- Page 1Rock Pegasus 650
- Page 2 Rock Pegasus 650
- Page 3 Rock Pegasus 650
- Page 4 Rock Pegasus 650
- Page 5 Performance Results
The different graphics chipsets definitely made a difference to battery life. Running Mobile Mark 2005, the Pegasus 650 turned in a battery score of one hour 54 minutes running the GeForce 6600 graphics, while switching to the Intel integrated graphics that time rose to two hours 48 minutes – that’s a pretty significant difference. Likewise, when running the DVD playback test under Mobile Mark, the GeForce graphics setup managed one hour 45 minutes, compared with two hours 39 minutes on the integrated solution – that’s the difference between watching a whole movie or not! Of course since the Pegasus 650 has an instant-on feature for DVD playback without booting into Windows, both those times can probably be improved upon.
So, the switchable graphics solution definitely makes a difference to battery life, but even with the Intel graphics selected, the battery life is far from the best I’ve seen. Compare these scores to the Acer Ferrari 4000 notebook that I looked at a while back, and you’ll see that battery life could be better. To be fair to the Pegasus 650 it is a faster machine in both SYSmark and PCMark, so it’s probably drawing a bit more power than the Acer was.
The problem with the switchable graphics, is that even with the GeForce 6600 selected, the Pegasus 650 isn’t exactly a mobile gaming powerhouse. The 3DMark03 score of 5505 and 3DMark05 score of 1303, both at 1,024 x 768 show that you’re not going to be pushing high frame rates in the latest games. And if you want to play at the screen’s native resolution, things will slow down even more. The Acer Ferrari did better in 3DMark03, but it was running an ATI Mobility Radeon X700 chipset. But if you’d rather have the ATI solution that’s no problem, not only does Rock offer that option, but it will save you £50 as well.