
|
301 sec
|
~40W
|
319 sec
|
~45W
|
|
WinRAR
|
274 sec
|
~45W
|
248 sec
|
~50W
|
|
iTunes
|
312 sec
|
~43W
|
242 sec
|
~50W
|
|
TMPGEnc
|
468 sec
|
~52W
|
380 sec
|
~58W
|
|
*Boot-up Time - start button to when the round Vista logo
appears
|
One oddity of the Dell was the long 59 seconds needed for it to go to sleep when this mode was directly engaged from the Start menu, compared to just 19 seconds for the comparison system. We suspect that the radio of the wireless keyboard/mouse might have been at fault.
| Help support this site, buy the Dell Studio Hybrid 140G Desktop from one of our affiliate retailers! |
|
