Showing posts with label Sluggish. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sluggish. Show all posts

Monday, February 3, 2014

Dell Inspiron 14 (Model 7437) review: Slim and stylish, but surprisingly sluggish

Dell’s Inspiron 14 7000-series laptops are sexy-looking beasts boasting forged-aluminum, beveled-edge chasses; 14-inch Gorilla Glass touchscreens; and backlit keyboards. But the absence of an SSD (as a cache or otherwise) has a significant impact on their performance.

These machines look like Ultrabooks, but they're not being marketed as such. Intel controls that standard and while it doesn’t explicitly state that a notebook must be equipped with an SSD to carry the Ultrabook moniker, the Ultrabook definition requires a notebook to operate in standby for at least seven days, and awake from standby with fresh data in less than three seconds. The Inspiron 14 7000 series (I reviewed the Model 7437) can’t do that with a mechanical hard drive, and it can’t be configured with one at time of purchase.

ROBERT CARDIN

Dell's Inspiron 14 7000 series cuts a super-thin profile despite its reliance on a mechanical hard drive. 

Apart from the absence of an SSD, this $850 laptop has a number of good components under the hood, including a fourth-generation Intel Core i5-4200U processor and 6GB of DDR3/1600 memory. But its 500GB mechanical hard drive spins its platters at only 5400 rpm, and its Intel Dual Band Wireless-N 7260 Wi-Fi adapter can connect only to 802.11n networks at a maximum physical link rate of 300 mbps. You’ll need a USB adapter if you want to network at 802.11ac speeds.

The Inspiron 14 produced a generally unimpressive Worldbench 8.1 score of 132. That renders Dell’s machine 32 percent faster than the Asus VivoBook S550CA that we’ve been using as a reference point, but leaves it far behind the consumer-oriented Lenovo Flex 14 (which has an SSD) and slightly behind the business-oriented Toshiba Tecra Z40 (which has a 7200 rpm mechanical drive).

Dell Inspiron 14 benchmark

There's no escaping the benchmark hit that a mechanical hard drive causes.

Looking at gaming performance—specifically, BioShock Infinite at resolution of 1024 by 768 with low visual quality—the Inspiron 14 slightly outperformed the Lenovo and the Toshiba, even though all three machines rely on the same integrated graphics processor (Intel HD Graphics 4400). It’s no gaming powerhouse, but it’s fine for less-demanding games like World of Warcraft.

The Inspiron’s 14-inch touchscreen is bright, beautiful, and clear, with excellent color accuracy, deep blacks, and crisp text and images. HD video looks very good on the Inspiron’s display, too. I noticed just a few artifacts in high-motion scenes. The touchscreen is smoothly responsive to multi-touch gestures, and the edge-to-edge glass allows for Windows 8 gestures to be performed quickly and easily.

The Inspiron 14 doesn’t have the most powerful speakers, but they sound better than most laptop speakers. They’re mounted on either side of the chassis, and they deliver just the right mix of bass and treble.

Dell Inspiron 14 benchmark

Gaming performance is fairly typical for a laptop with a fourth-generation Intel Core processor and integrated graphics. 

I did notice some anomalies in the Inspiron 14’s otherwise excellent industrial design. The chassis is much wider than necessary to accommodate a 14-inch display, with an unusually wide bezel at the sides and bottom of the display and more than an inch of dead space on the left and right sides of the keyboard. The island-style keyboard sits dead center in the chassis, a placement that renders the wrist rest cramped and uncomfortable. And why are the top row of function keys so tiny—they’re less than 0.25 inches tall—when there’s two inches of unoccupied space right above them?

The keyboard deck itself is flimsy—aggressive keystrokes cause the whole thing to sink slightly—and the flat keys provide very little tactile feedback. The aforementioned backlight provides very uneven illumination, giving the keyboard a marbled look. The touchpad, on the other hand, is quite good, providing swift, accurate movements and mostly smooth multi-touch gestures.

Dell Inspiron 14 battery life benchmark

The Inspiron 14's battery life is slightly shorter than Lenovo's Flex 14 or Toshiba's Tecra Z40, but those machines have lower-resolution displays. It crushes our reference laptop, which has a third-gen Intel Core processor. 

I’m a sucker for thin, pretty laptops that deliver great battery life, and the Dell Inspiron 14 7000 Series certainly fits that bill (although it’s not particularly light, weighing in at 4.4 pounds). Since my computer life revolves around word processing, browsing the web, and watching the occasional online video, this model’s mediocre benchmark performance isn’t a showstopper.

You’ll need to decide for yourself if that—or its $850 price tag—are showstoppers for you. Lenovo’s Flex 14 costs $100 less, but it has a lower-resolution display and isn’t nearly as pretty. Toshiba’s Tecra Z40 costs considerably more, but its CPU has Intel’s vPro management feature set and it’s more than a full pound lighter.

Sarah is a freelance writer and editor based in Silicon Valley. She has a love/hate relationship with social media and a bad habit of describing technology as "sexy."
More by Sarah Jacobsson Purewal


From PC World. Electronics product reviews and advice for best reference

Thursday, February 2, 2012

McAfee Internet Security 2012 Review: Uneven Protection, Sluggish Speeds

McAfee Internet Security 2012 PC security suiteMcAfee Internet Security 2012 ($80 for one year, three PCs as of January 29, 2012) finished 14th in our 2012 roundup of Internet security suites. Despite its low ranking, it performed well in some areas; its overall uneven showing, however, proved to be its undoing in this year's extremely competitive batch of suites.

First, the good news: McAfee's suite does very well at detecting malware before the attacker infects your PC. It fully blocked 96.2 percent of brand-new malware in our real-world malware-blocking tests--a slightly above-average score compared with the other suites we looked at this year. Meanwhile, its 99.99 percent detection rate for known malware samples was the second-best result we saw this year--and ever, for that matter. Its three false positives (out of a pool of 250,000 files) wasn't the absolute lowest we saw, but it was still very good.

But although McAfee's suite put up a good showing in those tests, it was another story once malware got onto our test computer. The McAfee package detected 80 percent of active infections on our test system, a below-average result--only one other 2012 suite we evaluated was unable to detect all infections in this test.

In addition, the McAfee product rendered malware infections inert just 70 percent of the time--the second-lowest showing in this test. By comparison, 9 of the 14 suites we looked at successfully disabled all infections on our test PC. That said, McAfee's suite was able to eradicate all traces of infections 60 percent of the time--a slightly above-average result among this batch of suites.

McAfee's suite struggled in some of our system-speed tests, producing a greater-than-average impact on overall system performance. It especially struggled in our application-installation test, and when we copied files over a network. It added over 1.5 minutes to our app-installation test (as compared with our test PC with no antivirus installed), which was the second-worst showing in this test. As for network file copying, it tacked on nearly 2 minutes to the test, a result good enough for only eighth place.

Scan speeds weren't great, either. McAfee's on-demand scanner (which runs when you manually start a scan) took 1 minute, 51 seconds to check 4.5GB of files, placing tenth overall for this subcategory. Its on-access scanner--which runs whenever you open or save a file--disappointed as well: Its time of 7 minutes, 4 seconds was the second-worst outcome we saw in that test.

All that said, we like McAfee's interface. The suite's installer takes a few steps to complete, but it has a couple nice touches: It will check your PC for malware before you install, and it will download the newest version of the software before it begins installation. The update check will take a while over slower connections, but it's a welcome addition nonetheless. For the most part, McAfee's main control panel is easy to use--clean, uncluttered, and friendly.

On the other hand, the fact that the firewall asks you to decide which apps to allow or deny Internet access is not very user-friendly, and strikes me as a holdover from the days when it was okay for a security suite to be difficult and annoying to use.

Should you buy McAfee Internet Security 2012? Although it didn't do terribly overall, and although it offers some things to like, we find it difficult to give this package a recommendation considering its low ranking. But if McAfee can smooth out some of the rough spots, the suite may be worth watching.


From PCWorld. Visit Amazon Computer and Notebook Center here