ASUS S1 Mobile Pentium III-M 1.2GHz

Performance - BatteryMark 2001

One thing we should point out about BatteryMark 2001 before we get to the results is that the tests have to be run in Windows 2000. As a result of this, the mobile Intel processors with a -M designation do not use the enhanced SpeedStep technology in this test. Because the enhanced SpeedStep features are not supported under Windows 2000, testing a -M notebook in BatteryMark 2001 does not reflect the battery life of a -M system in Microsoft Windows XP (where enhanced SpeedStep is supported). Instead, the BatteryMark 2001 scores reflect the battery life of a -M system running under their full clock speed with no frequency modulation. In the case of the ASUS S1, this means that the BatteryMark 2001 score we got represents battery life of the system while it is running at 1.2GHz regardless of what the system is doing. In a standard Windows 2000 install, the ASUS S1 will never hit its 800MHz underclocked speed. The only way to get a -M chip to its lower speed in Windows 2000 is to install Intel's SpeedStep drivers for Windows 2000 which allow a -M notebook to run at, and only at, the lower clock speed when on battery power. With this in mind, let's take a look at the results.

Battery Life (Minutes) Toshiba 1905-S277 1.6GHz Compaq Presario 2800T 1.7GHz PaceBlade PaceBook 600MHz WinBook N4 1.8GHz ASUS T9400 900MHz ASUS S1 1.2GHz 239 178 167 155 153 120 | 0 | 48 | 96 | 143 | 191 | 239 | 287

BatteryMark 2001 shows the ASUS S1 1.2GHz performing the poorest of all the notebooks tested. As a result of its small battery and fast processor, the ASUS S1 only lasted for two hours while on battery power. There is no question that battery life will improve with enhanced SpeedStep technology is enabled under a Windows XP build, but then again the battery life of all the other -M notebooks (the Compaq and the WinBook) will also increase. The battery life in Windows XP with BatteryMark 2001 will likely fall between the S1's 1.2GHz run time of two hours and its 800MHz run time of two hours and forty minutes. As we have mentioned before, getting a thin-and-light notebook often requires compromises and in this case battery life is compromised to keep the form factor small and weight down.

Performance - Startup Times

Boot Time (Seconds) Compaq Presario 2800T 1.7GHz ASUS T9400 900MHz ASUS S1 1.2GHz Toshiba 1905-S277 1.6GHz WinBook N4 1.8GHz PaceBlade PaceBook 600MHz 31 34 36 36 37 84 | 0 | 17 | 34 | 50 | 67 | 84 | 101

The ASUS S1 was fairly fast to go from a black screen to the Windows XP desktop. It took the system 36 seconds to perform this task, giving it the same boot time as the Toshiba 1905-S277. This left the S1 slightly faster than the WinBook N4 (by only one second) and significantly faster to startup than the PaceBlade PaceBook.

Out of Standby Time (Seconds) WinBook N4 1.8GHz Toshiba 1905-S277 1.6GHz Compaq Presario 2800T 1.7GHz ASUS S1 1.2GHz PaceBlade PaceBook 600MHz 6 6 7 10 11 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 13

The ASUS S1 took a good amount of time to come out of standby mode. The system was only faster than the PaceBook PaceBlade in this test and performed 3.5 seconds slower than the average of the other notebooks.

Out of Hibernate Time (Seconds) WinBook N4 1.8GHz Toshiba 1905-S277 1.6GHz Compaq Presario 2800T 1.7GHz ASUS S1 1.2GHz PaceBlade PaceBook 600MHz 16 17 19 23 41 | 0 | 8 | 16 | 25 | 33 | 41 | 49

Like the standby time we observed , the time required for the S1 to come out of hibernation was slower than the other mobile solutions we have seen. Again, the exception is the PaceBlade PaceBook "3-in-1" PC.