Verdict: CTX marks the spot WITH A DUAL-CORE CPU AND MOBILE X1800XT
Rock has chiselled itself a niche somewhere between premium bespoke PC manufacturers such as Voodoo and everyday box shifters. It seems like a successful course to plot, considering that Rock's Xtreme CT has been our Elite-listed laptop for a few months now. However, the CT is already under threat - from within Rock's own ranks. Rock's latest offering, reassuringly adding an X to its name, employs a similar formula, but adds a dual-core processor and the latest ATi Mobility Radeon X1800XT graphics to the hardware spec.
The CTX uses essentially the same chassis as its X-less sibling. It's big for a laptop and weighs in at over 4kg. However, it's smaller than some desktop replacements we've seen, and its attractive wedge shape disguises, to some extent, its hulking size. We looked at the top-of-the-range model based around the 2.16GHz Intel Core Duo T2600 CPU, but T2500 and T2400 versions are also available if you want to bring down the price by a £100 or so.
The chassis accommodates a sizable 17in widescreen TFT, which is available with resolutions of 1,920 x 1,200, or 1,680 x 1,050, with a £58.75 price difference between the two. These screens incorporate a technology that Rock calls X-Glass, although it's basically the same as Sony's X-black. Instead of using a diffuser to prevent glare, an anti-reflective treatment is applied to the TFT's surface to reduce diffusion and distortion, and provide clearer, higher contrast with a more vibrantly coloured picture. Our CTX came with the higher-resolution option, and the panel was stunning.
The Mobile version of the Radeon X1800XT doesn't give up a lot in terms of power to the short-lived desktop version. The mobile GPU has the full 16 pixel shader pipelines and runs at 550MHz, with 650MHz (1.3GHz effective) memory - just 75MHz and 200MHz respectively behind the desktop X1800XT. The Mobile GPU has only 256MB of memory though. Although Rock allows you to specify either ATi graphics or Nvidia's GeForce Go 7900 GTX for the same money, the ATi option includes a free second battery. This slips into the bay that the optical drive occupies, so you'll need to find no-CD patches for your games. It doubles battery endurance to give you around three hours of light usage, or around two hours when gaming.
Other than the dual-core processor and cutting-edge ATi graphics, though, the CTX is very similar to the CT. The 1GB of RAM is of the slightly faster PC2-5400 variety and the hard disk capacity has risen too, from 60GB to a 100GB 7,200rpm Hitachi S-ATA unit. In addition, the optical drive has been upgraded to a faster Sony DW-Q58A DVD-RW. The WLAN has 802.11b/g as well as 802.11a, should you find anywhere that uses it. However, the CT had some overclocking options in its BIOS that the CTX we reviewed lacked. There's also an optional internal DVB-T tuner, but Windows XP MCE isn't available pre-installed.
PERFORMANCE
With a top-of-the-range Core Duo at the helm, and the latest mobile graphics from ATi, we expected the Xtreme CTX to ace our benchmarks in every category. We've already been impressed by Core Duo, as in the case of Evesham's Voyager C550, but the Rock really showcases what this processor can do. In our 2D Media Benchmarks 2005, the overall score was 16 per cent faster than that of our reference 2.8GHz Pentium D 820 - quite a feat for a laptop, and better than Alienware's FX-57-equipped Aurora m7700.
The best gains were seen in the multiple apps test, which shows the benefits of Core Duo's SmartCache system, whereby the Level 2 cache is shared between both cores. The CTX was faster than our reference system in image manipulation, although it was no match for the Alienware. Perhaps the most significant result, though, was video encoding. This is usually one of the benchmarks still owned by the high clock frequency Pentium D, but even here, the Rock, benefiting from its dual cores, was 5 per cent faster than the reference machine. In other words, there will be no everyday app in which this laptop will feel slower than all but the most high-end desktop demon.
As this is our first look at ATi's Mobility Radeon X1800XT, we performed more than our average quota of game tests. In Need for Speed: Most Wanted, the Rock couldn't quite achieve a playable frame rate at the TFT's native 1,920 x 1,200 resolution with low anti-aliasing and low anisotropic filtering enabled. However, stepping down to 1,400 x 1,050 improved things considerably, and kept the frame rate above 29fps. We suspect that the best playable resolution would be 1,680 x 1,050 - but the 1,920 x 1,200 panel can't step down to that setting.
Switching to Quake 4 offered a more positive story, with playable frame rates up to the maximum 1,920 x 1,200 with 2x AA and 8x AF. Unfortunately, F.E.A.R. was a little too jerky at this resolution with 2x AA and 2x AF. Once again, though, dropping down to 1,400 x 1,050 lifted performance well above the threshold of acceptability and raised the minimum to 30fps. This again suggests that 1,680 x 1,050 would be the X1800XT's optimum resolution.
However, one game that was beyond the Rock's graphics at any resolution was Lara Croft Tomb Raider: Legend. It was smoother than a liberally sandpapered baby's bottom at 1,920 x 1,200 without Next Generation Content (NGC), achieving an average of 74fps in our FRAPS test run and not dipping below 43fps. But as soon as we turned on NGC, the frame rate dropped to the low teens at any resolution we cared to try. It looked gorgeous, but made Lara as hard to control as a drunken pit bull terrier. And without NGC, you lose a major part of what has made Tomb Raider: Legend such a hit.
Overall, these gaming results imply that the lower resolution of the two screen options might have been a better choice. Having a 1,920 x 1,200 resolution makes for plenty of posing value, and it's an undeniably gorgeous display that would be ideal for running apps that require plenty of 'desktop real estate', such as video editing. But if your main focus is gaming then it's a bit of a waste because the 3D graphics acceleration can't quite keep up. As our testing shows, for many of the latest titles, the cheaper 1,680 x 1,050 panel would be a better match, allowing you to play at full screen resolution with high quality settings, and saving you £58.75 over the model we reviewed.
CONCLUSION
The CTX can handle virtually all of the latest games at high resolutions with decent quality settings. This is incredible, considering what a joke laptop gaming was a few years ago, and how relatively svelte the CTX is compared with slabs such as Alienware's Aurora m7700.
It's also very capable when it comes to everyday 2D applications, so it's a great general-purpose desktop replacement. Despite the high price, with its top-of-the-range components, the CTX should last you for a few years. We suggest choosing the cheaper screen, which better matches the performance of the GPU, and opting for 2GB of RAM from the outset (£146.88 extra), since many games find this beneficial. Otherwise, Rock's Xtreme CTX is one of the best gaming laptops around - until the CTXX comes along.
