Dell DTR Laptop Shootout - M1710 vs. E1705
by Jarred Walton on May 30, 2006 1:30 PM EST- Posted in
- Laptops
Features
We've already stated that the M1710 and the E1705 are very similar, and the primary difference comes at the lower end of the spectrum. Here's a quick rundown of the available features for both systems.| System Configuration Options | ||
| Dell XPS M1710 | Dell Inspiron E1705 | |
| Processor | Intel Core Duo T2400/T2500/T2600 (1.83/2.00/2.16 GHz) | Intel Core Duo T2300/T2400/T2600 (1.66/1.83/2.16 GHz) Intel Core Solo T1300 (1.66GHz) |
| Chipset | Intel 945PM 64-bit Dual-Channel | Intel 945PM or Intel 945GM 64-bit Dual-Channel |
| FSB Speeds | Up to 667 MHz | Up to 667 MHz |
| Memory Speeds | DDR2-533, DDR2-667 | DDR2-533, DDR2-667 |
| Memory Slots | (2) x SO-DIMM, max. 4GB, DDR2, Dual Channel supported | (2) x SO-DIMM, max. 4GB, DDR2, Dual Channel supported |
| Graphics | NVIDIA GeForce Go 7900 GS 256MB or 7900 GTX 512MB GDDR3 |
Intel 950GM 128MB Shared (512MB System Memory) or 224MB Shared (1GB+ System Memory) (Optional) ATI Mobility X1400 256MB (Optional) NVIDIA GeForce Go 7800 256MB (Optional) NVIDIA GeForce Go 7900 GS 256MB |
| Display | 17" WUXGA (1920x1200) UltraSharp with TrueLife | 17" Wide Screen WXGA+ (1440x900) or (Optional) 17" Ultrasharp Wide Screen WUXGA (1920x1200) with TrueLife |
| Expansion Slots | One ExpressCard 54mm slot supporting 1.5V and 3.3V, ExpressCard/34 and ExpressCard/54, 26 pins | One ExpressCard 54mm slot supporting 1.5V and 3.3V, ExpressCard/34 and ExpressCard/54, 26 pins |
| Hard Drive | 60/80/100 7200 RPM | 60/80/100/120GB 5400 RPM or 60/80/100GB 7200 RPM |
| Optical Drive | DVD+/-RW with Dual-Layer DVD+R Write Support | 24X CD Burner/8xDVD Combo Drive or 8x DVD+/-RW with Dual-Layer DVD+R Write Support |
| Networking/ Communications |
Integrated 10/100/1000 PCIe Gigabit Ethernet and V.92 56K Modem (Optional) Dell Wireless 1390 802.11g Mini Card (Optional) Dell Wireless 1490 802.11a/g Mini Card (Optional) Intel Pro/Wireless 3945 802.11a/b/g Mini Card (Optional) Dell Wireless 350 Bluetooth Internal (2.0 + Enhanced Data Rate) |
Integrated 10/100 Ethernet and V.92 56K Modem (Optional) Dell Wireless 1390 802.11g Mini Card (Optional) Dell Wireless 1490 802.11a/g Mini Card (Optional) Intel Pro/Wireless 3945 802.11a/b/g Mini Card (Optional) Dell Wireless 350 Bluetooth Internal (2.0 + Enhanced Data Rate) |
| Audio | 24-bit High Definition Audio with 2.1 Speakers | Integrated Sigmatel HD 24-bit Audio or (Optional) Sound Blaster Audigy ADVANCED HD 24-Bit Audio |
| Left I/O Ports | 2 x USB 2.0 | 2 x USB 2.0 |
| Right I/O Ports | 4-pin Unpowered IEEE 1394A, 5-in-1 Flash Reader (MS, MS Pro, SSD/SDIO, MMC, xD, CD Type I/II, IBM MicroDrive), Headphone and Microphone connectors | 4-pin Unpowered IEEE 1394A, 5-in-1 Flash Reader (MS, MS Pro, SSD/SDIO, MMC, xD, CD Type I/II, IBM MicroDrive), Headphone and Microphone connectors |
| Back I/O Ports | 1 x RJ45 LAN 4 x USB 2.0 1 x RJ11 Modem 1 x DVI-D 1 x VGA 1 x S-VIDEO Out |
1 x RJ45 LAN 4 x USB 2.0 1 x RJ11 Modem 1 x DVI-D 1 x VGA 1 x S-VIDEO Out |
| Keyboard | 87 Key QWERTY (US) | 87 Key QWERTY (US) |
| Battery | 9-Cell 80WHr "Smart" Lithium Ion | 6-Cell 53WHr "Smart" Lithium Ion or 9-Cell 80WHr "Smart" Lithium Ion |
| Dimensions | 1.7"x15.5"x11.3" (HxWxD) 8.8 lbs. (Display, 9-Cell battery, DVD-Combo drive) |
1.7"x15.5"x11.3" (HxWxD) 7.61+ lbs. (Display, 9-Cell battery, DVD-Combo drive increase weight) |
| Power Adapter | 130W 1.42"x2.56"x6.67" (HxWxD), 1.68 lbs. with cables | Ac Adapter - 90W 1.35"x2.39"x6.04" (HxWxD), 1.19 lbs. with cables |
| Chassis | Metallic Black Dell XPS M1710 or Special Edition Formula Red Dell XPS M1710 |
Dell Inspiron E1705 |
| Other Features | XPS 16 Color Configurable Accent Lighting Trackpad with scroll bars |
Trackpad with scroll bars |
The first difference comes in terms of supported processors. The M1710 can naturally support the same processors, but Dell doesn't offer anything lower than the Core Duo T2400 (1.83 GHz) processor in the XPS systems. The E1705 in contrast can be purchased with the Core Duo T2300 (1.66 GHz), or you can even opt for the Core Solo T1300. The price difference between the Core Solo and Core Duo isn't enough that we would actually recommend going that route, however.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
The next major difference comes with the default LCDs. The XPS systems come with a WUXGA UltraSharp LCD (1920x1200), while the Inspiron E1705 defaults to WXGA+ (1440x900). You can get the same display with the E1705, but it's a $150 upgrade. Some people might actually prefer the WXGA+ display anyway, as 1920x1200 resolution on a 17 inch LCD can result in small text on many applications. We would like the option of getting a WSXGA+ (1680x1050) as well.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
The memory and storage offerings follow a similar pattern. The XPS only comes with 7200RPM hard drives, ranging from 60GB to 100GB. The E1705 includes those three hard drives, but it also adds four 5400RPM drives to the list of available choices, ranging from 60GB to 120GB. On the memory front, XPS laptops come with a minimum of 1GB of RAM, and all of the memory offerings are DDR2-667 (other than the insanely expensive 2x2GB configurations: $1800 for DDR2-533, or $3000 for DDR2-667 - not that we would actually recommend either upgrade at those prices). The Inspiron E1705 adds a low-end 512MB option, DDR2-533 as a choice at every memory configuration, and drops the 4GB upgrades. The low-end Core Solo E1705 gives you the choice of either a DVD burner or a CD-RW/DVD-ROM combo drive, while all of the other models come with a DVD burner by default.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
Video card choices on the XPS are limited to the 7900 GS or the 7900 GTX. The E1705 also offers the 7900 GS now ($349 upgrade), but you can also choose to go with integrated GMA950 graphics, ATI Mobility Radeon X1400 HyperMemory ($149 upgrade), or GeForce Go 7800 ($199 upgrade). Of the various graphics card offerings, we have to say that there's little point in getting the X1400 HyperMemory given the cost, at least if you're interested in playing games. If you need more graphics power than the integrated graphics provide, the extra $50 to get the GeForce Go 7800 will more than double graphics performance.
The 7900 GS is the fastest of the graphics options for the Inspiron models, and with the 90 nm manufacturing process it may actually produce less heat than the GeForce Go 7800. It's difficult to recommend spending almost twice as much money, but it should come with a decent increase in performance. The GeForce Go 7800 only has 16 pixel pipelines, whereas the GeForce Go 7900 GS comes with 20 as well as higher clock speeds. If you're really interested in high-powered graphics performance, you can of course upgrade to the XPS and get the GeForce Go 7900 GTX instead. We'll have more to say later on the graphics card choices, and while the X1400 isn't great for games, it does have other benefits.
The remaining differences are generally minor. Of course there's the aforementioned difference in appearance. The XPS comes with an 80 WHr (9 cell) battery by default, and the Inspiron comes with a 53 WHr (6 cell) and offers the 80 WHr battery as an upgrade. Somewhat interesting is that the external power brick is a 130W model for the XPS and only 90W for the Inspiron. The 7900 GTX configuration is likely the reason for the different power brick, as otherwise the two laptops are basically the same. The XPS power brick does weigh a bit more as well, but given the total system weight it's unlikely that you would notice the extra couple of ounces.
That takes care of the general overview, but before we get to the benchmarks we want to look at some of the specific shared components. We'll also take a look at how the laptops are put together.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
RedStar - Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - link
"NVIDIA's rating of 400 MHz does not mean manufacturers have to run it that fast"Nvidia's rating very much means the mobile part is capable of 400Mhz --anything less is an underclock.
Why on earth would nvidia publish a spec with the expectation that no one would follow it?
Heck, they could just say we have an 1000Mhz mobile core but too bad everyone will make it go 180Mhz.
Since people are running the go 7800 at 390+MHz without a power upgrade, i would have to say you are very much mistaken about the power draw.
But, i would say the primary issue was two fold.
1)Heat output (thermal profile)
2)To differentiate the product enough from Dell's similiar but ultra expensive XPS line
(of the same february time frame)
I, and others, tend to believe dell was concerned more about #2.
JarredWalton - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
NVIDIA wants to put the best face on its product. Just because the chip will run at 400 MHz doesn't mean it can do so within the thermal envelope a manufacturer has for a laptop. I've heard people complain about overheating issues with high-end laptops already, so if Dell plays it a bit safe I won't complain too loudly. I'd really like 1000 MHz RAM with a 333 core say over 400 core and 650-700 RAM.As for protecting the XPS line, the 7900 GS basically fills in the gap. I personally think the GF Go 7800 is going into E1705 because Dell had a bunch of extras from older XPS models. They're downclocking them to reduce power and heat. At 94W measured peak, I would certainly be concerned about long-term usage of a 90W power brick. Unless the 90W rating is conservative, but then why have a 130W for the XPS line?
Anyway, look at the battery life of the 7800 Go compared to the 7900 GTX Go, and then increase the GPU performance by 60%. If you can't have the GPU fall back to the same level (1.1 V and 100 MHz core/658 MHz RAM or something), there are good reasons to not ship a faster GPU. I *still* don't recommend the 7800 Go version, as you would be better with either more battery life (X1400) or better gaming (7900 GS). I just tested what I was sent.
RedStar - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
I would agree, the introduction of the 7900GS makes this moot to everyone --except those that bought the i9400 when it first came out and had only the go7800 to choose from (with no reviews yet available --except for the one that said the go 7800 was equal to the ati x1400 [we all then found out why --Dell's 260 core!!]).The limited possibility of a 7900GS upgrade sounds, at least, hopeful.
:)
Andyvan - Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - link
I bought my wife an E1705 a couple of months ago. She doesn't game, so I went with the MX1400. I also went with the slower disk, hoping that would yield lower heat/noise, and longer battery life. I'm curious as to whether I chose well.-- Andyvan
JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - link
The 7200 RPM HDD kicks power draw up about 2 W when it's active versus sleeping. Really, most laptop parts are already very low power. The X1400 consumes 28W total when idle - most desktops use that much just for the motherboard. The 7200 RPM drives will run slightly warmer than the 5400 RPM models, but they are also about 30% faster in HDD performance. Adding more RAM will often make HDD performance less important, but if you copy files around on the HDD you will definitely notice the difference.Warder45 - Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - link
What about the noise difference in 5400 vs 7200? I've heard that the 7200 HD's can be a lot louder.Yianaki - Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - link
Why can't you have a top of the line 7900 GTX and when watching a DVD or the xp desktop doesn't the graphics card go into basically a sleep mode and turn of almost all the memory. HELL why don't they add a crappy additional teeny transistor space to the gpu chip if it is sooo hard to get the power requirements down on the main GPU. That way they can turn off most of the ram and the gpu and just use this additional teeny transistor space to run simple XP desktop functions or while playing DVD's. I mean a simple xp desktop functions can't take up that much die space. I simply don't get it. I mean this is like the nth graphics card from nvidia and yet it still sucks up the power. I have the horrible intel onboard graphics on my laptop and apart from it eating up some of my precious ram I am EXTREMELY happy with it doing regular desktop XP tasks. Sucks ass for gaming of course. I mean how hard is it for nvidia to totally turn off pretty much all of the GPU when just in desktop mode. Is the huge power difference just because of the high performance memory used? There really shouldn't be a penalty for getting top o' the line graphics I believe.mindless1 - Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - link
From the article,"Why would anyone want to get the X1400 in such a laptop? Obviously, because it uses far less power than even the GeForce Go 7800."
More like, most people are not gamers and of those who are, many will prefer gaming on their desktop. The % of people that will buy a laptop with gaming in mind is miniscule, and that brings up the other puzzling part about so many gaming benchmarks of laptops instead of more useful things like HDD & office productivity. Sure, anything can run office but what about working with giant databases, or wifi range, or most of the parameters that matter to most prospective laptop buyers. Gaming just isn't important at all if it were the same price. Now subtract the price difference and you see why anyone, actually most people do not pay for the gaming GPU inside.
Blahman - Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - link
Hardly... notebook sales have surpassed desktop sales recently.Desktops are on the way out if you ask me. Even if you're a gamer. There are notebooks out there already that have SLI, and the Core Duo architecture is the future of all Intel processors, and it STARTED in notebooks.
Every new notebook generation closes the performance and price gap between desktops and notebooks.
I recently configured and ordered a nice E1705 with the 7900 GS (which I really wish AnandTech had included in the benchmarks, it's more than twice as fast as the 7800 Go) for $1250 (with a $750 coupon code). Skimp on the RAM and go for a $180 aftermarket 2GB PC2-5300 upgrade.
Later on down the road you will be able to upgrade to Merom, and possibly the 7900 GTX or G80M. For now Dell is keeping their spare 7900 GTXs for warranty repairs and aren't currently for sale, but like the last generation with the 7800 GTX, it may be available in the future from Dell Spare Parts.
For tons of more info about these models check out http://www.notebookforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=1...">the Dell 17" Notebooks section at notebookforums.com.
ElFenix - Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - link
who buys a 9 pound notebook with somewhat horrific battery life regardless unless they're gaming? an external display hooked up to a 15" or 14" 6 pound notebook would be far more useful to the user you're describing.and don't forget that this IS a gaming oriented website.