Join for quick access. Enter your email below and we'll send confirmation plus sign you up to our newsletter.
By submitting your information, you confirm you are aged 16 or over,
have read our
Privacy Policy
and agree to the
Terms & Conditions. Geographical rules apply.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Join the club
Get full access to premium articles, exclusive features and a growing list of member rewards.
An account already exists for this email address, please log in.
We’ll report our test results in the form of a summary table (Table X), then follow each set of benchmarks with some description, discussion and analysis.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Benchmark
8920G
M70S
D90X
HDX 9203WK
VGN-AR790U/B
Sysmark 2007
135
121
146
139
147
PCMark Overall
5371
6117
7541
5714
5165
PCMark CPU
6459
6212
8502
6678
6197
PCMark Memory
5154
4949
5586
5133
4999
PCMark Graphics
5300
5542
9293
7923
4487
PCMark HDD
4543
4595
6740
4639
5409
3DMark 1024 low
6233
4108
14143
9482
4846
3DMark 1280 low
5038
3764
13481
7992
3884
3Dmark 1920 low
3920
3308
12667
6205
2795
3DMark 1024 High
4546
2678
13276
7398
3676
3Dmark 1280 High
3549
2424
12181
6018
2842
3Dmark 1920 High
2637
2099
9854
4521
1888
iDHCAT 3.0
139
124
227
129
132
MobileMark Productivity
254
201
Fail
133
130
MobileMark Reader
138
160
72
135
100
MobileMark DVD
111
122
67
116
65
Table X makes three very interesting and potentially valuable points:
The Sony VGN-AR790U/B posts a surprisingly high SYSmark 2007 result — it’s higher than both the HP HDX and the Eurocom D90X. Given that the Sony unit has a T9300 and the HDX a T9500, while the other devices are on par, it’s interesting that the Sony outperforms the HP. The fact that the Eurocom has a faster quad-core processor and the Sony runs a little ahead says that SYSmark 2007 doesn’t really assess the true abilities of the processor or its faster drives.
When it comes to the rest of the benchmarks except for MobileMark (more on that in the next item), the range of equipment inside the various notebooks dictates their ranking for PCMark, MobileMark and Intel’s Digital Home Theater Capabilities Assessment Tool version 3.0. That said, both the Asus and the Acer units post very respectable showings, especially given their street prices.
In a single word, multimedia notebook battery life is miserable. Here again, the Asus and Acer units put on a surprisingly strong showing in the MobileMark tests, and are the only machines to break 200 minutes of battery life on the relatively undemanding Productivity test. The Web surfing (Reader) and DVD playback (DVD) tests otherwise evoke times that range from slightly over one hour — nowhere near enough time to watch a full-length DVD on battery power — to just over two hours to as long as just over two-and-a-half hours for the simple surfing scenario. This only confirms the notion that notebooks like these aren’t really meant to operate in battery-only mode. Rather, the battery serves more as a kind of built-in uninterruptible power supply (UPS) rather than as a genuine permanent power source.
With these preliminaries behind us, let’s take a closer look at the various benchmarks by category, where we’ll explain what these instruments measure and what this set of measurements has to tell us.