Dell M6500: A Precision Strike on Bling
by Jarred Walton on March 9, 2010 3:00 AM ESTDell M6500 Workstation Performance
As expected, SPECviewperf shows real benefits from the hardware features enabled in NVIDIA Quadro GPUs; here the difference between the two otherwise similar systems is night and day. Watching the M6500 run through the SPECviewperf tests compared to the W870CU (and really, we're comparing the GTX 280M to the FX 3800M) is like watching a game running on a moderate IGP compared to the same game running on a top-end GPU (think HD 4200 compared to the HD 5870). Real-time interaction with the type of applications tested in SPECviewperf is possible with an FX 3800M, but it's very choppy with the GTX 280M. The Quadro FX 3800M turns in performance that's anywhere from 4x to 14x as fast as the GTX 280M.
One of the features enabled in the Quadro drivers/firmware is improved antialiasing (particularly line antialiasing), which gives us results like the above table where the GTX 280M lists "no result for multisample performance. That's because SPECviewperf deemed the performance as "too low" or "unacceptable". Looking at the M6500/FX 3800M result, we see that most of the tested applications can run with antialiasing at 2x or 4x with little impact on performance, with 3ds Max able to run at 16xAA with acceptable performance. Note that SPECviewperf considers a result "too slow" if it's not within 10% of the baseline (0xAA) score. Let's look at the detailed multisample results table.
Besides better antialiasing performance, the Quadro chips also support up to 32xAA (compared to 16xAA on GeForce cards). As you can see in the above table, while the GTX 280M is able to run at roughly the same rate with or without antialiasing in many of the tests, the final speed is still much slower than even the worst Quadro result. At worst, the 32xAA on Quadro 3800M still turns in performance that's 2.7x faster than a GeForce (e.g. ensight-03); at best it's an order of magnitude faster at equivalent settings.
Wrapping up with multithreaded performance, we see that the W870CU fails to ran many of the quad-core tests, which is why those sections of the table are blank. This is most likely a driver/firmware/OS incompatibility, and it goes to show that having a certified system can make a difference. Like the other results, the M6500 is still 6 to 13 times faster than the W870CU. Let's wrap things up with SPEC's LightWave benchmark.
In contrast to SPECviewperf 10, and similar to the x264 encoding and Cinebench results on the previous page, the LightWave tests depend almost entirely on the CPU in your system, so the scores of the M6500 and W870CU are close. The M6500 scores higher in the "Interactive" benchmark of LightWave while the W870CU scores higher in the Render and Multitask LightWave tests. Differences in drivers and the type/configuration of RAM may account for the slight discrepancies, but largely we're looking at CPU tests that show the two notebooks as being equal.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
42 Comments
View All Comments
Nick-932 - Saturday, August 21, 2010 - link
Have you seen one in real life next to an Apple...Because all apples look like wimpsy flimsy notebooks comparing to an M6500.Additionally, they do not even have any spec similar as the M6500, even 8 months after their initial release.
jabber - Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - link
...but that 'thing' above the keyboard...????Didnt read the review actually as it's too expensive for me. So if what ever that thing is is explained as crucial then I apologise.
strikeback03 - Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - link
I read the review and still don't know. I was expecting an explanation of what the thing that looks like it was attached with a blob of caulk is on a laptop they think looks good.JarredWalton - Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - link
I guess you guys are referring to the FIPS fingerprint scanner? It's not "attached by a blob of caulk"... though I suppose the images don't quite convey what it actually looks like. Here's a better shot, if you didn't look at the gallery:http://images.anandtech.com/galleries/605/dell-pre...">http://images.anandtech.com/galleries/605/dell-pre...
It's an optional extra for security; rather than swiping your finger, you place it on that scanner. It's supposed to be more accurate than the swipe scanners.
jabber - Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - link
So why does it look bolted on?Lenovo manage to make a decent looking fingerprint scanner.
This thing is a mess. In fact the more I look at this laptop the more crap it looks.
Looks like a rough prototype.
JarredWalton - Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - link
Perhaps it looks better in person. The scanner is flush with the rest of the chassis, and about the only complaint I'd have with it is that the scanner has a gray border. Trust me, the chassis as a whole feels rock solid. I don't think it's the most awesome looking laptop ever created, but the LCD does look great and it's nice to see a large notebook I wouldn't be embarrassed about using in a business setting.Since you dislike the look of this notebook so much, what do you think makes for an attractive notebook? And please don't say MacBook Pro... they're fine, but you simply can't fit quad-core i7 with a Quadro FX 3800M into anything that thin. I'm actually quite impressed that the M6500 is "only" 1.3" thick!
jabber - Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - link
lol, no I wouldnt say a MacBook pro.However, I do find it baffling why manufacturers struggle to come up with something asthetically pleasing.
I do believe less is more, though it would be hard to design a laptop on that principle that wouldnt infringe on the mac design. They have reduced a design to it's near minimum.
I like the general look of my Inspiron 13Z though the 8 cell battery pack spoils the lines. It does mean however I can go 8 hours+ without power. The glossy plastics are also a big no-no.
If Dell just improved the build quality of say their Studio line with better/tougher plastics then that would go a long way.
DukeN - Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - link
Would truly have appreciated a Lenovo W5XX comparison here, or even a T500. TIA.hko45 - Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - link
Another reason to get this is the E-Port Plus docking (for all mobile Precision and most Latitudes -- I haven't seen anything comparable from anyone else). It allows the connection of two DVI or DisplayPort displays. That's what I use for my M6400 when I run PhotoShop & Lightroom. This should take care of any color issues. I would only use it as my first edit pass for my photos when on the road anyway. I'm definitely going to get an M6500 as soon as funds permit.geekforhire - Wednesday, March 10, 2010 - link
I received my Precision M6500 about a week ago, and in general I'm very happy.
Mine has the i7 Q720 processor, 64GB SSD, CD/DVD burner, 1440x900 RGBLED display, Intel 5300AGN Wifi card, 4GB memory, and Windows 7 Pro.
My previous notebook computer was 15.4" Dell Inspiron 8600, which I also designed, and served me well for 5.5 years. It failed about 6 months ago with a motherboard problem that would be expensive to replace - about as much as a netbook. At the time, I didn't want to spend alot of money on a replacement computer, so I got a netbook: Asus S101. It's a nice little (little!!!) machine, came with a Window XP Home on a 16GB SSD (note: they are now shipping with a 32GB SSD, which is actually livable, where the 16GB is definitely /not/ and later upgraded to 64GB). It does alot of things very well, but I eventually came to the conclusion that this was not enough computer for me. And if it failed I'd have to ship the computer away to the manufacturer for service - which would put me out of service for about 2+ weeks. So I bit the bullet, and got another real computer.
Loves:
Performance is excellent. This is safely the fastest notebook I've ever had the pleasure to work with - ever.
The display is excellent, displaying everything including movies with great sharpness, color quality, and contrast.
The keyboard has good touch, and the back-lighting is a nice touch that really should be included with every notebook.
Someone gave good though to the internal airflow, which allows the machine to be quiet and be effective even when resting on my lap with a comforter.
The SSD is giving snappy performance, but it's actual available physical C: size is 58.7GB, and there is the risk that the performance will decline over time (trim capability is unknown yet).
Fastest wifi performance I've ever measured: downloaded iTunes yesterday and the Network tab on the Task Manager showed an average 10.5% utilization with frequent peaks of 11.75% of a 54mbps wifi connection (I have a 7mbps DSL line to the internet with a high performance wifi router, but the Apple servers deserve some credit too).
The sound fidelity coming from the speakers is extremely good, especially for a notebook. Playing the movie "The Transporter" (music by Stanley Clarke), there were several very interesting sound positioning effect that many other speakers just won't present quite as well.
The built in webcam and array microphone work well. I'm having lots of great conversations with my daughter via Skype, who's on a 2 month trip in Ireland. Visual detail is good, and room echo of what I'm sending is low to non-existent.
I'm a believer in the Dell 4 year high end extended service warranty, and include it in all of the notebook computers that I design, because notebooks are subject to physical insults that desktop computers are not, and Dell will overnight ship replacement parts. Want to rent a great notebook computer for the price of a new great computer, here are 2 realistic human threats that tend to produce total loss: Dropping, and Liquid Spills.
Overall build quality is good. But it kind of better be with a machine this heavy, or else simple motions like lifting it from the front corner is going to cause the chassis to quickly split.
There are oodles of practical connectors and adapters built in, and I really like the slot-load CD/DVD drive.
Peeves:
The battery life seems to last about 2 hours, not the 3-4 hours I was designing for (I attribute this to the lowest end display card, which is much stronger and much higher power consuming than I wanted). I've played with the various power options and I've been able to improve the duration from the 1.5H that I seemed to first be getting when I received the machine, but I think 2.5H is going to be the wall.
The touch pad is left of where it should be. It's centered under the keyboard, rather than in the physical center of the computer, causing an awkward right hand "lunge" across to 1.5" left of where I naturally expect it to be. But I can recalibrate.
This machine and power brick are large and heavy, and are well served by backpack transport rather than something with just a single handle.
The low level light performance of the webcam in a dimly lit restaurant is fair, producing brownish grainy images. (reminder that the human eye has such an amazingly good sharpness even with wide variations of available light, that even modern DSLR technology comes no where near what the human eye can do so easily that we take that capability for granted.)
The machine was shipped about 3 weeks later than the original estimate. Note that this longer-than-expected actual ship date has happened with all other 17" Precision notebook computers that I've designed in the past.
Not sure yet about the 64 bit OS. There have been 1-2 weird freezing issues which I suspect the 32 bit OS may not experience; there is a compatibility issue with printing from a 64 bit machine to a printer attached to a 32 bit machine, but the effective work around is to print directly to the network attached printer. But having 4GB of available memory with a 64 bit OS is nicer than having 3GB of actually available memory on the same machine with a 32 bit OS. So the jury is still out on whether to reinstall with the 32 bit OS, or stick with the 64 bit OS.
In a nutshell, I can see myself growing old with this woman.