Dell XPS 15 L521X: A Detailed First Look
by Jarred Walton on July 25, 2012 1:10 AM ESTIntroducing Dell’s XPS 15 L521x: the 2012 Update
I’ve had some good experiences with Dell’s XPS line of laptops over the years, but in virtually every case I’ve had a few minor complaints. The earlier models were large, fast, and too expensive for most users. Then Dell dropped the XPS line for a while and went with the Studio XPS—still generally expensive and there were performance elements that came up short (e.g. the Studio XPS 16 had an awesome RGBLED backlit display, but it tended to run a bit toasty and the hardware wasn’t as fast as previous XPS offerings). With the relaunch of the XPS line in late 2010, the original XPS 15 delivered a great display and a well-balanced set of components that was enough to earn our Gold Editor’s Choice award, but the chassis was understandably a bit too bulbous for some tastes. The XPS 15 Sandy Bridge update improved the CPU and GPU options, but six months after the first XPS 15 I was even less enamored with the chassis.
Next up in the list of progression was the XPS 15z, which improved some areas but regressed in others. It had a thinner, sleeker looking chassis, but dropped support for quad-core processors, downgraded the GPU slightly, had some thermal concerns, and perhaps most worrisome was the build quality. I posted an update a few months after the review that summed things up nicely: “I can't stress enough how it feels like Dell cut a few corners and the result is a laptop that doesn't hold up as well as I'd like over the long haul…. When the inevitable Ivy Bridge update of the 15z comes out, you can bet I'm going to pound on it a little more.” And that brings us to the new XPS 15, which has a completely redesigned chassis. Did Dell listen to my complaints about the 15z build quality? You better believe it!
Superficially, the new XPS 15 looks quite similar to the 15z, at least in pictures. Meet one in person, however, and the changes are immediately noticeable. Many suggested that the XPS 15z was trying to clone Apple’s MacBook Pro, but that’s somewhat disingenuous—unless you consider any laptop that aims to be slimmer and silver to be a MBP clone, I suppose. I would however suggest that it did take more than a couple design cues from Cupertino, including a strikingly similar keyboard layout. The newest model keeps the 15z keyboard layout (which is still a step back from the XPS 15 L501x/L502x in my opinion), but ditches the silver palm rest and keyboard area for a matte black surface with a soft-touch coating. The touchpad also gets a clickable MBP-like interface that we’ve seen on just about every Ultrabook along with many newer laptops. Personally, I still prefer touchpads with separate non-integrated buttons, so this is another step back.
What’s not a step back is the chassis itself, which is now the most MacBook Pro-like chassis I’ve encountered in a non-Apple product. It uses machined aluminum for the main chassis and frame, similar to Apple’s unibody chassis, and it’s thicker and far more rigid than any previous Dell XPS laptop. Even the display cover gets a thick aluminum backing, so there’s really no twisting or flexing to speak of. The palm rest on the other hand isn’t machined aluminum but instead uses magnesium with a soft-touch coating. If you thought the XPS 15z copied a lot of Apple’s design, the XPS 15 will only cement that impression, but really I don’t care: if a competing product is better, then stealing a few ideas isn’t going to hurt my review of it. [Insert obligatory Steve Jobs quote about great artists stealing….]
Here’s the spec sheet for the new XPS 15, and I’ve included the specs of the last-gen MacBook Pro 15 as a reference point. Note that unlike the MacBook Pro Retina, Dell continues to include a DVDRW/Blu-ray optical drive with their XPS 15.
Dell XPS 15 Specification Comparison | ||
Laptop | Dell XPS 15 L521x | Apple MacBook Pro 15 (2012) |
Processor |
Intel i7-3612QM (Quad-core 2.10-3.10GHz, 6MB L3, 22nm, 35W) |
Intel i7-3610QM (Quad-core 2.30-3.30GHz, 6MB L3, 22nm, 45W) |
Chipset | HM77 | HM77 |
Memory | 8GB DDR3-1600 | 4GB DDR3-1600 |
Graphics |
Intel HD 4000 (16 EUs, up to 1100MHz) NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M 2GB GDDR5 (Optimus) (384 cores at 624MHz/709MHz Boost, 128-bit GDDR5-4000) |
Intel HD 4000 (16 EUs, up to 1100MHz) NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 512MB GDDR5 (384 cores at 735MHz, 128-bit GDDR5-4000) |
Display |
15.6" WLED Glossy 16:9 1080p (1920x1080) (AU Optronics B156HTF/B156HW03) |
15.4" WLED Glossy 16:10 WXGA+ (1440x900) |
Storage |
750GB 7200RPM HDD (Seagate ST9750420AS) 32GB mSATA caching SSD (Samsung PM830) |
750GB 5400RPM HDD |
Optical Drive | Blu-ray Combo slot-load (Matshita UJ167) | DVDRW slot-load |
Networking |
802.11n dual-band 300Mb WiFi (Intel 6235) Bluetooth 4.0 (Intel 6235) Gigabit Ethernet (Realtek RTL8168/8111) |
802.11n dual-band 450Mb WiFi Bluetooth 4.0 Gigabit Ethernet |
Audio |
Realtek ALC269 Stereo Speakers Headphone/Microphone jacks |
Stereo Speakers with Subwoofer Headphone/Microphone jacks |
Battery/Power |
9-cell, 14.8V, 4400mAh, ~65Wh 90W Max AC Adapter (19.5V, 4.72A) |
77.5Wh 85W MagSafe Power Adapter |
Front Side | N/A | N/A |
Left Side |
3 x USB 3.0 Mini-DisplayPort HDMI Gigabit Ethernet AC Power Connection |
Headphone and Microphone jacks SDXC Card Reader 2 x USB 3.0 1 x Thunderbolt 1 x FireWire 800 Gigabit Ethernet MagSafe AC |
Right Side |
Headphone and Microphone jacks Kensington Lock Memory Card Reader Optical Drive (BD-Combo) |
Kensington Lock Optical Drive (DVDRW 8x SuperDrive) |
Back Side | Exhaust Vent | Exhaust Vent |
Operating System | Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit | OS X Lion (or Mountain Lion) |
Dimensions |
14.6" x 9.8" x 0.91" (WxDxH) (371mm x 249mm x 23.2mm) |
14.35" x 9.82" x 0.95" (WxDxH) (364mm x 249mm x 24.1mm) |
Weight | 5.79 lbs (2.6kg) | 5.6 lbs (2.56kg) |
Extras |
1.3MP HD Webcam 80-key Backlit Keyboard (Spill Resistant) Memory Card Reader (MMC/MS Pro/SD) |
720p FaceTime HD Webcam 78-key Backlit Keyboard Memory Card Reader (SDXC) |
Price | $1700 MSRP, online starting at $1600 (7/17/12) | $1799 MSRP; online starting at $1710 (7/17/12) |
The “on paper” matchup between the Apple and Dell laptops ends up being quite interesting. Not surprisingly, even the base model MacBook Pro 15 is quite a bit more expensive than the mid-tier XPS 15. (There’s a dual-core model XPS 15 that comes with an i5-3210M CPU, GT 630M 1GB GDDR5, 6GB RAM, 500GB HDD + 32GB mSATA SSD, 1080p LCD, and DVDRW for $1300 if you’re interested.) In many key areas, Dell comes out ahead of Apple this round: they have a higher resolution LCD standard, you get 8GB DDR3-1600, they use a 750GB 7200RPM HDD with a 32GB mSATA SSD caching drive (via Intel’s Smart Response Technology), you get a Blu-ray combo drive, and there’s a third USB 3.0 port plus HDMI and DisplayPort outputs.
However, that’s not the whole story: Apple uses a full voltage 45W i7-3610QM processor, which boasts slightly higher clock speeds than the 35W 3612QM, and they also use a GT 650M GPU that comes with higher core clocks. Let’s also not forget the FireWire 800 port (well, I’ve never used FireWire so actually I can forget about it…), or more importantly the Thunderbolt port. Apple also uses a higher capacity battery configuration and provides a 450Mbps capable (dual-band 3x3:3 MIMO) wireless adapter.
Perhaps more interesting than the differences are the areas where they’re the same. Both laptops have machined aluminum chassis, and the dimensions are very close to a tie. Apple isn’t quite as wide, thanks to their 16:10 aspect ratio display, but the Dell XPS 15 is actually slightly thinner. Despite the relatively similar dimensions, Apple still manages to come in 0.2 pounds lighter, but for this size laptop that’s close enough for all practical purposes.
So which laptop is better? In the past, I’ve always felt that Dell’s attempts to compete with Apple came up a bit short. The first XPS 15 (L501x/L502x) was a nice change of pace from previous Dell designs, but it wasn’t really close to Apple in terms of overall design. The XPS 15z got the form factor right in my opinion, but build quality still went to Apple—plus you were limited to dual-core CPUs. I would also say the same thing about HP’s Envy line—they’ve had some nice looking laptops for sure, but I’ve never felt they could match Apple’s overall build quality (though I would rank the previous models slightly ahead of Dell’s older XPS offerings). This time, build quality is absolutely top notch for the new XPS 15, and the only thing that really differentiates it from the MacBook Pro is the black palm rest with soft-touch coating, and the silicone on the bottom of the chassis.
What it really comes down to is one thing: do you prefer running Windows or are you an OS X devotee? Sure, you can always run Windows on a MacBook in a pinch (or you could try to make a Hackintosh), but as we’ve shown in the past there’s a penalty in terms of battery life if you choose that route. If you have never owned a MacBook Pro, there’s a good chance you fall into the camp of users that admire Apple’s designs but couldn’t care less about their OS—which is exactly my feeling. Now, we have a truly viable alternative for the MacBook Pro (though sadly there’s nothing even remotely close to the MacBook Pro Retina, of course). And guess what? You’ll pay more; yes, it’s true: quality has a price.
I’m not sure exactly how much of the added cost comes from the sturdier and slimmer chassis, but if we look at competing Windows laptops (e.g. ASUS N56VZ), you can actually get pretty much the same specs from a laptop for just $1000. There’s no doubt in my mind that the XPS 15 is built better than the N56VZ, but I’ve been using a similar ASUS laptop for a couple months now and the only thing that’s really missing in my mind is solid state storage—which you can easily add on your own. The ASUS should also be slightly faster on the CPU side, though the use of DDR3 memory on the GPU makes it a bit of a wash. Based purely on the overall design and features, I’d go with the Dell XPS 15, but at a 60% price premium the ASUS is clearly the better bargain.
109 Comments
View All Comments
xype - Wednesday, July 25, 2012 - link
Never said it was the pinnacle. But feel free to educate me how above industry average growth is "struggling" or, alternatively, show me some data for the past 5 years that shows Apple’s sales dipping lower than those of their competitors.Unless, for some reason, Apple gets paid with magic dollars that increase their value after Apple receives them, their PC profits do not come about from "struggling".
But hey, since you told me, I’m gonna get a real hard grip on my desk now while you look for data to support your claims. Wheee!
ananduser - Wednesday, July 25, 2012 - link
Above average industry growth ? You should check Lenovo and Asus' numbers for above average growth, double digits. For the most recent quarter Apple stagnated.xype - Thursday, July 26, 2012 - link
Ugh. Yeah, most recent quarter. That totally negates the past, what, 5 years? Apple is doomed! o_Oananduser - Thursday, July 26, 2012 - link
I didn't say that. You seem to extract Apple out of the PC landscape like they were pushing PowerPC hardware. Not anymore. Ever since they switched to Intel their growth was steady but small. So no Apple does not have above average industry growth. Other PC OEMs do.CeriseCogburn - Sunday, July 29, 2012 - link
Hey you got overconfident and he upped the ante and provided the heat that destroyed your smug appletude.The least you should have done is take it like an appleseed, but instead you smarted off and made up a sucky strawman.
tsk tsk, Steve is disappointed. You're fired.
yyrkoon - Wednesday, July 25, 2012 - link
Except, those "PC makers" who are "retards" actually contribute to the technology specifications. For hardware used in your precious Apple systems.x86-64 CPU's /chipsets, nVidia graphics cards, SATA, PCIe, Thunderbolt, , etc, etc.
Matter of a fact. Apple did not even make the first laptop. Epson 1981, Microsoft 1982, Compaq 1988, IBM 1984, Radio Shack 1983 ( In collaboration with Microsoft ), and possibly NEC 1989 all had designs before Apple in 1989. Not to mention others dating back to 1979.
So who is thinking "differently" again ? Do not even get me started on OSX.
So, if not for the technology giants of the world. Apple would not even have existed. Like many others in the industry, they take the ideas from others, and improve on them. Improvement is also a subjective term in this situation.
xype - Thursday, July 26, 2012 - link
Who contributes to technology specifications? Dell? Asus? Acer? HP?Did Intel start targeting the ultra-low-power CPU specs because of all of these guys, who made the first "Ultrabook"?
And how "special" do you have to be to think I was claiming Apple made the first laptop? Duh?
Unibody aluminium enclosures, retina display, the ultrabook form factor, thunderbolt, etc are not popping up in Acers and Asuses and Dells first. I’m NOT claiming Apple is the end all be all (as some specialitos here seem to think), but they DO contribute their share to the ecosystem and claiming they don’t and that they are just "assembling" PC parts is reeking of butthurt, especially seeing how HP and now Dell seem completely unable to make "premium" laptops that don’t looks like MacBook knock-offs.
Which is my original point: it’s annoying that they don’t, because people are not buying only Macs and it would be really nice to have some hardware that actually looked different. They just don’t give enough of a shit.
yyrkoon - Friday, July 27, 2012 - link
The point was. Apple does currently makes a system that is based on PC ( x86 compatible ) parts. They do not come up with technology ideas. They buy decent / good parts and assemble them. Then they write a limited driver base into their operating system to support such hardware.Which in fact is a good idea, but very limited. General purpose computing, that is limited by software support. For software titles, and additional hardware. Then, it is also very proprietary in comparison to other alternatives. You're locked into their hardware, and software.
The reason why OEM PC vendors "dont give a shit" is that such systems cost a lot, and PC system purchasers are cheap. If you were to compare lets say Dell to Apple. I think you would find that Dell probably sells many more systems *This* is an "Apple" to Apples comparison. Now, as for who actually makes more money . . . I have no idea. Nor do I care.
As far as who actually contributes to PC technology. Try using google. I think you would very likely find Intel, AMD, IBM, supermicro, and Epson among them. Then, many others in the PC industry like Asus.
CeriseCogburn - Sunday, July 29, 2012 - link
A black keyboard area is a scourge on us all.Used to be you could see all laptop keyboards in the dark without back lighting, until the pliable masses were all doggy trained into loving black on everything - now they're just invisible past dusk. Pavlov man - the training is actually amazing.
Yeah, so strike one for the crap black keyboard and area, and I include the mindless drooling dogams in that strike as well.
That's also why they all make maccy looking clones- because the idiot masses respond like clockwork.
yyrkoon - Wednesday, July 25, 2012 - link
Jarred, how about setting processor affinity to 2 cores only ? Then retesting a game or two ? The results should be interesting.I'm thinking that game performance should get a boost, and CPU temps should drop some.