Rock Xtreme 620 - 15.4in Gaming Notebook Comments
| Author | Ardjuna Seghers |
| Published | 20th Mar 2009 |
| Manufacturer | Rock |
| Price | £1,532.17 (Exc VAT) |
| as reviewed | £1,762.00 (Inc VAT) |
| Latest Price | Click here |
| Design | ![]() |
| Features | ![]() |
| Performance | ![]() |
| Value | ![]() |
| Overall | ![]() |
Comments for Rock Xtreme 620 - 15.4in Gaming Notebook
Petrov said on 20th March 2009
Xelon said on 20th March 2009
Interesting review, but why did Rock choose the now defunct 15.4 16:10 panel? Surely 15.6 or 16" 16:9 panel would be the choice of 2009.
BinnsY said on 20th March 2009
I think the main reason would be that this laptop has actually been out for sometime and if I remember correctly was announced and designed just before the big switch to the 16:9 format.
As this is a gaming notebook 16:10 is also still the main format for gamers.
smc8788 said on 20th March 2009
It would have been nice when spending this amount of money on a laptop to have the latest notebook GPUs that are available (GTX 260M/280M or Mobility Radeon HD 4870/4870 X2) rather than something that is now quite old.
Andy said on 20th March 2009
It's fair to assume that it will be updated with the latest GPUs in the near future.
TheLostSwede said on 20th March 2009
@Xelon, wow, you've really bought the 16:9 marketing spiel hook, line and sinker...
Now repeat after me, 16:9 bad, 16:10 good.
16:10 screens generally (with some minor exceptions) offer higher resolutions than 16:9 panels and in this case you're getting 1,680x1,050 resolution rather than 1,366x768 which you'd get on a 15.6 or 16-inch 16:9 panel.
It's all just marketing hype, on a computer there is NO advantage of going 16:9 over 16:10, apart from maybe the short time you're using it for watching movies on and then you only get a slightly larger black border.
Ohmz said on 20th March 2009
I agree with TheLostSwede, I'm scared of losing all that vertical space! Even now, desktop monitors are going from 1200 pixels to 1080 pixels vertically. Kinda defeats the whole purpose of a big monitor doesn't it?
Matthew Bunton said on 20th March 2009
Yep LostSwede is right I have a Sony Viao 16:9 and most older games have to be played with large black borders down each side which is a real pity. Although I think most new games support the 16:9 ratio if like me you still enjoy playing some of the older games you're better of with a 16:10 screen.
Ardjuna said on 25th March 2009
@Petrov: The overall score is a combination of price, performance, looks and value - and it's the Rock we're reviewing, not the Clevo, which is indeed a good chassis and used by many other manufacturers, some of whom offer better value depending on your needs.
@smc8788: As you might know, at least in the case of nVidia's latest chipsets they're nothing more than revised and overclocked versions of older cards, so you're not getting 'old' tech as such and performance will probably be quite similar.
@TheLostSwede: Amen.
Add Your Comment
Add your comment
You must be logged in to comment. Login or register here.




Given your only complaint is the slight noise while gaming, why do you only award it an 8/10 and no TR Recommendation? Is there really a better gaming solution in a 15.4" form factor than this Clevo chassis and spec?
2 points strikes me as a lot to take off for one minor niggle? I have the equivalent model from Kobalt Computers, and it by miles the best gaming laptop I've ever owned (and I've owned more than 4).