Dell XPS 410: Core 2 Duo for the Masses
by Jarred Walton on September 18, 2006 12:20 PM EST- Posted in
- Systems
Gaming Resolution Scaling
As this is a system review, we will look at the gaming performance that can be achieved using the XPS 410 at lower resolutions and/or detail settings. We tested the five most commonly used resolutions for modern LCD displays at "high" and "medium" settings. We have provided a chart below of the test settings used for "medium quality" and "high quality" in each game. Here are the results from all three tested systems. All of the results are with sound enabled where possible, as this is how most people play games and it reflects testing the performance of the entire package rather than individual components.
The ABS Ultimate X9 continues to be the fasted tested system that we have reviewed, especially at higher detail settings. The ABS Ultimate X9 was not tested without antialiasing (except in Oblivion and SS2 due to the use of HDR), as performance is more than acceptable so there's no need to drop detail levels. The Sabre Extreme on the other hand can definitely benefit by running at slightly reduced detail settings, especially at higher resolutions. The chief difference between the Sabre Extreme and the XPS 410 is the graphics card, and the fact that the 7900 GTX is faster than the 7900 GT is not at all surprising. If you're wondering how the XPS 410 with a 7900 GS would perform, the reduction in the number of pipelines will reduce performance slightly relative to the 7900 GT in the PC Club Sabre Extreme, but for the most part the two cards would perform very similarly.
Even the fastest system is running into GPU limitations, so the performance benchmarks here essentially amount to comparing different GPUs. At present, the vast majority of games depend more on graphics performance than CPU performance, so with the exception of flight simulators and certain strategy games, GPU performance really does equate to gaming performance. If you need help deciding whether or not you should upgrade the graphics card in a prebuilt system, you can always refer to our video card reviews. Perhaps future games will be able to place more of a burden on the CPU, but that doesn't appear too likely, as games like Unreal Tournament 2007 and the recently released Prey appear to be more GPU limited than current titles.
The choice of graphics card is going to depend in a large part on your choice of display. If you plan on getting a standard 19 inch display -- widescreen or not -- a 7900 GT or 7900 GS will be plenty powerful for the majority of games. With larger displays, running at the native LCD resolution will require more graphics power, and you can see the advantage that the Dell XPS 410 holds over the Sabre Extreme due to the faster GPU. Disabling some of the graphical complexity can help improve frame rates on lower end GPUs, but eventually we will reach the point where faster hardware is going to be required.
DirectX 10 and Windows Vista are both due out in early 2007, and we expect them to usher in a new era of GPU performance. Until then, the GeForce 7900 GS strikes a good balance between price and performance (it would score slightly lower than the 7900 GT), while the GTX continues to be a very fast single GPU solution. However, we are certainly hesitant to recommend spending $500 or more on a DirectX 9 graphics card that will become outdated in just a few more months. If you demand more gaming performance now, consider that a GX2 can be had for almost the same amount of money as Dell charges for the 7900 GTX.
As this is a system review, we will look at the gaming performance that can be achieved using the XPS 410 at lower resolutions and/or detail settings. We tested the five most commonly used resolutions for modern LCD displays at "high" and "medium" settings. We have provided a chart below of the test settings used for "medium quality" and "high quality" in each game. Here are the results from all three tested systems. All of the results are with sound enabled where possible, as this is how most people play games and it reflects testing the performance of the entire package rather than individual components.
| Game Settings | ||
| Medium Quality | High Quality | |
| Battlefield 2 | All settings at high with 0xAA | All settings at high with 4xAA |
| Far Cry | All settings at Very High with 0xAA/8xAF Water at Ultra High |
All settings at Very High with 4xAA/8xAF Water at Ultra High |
| HL2: Episode 1 | All settings on high HDR and color correction enabled 0xAA/8xAF |
All settings on high HDR and color correction enabled 4xAA/8xAF |
| Oblivion | Ultra High Defaults (Max) except: Grass: 0% Interior/Exterior Shadows: 25% Self Shadows: Off Shadows on Grass: Off Tree Canopy Shadows: Off Shadow Filtering: Off Specular Distance: 50% HDR: On (AA: Off) |
Ultra High Defaults (Max) except: Grass: 50% Interior/Exterior Shadows: 50% Self Shadows: Off Shadows on Grass: Off HDR: On (AA: Off) |
| Quake 4 | High defaults with 0xAA SMP enabled |
High defaults with 4xAA SMP enabled |
| Serious Sam 2 | High Detail Defaults High Texture Size HDR Enabled (AA Off) |
Maximum Detail Defaults HDR Enabled (AA Off) |
The ABS Ultimate X9 continues to be the fasted tested system that we have reviewed, especially at higher detail settings. The ABS Ultimate X9 was not tested without antialiasing (except in Oblivion and SS2 due to the use of HDR), as performance is more than acceptable so there's no need to drop detail levels. The Sabre Extreme on the other hand can definitely benefit by running at slightly reduced detail settings, especially at higher resolutions. The chief difference between the Sabre Extreme and the XPS 410 is the graphics card, and the fact that the 7900 GTX is faster than the 7900 GT is not at all surprising. If you're wondering how the XPS 410 with a 7900 GS would perform, the reduction in the number of pipelines will reduce performance slightly relative to the 7900 GT in the PC Club Sabre Extreme, but for the most part the two cards would perform very similarly.
Even the fastest system is running into GPU limitations, so the performance benchmarks here essentially amount to comparing different GPUs. At present, the vast majority of games depend more on graphics performance than CPU performance, so with the exception of flight simulators and certain strategy games, GPU performance really does equate to gaming performance. If you need help deciding whether or not you should upgrade the graphics card in a prebuilt system, you can always refer to our video card reviews. Perhaps future games will be able to place more of a burden on the CPU, but that doesn't appear too likely, as games like Unreal Tournament 2007 and the recently released Prey appear to be more GPU limited than current titles.
The choice of graphics card is going to depend in a large part on your choice of display. If you plan on getting a standard 19 inch display -- widescreen or not -- a 7900 GT or 7900 GS will be plenty powerful for the majority of games. With larger displays, running at the native LCD resolution will require more graphics power, and you can see the advantage that the Dell XPS 410 holds over the Sabre Extreme due to the faster GPU. Disabling some of the graphical complexity can help improve frame rates on lower end GPUs, but eventually we will reach the point where faster hardware is going to be required.
DirectX 10 and Windows Vista are both due out in early 2007, and we expect them to usher in a new era of GPU performance. Until then, the GeForce 7900 GS strikes a good balance between price and performance (it would score slightly lower than the 7900 GT), while the GTX continues to be a very fast single GPU solution. However, we are certainly hesitant to recommend spending $500 or more on a DirectX 9 graphics card that will become outdated in just a few more months. If you demand more gaming performance now, consider that a GX2 can be had for almost the same amount of money as Dell charges for the 7900 GTX.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
50 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
No problem - gotta do my job as author! :)You might want to email Gary on the HDD stuff, as that's basically beyond the scope of system testing. He's handling HDD reviews, so maybe you can pass on your suggestions. I think he's covered HDD performance well, though getting repeatable results with real world tests is going to be somewhat difficult.
JarredWalton - Monday, September 18, 2006 - link
^^ Er..."defragment" not "the fragment"
*EIGHT* thousand words, not "a thousand".
LOL Stupid Dragon NaturallySpeaking! (Stupid editor for not proofing my post before hitting reply.)
biggersteve - Monday, September 18, 2006 - link
An amazing story. XPS has a special support number 800-999-3355. We called this number and the guy in India was pretty efficient and helpful. XP had died with a reboot loop. Could not even safe boot. The guy advised us to use ctl-F11 to completely erase the HD and start over. We'd only had it a week so that was ok, though I suspect we could have done a roll-back, though we couldn't even safe boot. Anyway, all this happened after Microsoft helpfully installed 37 automatic updates. The guy at Dell said half the calls they're getting are because of this. (The other half must be the battery recall...) So he told us to turn off Windows Automatic Updates and never ever ever use it again. I only have one data point, but it looks like Microsoft released an automatic update that whacks all the XPS 410's out there and maybe more. So now we have a standoff where Dell is telling everyone to never use Microsoft automatic updates. Who wins? The virus and spyware writers. And Apple... since Apple controls the hardware and OS alike, they'd never release a cluster-fsck like this one.yyrkoon - Monday, September 18, 2006 - link
well, this should be obvious, but the person who told you to turn off windows automatic updates, and to 'never ever ever turn it on again' is an idiot. Sounds like either you had/ have spyware, or a virus, OR, you installed a hardware update from MS, instead using Dells drivers. I have personally run into 'MS certified drivers' issues with Dell systems in the past (more than once). I dont own a Dell myself, but the majority of our customers, that want a prebuilt in-expencive systems, we recommend to buy from Dell, so we do see our share of them.My recommendation, would be to USE automatic updates, but instead of having it download, and install the updates for you, configure it to notify you only, then you can manually download, and install yourself. When installing the updates, make sure to choose 'custom', and read what each update is all about. 9 times out of 10, if it isnt a critical update, or a security fix, you dont need it.
mino - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
Agreed on the auto-off stuff.However it is possible some MS priority update will not like some HW/drivers even WHQL-ed ones. Compatibility is the word. Windows world is simply too diverse to check all of the possibilities.
mino - Monday, September 18, 2006 - link
Experienced such a story many times... SP2, .NET 2.0, specific "hot-fix" ...Cynic would say "Welcome to the world of Windows!". ;(
JarredWalton - Monday, September 18, 2006 - link
Interesting. I did download and apply all of the currently available patches from Microsoft without any problems. Note that I downloaded these manually rather than letting Windows do the patch automatically during the night. I don't know if that would make a difference, but I don't particularly like having the automatic update process running all the time.mino - Tuesday, September 19, 2006 - link
Most of the times things work, the problem are the situations when they do not.Not once have I had to spend a day installing a few updates a time, just to find out which one was incompatible .. so that some Windows feature would work.
Pastuch - Monday, September 18, 2006 - link
I am actually a Dell employee at their technical support centers in Ottawa Ontario Canada. I can say with all honesty that if you get anyone in north america youll probably get great support. The problem is that Dell phone support has a large number of different queues and our customers tend to get bounced around quite a bit. The company is really trying to improve their customer service which is why they have moved most of their tech support to Canada. If you know someone that isnt tech savy they have the option of buying a "Dell on Call" plan. This is an annual plan or single incident that provides support for pretty much anything. If you are going to get a Dell you can get a 30day trial of DOC (Dell on Call) support with your system. A typical DOC call will have the agent remotely connect to your computer and show you the basics of spyware/adware prevention, updates, system maintenance , etc. I have been an Anand reader for years and I think the type of people likely to buy this PC would benefit from Dell on Call software support. I actually worked in DOC for the last 6 months and was resently promoted to IT operations for the building here in Ottawa.For the record: I've never bought a dell and I'll continue to build all my PCs from scratch and overclock the $hit out of them. Nothing like taking an Opteron 146 (2.0) to 2.8 on AIr!
P.S. In the next year you will be able to get almost any of our machines with AMD or Intel chips. I was one of the thousands of Dell employees that have been pushing for this for a long time. ;)
regpfj - Monday, September 18, 2006 - link
To Jarred - great review, nice job. I liked the discussion of the case features and proprietary motherboard. It's fun to see a legacy-free setup, although serial and IDE have their place too. These unusual things make Dell stuff a bit more interesting to read about.On to my question -
On page 9, the fps vs resolution graphs confused me a tiny bit. For all games except Bf2, performance is a bit lower at 1600 x 1200 than at 1680 x 1050. I think 16x12 is about 9% more pixels than 16.8 x 10.5, right? So is Bf2 just weird, or did the numbers get turned around a bit?