Asus F9Dc
Specifications
Price comparison
Average of 1 scores (from 2 reviews)
Reviews for the Asus F9Dc
Source: Notebookreview.com
Archive.org versionWhen I picked up my HP Pavilion dv6258se early this year, around February, I bought it because I lived thirty miles from school and wanted to have a sort of portable workstation for editing video and playing the occasional game. It's a fifteen incher, big and beautiful. Mainly big.
If the battery life is something you think you can live with, then honestly, this notebook really is a steal. I know it sounds like I've kvetched a lot about the unit, but it's a very solid machine. If my classes this quarter hadn't almost universally banned laptop use (barbarians!) I might've actually picked up one of those one-size-fits-all batteries to cover that. I may still.
The important thing is that it's powerful and versatile, and is really a hell of a lot of bang for the buck.
Leistung gut, Mobilität mangelhaft
User Review, online available, Long, Date: 12/06/2007
Rating: performance: 80% mobility: 50%
Foreign Reviews
Source: PCM
NL→EN Archive.org versionSingle Review, online available, Very Short, Date: 02/15/2008
Rating: Total score: 80% price: 80% performance: 80% display: 80% mobility: 50%
Comment
NVIDIA GeForce 8400M G: The 8400M G is a pared-down 8400M GS with only half as much Stream Processors and a smaller memory bus. Therefore, the performance is much lower and only as fast as the old 7400 card. Only MPEG-2 acceleration.
Only some 3D games with very low demands are playable with these cards.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Graphics Cards and the corresponding Benchmark List.
AMD Turion 64 X2: AMD Turion 64 X2 is intended to be positioned against the Intel Core Duo was presented in 17. May 2006. The current consumption is not higher than with Centrino-Duo-notebooks (TL-45 with ATI Xpress and Mobility Radeon X300). This means, that approximative the same battery runtime and fan functions can be expected (with this chipset). However, the performance was 20% below the T2300 (1.66 GHz) due to the lower L2 Cache (Core Duo has 2048 Kbyte shared L2 Cache). Nevertheless, the performance is sufficient.
TL-56:
In 90nm (33W TDP) and 65nm (31W TDP) produced dual core processor with a clock rate of 1.8 GHz. The TL-56 is still based on the K8 core and compareable to a slower clocked Core Duo.
» Further information can be found in our Comparison of Mobile Processsors.
