Benchmark Results: Synthetics
Our scores here represent a mix of graphics and processing performance. The overall 3DMark score clearly favors the two GeForce 8800M GTXs in Killer Notebooks’ Odachi, followed by Alienware’s pair of GeForce 9800M GTs in SLI. Eurocom places third with its single 9800M GT and ASUS pulls up the rear with the 9700M GT.
The CPU score accurately reflects how we’d expect to see each machine’s processor rank. The desktop Core 2 Quad Q9650 clearly has an upper hand given the threaded nature of this test. Way behind is Eurocom’s dual-core Core 2 Extreme X9100. The X9000 in Alienware’s m17x is just behind that, and ASUS’ T9400 places last.
Finally, the GPU score reflects the same order seen in 3DMark’s overall metric—naturally the SLI configurations take a commanding lead.
In a synthetic suite like PCMark Vantage, variations in hardware are exacerbated in relation to real-world benchmarks. The overall PCMark score demonstrates the performance advantage of Killer Notebooks’ quad-core processor. Next up is the Alienware machine, with its powerful SLI graphics config and striped storage array. ASUS places third and, although it showed better in our real-world tests, Eurocom’s Montebello pulls up the rear.
As you sort through the individual suites, it becomes clear where each notebook’s advantages lay. Perhaps the most surprising results are Alienware’s last-place finish in the Gaming subset and its poor finish in the HDD test.
Sandra correctly places each processor where we’d expect it to fall. More interesting, perhaps, are the memory bandwidth numbers, which clearly favor the quad-core platform, but also show the DDR3-equipped Centrino 2 systems serving up reasonable throughput.