The G51J consumes less power than the GT725, in spite of its higher-TDP processor. This is most likely due to the relatively high idle power consumption of the GT725’s Radeon HD 4850 graphics processor, as noted in our previous graphics reviews.
Dividing the average performance score of the Eurocom and MSI notebooks by that of the Asus G51J shows how the GT725 and D900F compare. Averaging power in the same way, and then dividing the performance by efficiency, allows us to see how the G51J really is the most power-efficient portable gaming solution.
One might think that a more efficient notebook that consumes less power might also have better battery life, but Asus left us with one surprise.
This specific model G51J-A1 comes equipped with the smaller of two batteries Asus offers for this particular chassis. Had Asus chosen to include the larger battery, the notebook would have been bulkier, heavier, costlier, and, in spite of all those hindrances, arguably more functional as a “mobile” device.
Ed.: Intel has been trying hard to prove that Clarksfield is a more energy-efficient solution than the mobile Core 2s that came before. But it insists that realizing better battery life requires a low-end graphics processor--something we don't think you'll see in one of these desktop replacement-class Core i7 Mobile-based notebooks. I showed as much in my Clarksfield preview, and Thomas' numbers here back that data up.
- Big Gaming On A Smaller Scale?
- Asus G51J Details
- Internal Components, Software, And Accessories
- Test Settings
- Benchmark Results: Crysis And Far Cry 2
- Benchmark Results: Clear Sky And World In Conflict
- Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Benchmark Results: Synthetic
- Power, Efficiency, And Battery Life
- A Good Value, A Great Starting Point