Asus N10 Review — the First Netbook For Gaming

Kim Hawley writes "Mobile Computer has a review of another new netbook from Asus. The N10 comes from Asus’ notebook division rather than its Eee PC division, and has an impressive specification. Most notable are the ExpressCard/34 slot and switchable nVidia GeForce 9300M graphics, and the video shows the N10 playing Call of Duty 4 very smoothly. Pre-orders in the US are around $600 – about the same as the Eee PC 1000. The N10 is closer to a traditional laptop than a true netbook, though – is feature-creep killing this new market already?"

Comments

Switchable graphics card?

[compumike]

From TFA:

In addition to the same so-so Intel 945 graphics found on other netbooks, the N10 also has a discrete nVidia GeForce 9300M graphics chipset - enabled with the flick of a switch (and a reboot)

Very strange feature, definitely the first I've heard of this. You would really think that they could be able to power down enough of the 9300M to compare with the 945. But I guess they did the math and it makes sense to include two separate graphics controllers?

Seems like a pain to have to reboot to play games... but I guess I already do that between Debian/Windows. :-/

--
Hey code monkey... learn electronics! Powerful microcontroller kits for the digital generation.

Re:Switchable graphics card?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Intel 945 is an EXTREMELY WEAK integrated GPU. It's only with the x3100 series (hobbled by bad drivers) and more recent integrated chipsets that Intel has managed to produce any sort of reasonably acceptable results. i.e. while Intel may do OK at designing CPUs they, apparently, can't design a GPU to save their lives which would make sense that their pushing for more graphics processing back on CPUs, especially since their hauking >=2 core CPUs in which the beyond one core the rest usually have little to do given the current lack of multithreaded apps.

Why would anyone bother switching? If I had one I'd just leave it permanently set to the 9300M unless I REALLY needed that couple of extra minutes of battery runtime. It's more of a nicety than a necessity that Asus allowed users to switch GPUs, and it's likely that the reasoning was: well, we're stuck using this Intel chipset which comes with this integrated Intel 945 GPU, so we may as well spend a few cents and let users switch. Probably if they had it their way the 945 would've been removed from the chipset.

wow

[atari2600]

I personally feel laptops aren't good enough for serious gaming. Even though you connect a mouse, the keyboard still cannot match up to a regular size keyboard. There is the issue of heat and needing to be hooked up for max CPU freq and display brightness. Don't get me wrong - I love gaming laptops - they make great machines for development and running VMware images but in general I laugh at the idea of gaming laptops (upgrades? *smirk*).

Gaming netbook though in my opinion borders on ridiculous. The N10 has a 10.2" screen. Checking the AH in wow sure. Using counterstrike as an expensive chat client while you idle in the start zone? Sure. Playing Solitaire and Bejewelled? Sure. Serious gaming? F that.

Re:wow

[ducomputergeek]

I have a friend who has a 17" gaming laptop and on occastion we'll hook up at the coffee shop and play around of Ghost Recon 1. (Yes the original version). I'm usually playing on a 12.1" PowerBook and there is a hell of a difference. He can snipe me down because he can easily see the movement on his screen. There are places where he can be running and I can barely make him out.

Same if I play Halo on the Mac, but not quite as bad.

I know, 2001 called and want their games back, but my point is that 17" vs. 12" screens do make a difference..

Re:wow

[BorgAssimilator]

True, I normally prefer a desktop for gaming, but some people enjoy using a laptop for everything. Especially with companies starting to cater to this market, coming up with technologies like this.

Plus, laptops are awesome for LAN parties (less power consumption, smaller size, etc)

Re:wow

[Hatta]

For someone with the username 'atari2600', you have an odd idea of what constitutes serious gaming. Any netbook should have enough power to run any atari 2600, 8 bit, 16 bit, and many DOS games. There are a lot of hardcore SHMUPs, RPGs, and platform games you can play on a netbook. Why does this not constitute "serious" gaming?

IMO any serious gamer cares less about graphics than gameplay. Have you played Elite? Ultima IV? Sam & Max? X-Com UFO Defense? These are all serious games that you can play on a netbook.

Re:wow

[strabes]

but some people enjoy using a laptop for everything

Most college students who travel great distances to their schools, like myself, have laptops. I'm not a gamer (though I do enjoy the occasional game of Halo), but bringing a desktop & monitor cross country seems kind of inconvenient, regardless of how much of a gamer one is.

Re:wow

[harry666t]

> I know, 2001 called and want their games back

I really love the games from before ~5 years ago. Top-down GTAs, Jedi Knight series, Q3... Say, you can be a serious gamer even with a GeForce 2. You just play games that were released before GeForce 2 was on the market. It isn't like a game that was absolutely brilliant (Diablo 2 for example) suddenly became something less just because a few new ones were released in the meantime.

The most important factor in games is the fun factor, and there are thousands of games that do not need tomorrow's high-end hardware to be fun.

Re:wow

[Anonymous Coward]

My point precisely. I have got a 250 HDD for the laptop, and now I keep installed a lot of games that I liked (GTA3, Thief, Deus Ex, Jedi Knight, Psychonauts, etc). The laptop (X1600 card) runs them like a breeze, and it's nice to always have them there, be able to fire them up and have a walk around.

Crysis probably won't run. Who cares.

stop it

[PopeRatzo]

is feature-creep killing this new market already?

Do we care more about having a lot of different options for the user, or about protecting this "new market"?

I really don't think that every new useful product has to become part of some special "market" just because reviewers and marketing people feel the need to categorize and simplify absolutely everything.

I've seen too many good, innovative products die on the vine because the PR machine didn't quite know what to do with it. And have no doubt, sites like Mobile Computing, Engadget, Gizmodo, are nothing but cogs in the giant Moloch of the marketing departments and soap peddlers who have created this consumerist dystopia.

If it's a good product, it doesn't have to be destroyed just because it doesn't fit neatly on a tab of some big box store's website.

No /. Article is Complete without a Leading ?

[Lord Byron II]

A surprising number of stories that make it to the front page have a rhetorical, leading question. In this case: "is feature-creep killing this new market already?" The question itself begs the question - is this new netbook a victim of "feature creep"? I know that anyone else who cares about logic in their arguments is bothered as much as I am. I wish that the editors would filter this sort of nonsense out before they post.

Re:Gaming Laptop

[neokushan]

Gaming laptop != gaming NETbook.