Dell Alienware Area-51m R2 lands with up to Core i9 Comet Lake-S processors, an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER, 64 GB of RAM, 4 TB of storage, a 300 Hz IPS display and a surprise addition from AMD

[Redaktion]

The Alienware Area-51m R2 is here, and it is not an all Intel and NVIDIA affair. Sporting up to a Core i9-10900K processor, Dell has equipped the Area-51m R2 with an array of NVIDIA GPUs and even an AMD Radeon RX 5700M. Complemented with up to 64 GB of RAM, 4 TB of SSD storage an a 300 Hz IPS display, the Area-51m R2 will be available from June 9 starting at US$3,049.99.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-Alienware-Area-51m-R2-lands-with-up-to-Core-i9-Comet-Lake-S-processors-an-NVIDIA-GeForce-RTX-2080-SUPER-64-GB-of-RAM-4-TB-of-storage-a-300-Hz-IPS-display-and-a-surprise-addition-from-AMD.464413.0.html

[Spunjji]

Another quality effort hampered by going with an absurdly inappropriate CPU for the job. 🤦‍♂️

Today's Dell news has been such a near miss!

[Calipha]

This is a gaming-focused device, and Intel is superior in gaming performance, even the 6700K beats the 3700X in most gaming benchmarks.

[Spunjji]

This is a gaming-focused device, and Intel is superior in gaming performance, even the 6700K beats the 3700X in most gaming benchmarks.

1) You know the 3700X is a 65W CPU, right? The 3900X or even 3950X would be a better point of comparison with these "125W" Intel CPUs. They'll never be able to sustain anything their boost clocks, either - the Core i9-10900K hits 90 degrees C under a 240mm radiator.

2) It's a dead giveaway that you didn't qualify "superior gaming performance". Intel tend to get higher maximum frame-rates in CPU-limited situations, and that might make a noticeable difference if you're going to go for the 300Hz display with a 2080 Super and play e-sports games. In the majority of situations and configurations you'll be GPU limited, at which point the differences disappear.

3) Gaming-focused doesn't have to mean "only good at gaming". For a device costing this much, it'd be nice if it were the best at most things. It'd also be nice if it could come anywhere close to its purported maximum performance, and nicer still if it could do so without generating a ridiculous amount of heat. This device will do none of those things.

It's annoying that it requires so many more words to dismiss nonsense than it does to post it in the first place.

[_MT_]

1) You know the 3700X is a 65W CPU, right? The 3900X or even 3950X would be a better point of comparison with these "125W" Intel CPUs. They'll never be able to sustain anything their boost clocks, either - the Core i9-10900K hits 90 degrees C under a 240mm radiator.
...
3) Gaming-focused doesn't have to mean "only good at gaming". For a device costing this much, it'd be nice if it were the best at most things. It'd also be nice if it could come anywhere close to its purported maximum performance, and nicer still if it could do so without generating a ridiculous amount of heat. This device will do none of those things.

He was comparing it with 6700, not 10900K.

The previous generation could be had for similar money as m17 R2 while being better equipped. It's true that it's thermally limited and a desktop with the same components is going to offer better performance. But it's a real beast. I don't think I have seen a laptop with mobile components that could stand up to it. It would be interesting to see what a mobile 9980HK could do in this chassis. It probably wouldn't be able to match a 9900K. Maybe the newer 10980HK could. But I don't think it would've been a big loss. Now, in this generation, there is going to be no 10 core mobile chip. I guess that could appeal to some. We'll see how is this generation going to fare.

Not generating a ridiculous amount of heat is a worthy goal for a sane machine. However, this is not a sane machine. You can always cram in more. Yes, I would have liked to see it with 3900X or 3950X. But I think the GPU is even bigger reason not to buy. I don't know when mobile chips are coming, but desktop chips are around the corner. And this uses desktop chips. I guess they might wait until CES 2021. That should be a worthy update.

[AWisaJoke]

This was the big announcement? What a joke

[DougJudy]

I really don't care what components this uses, be it intel, amd, nvidia, whatever. This is not a normal laptop or a good options for any reasonable use case, it's simply a powerfull machine that some people will choose to buy regardless of the value it offers (which imo is bad)

Would a ryzen cpu be better (like the xmg apex 15)? Sure. Does it matter? Nope, you might as well buy a small form factor desktop and carry a portable display with you at this point.

[_MT_]

I really don't care what components this uses, be it intel, amd, nvidia, whatever. This is not a normal laptop or a good options for any reasonable use case, it's simply a powerfull machine that some people will choose to buy regardless of the value it offers (which imo is bad)

Would a ryzen cpu be better (like the xmg apex 15)? Sure. Does it matter? Nope, you might as well buy a small form factor desktop and carry a portable display with you at this point.

That's what I thought about the first generation. Since it was their crazy flagship. Until I actually looked at the configurator. It turned out it offered better value than m17 R2 and in a reasonable configuration (still very powerful by laptop standards) wasn't much more expensive than XPS 15 as I would configure it (again, reasonable; no 8 core and such). I believe RAM (especially the 2933 MHz upgrade) and storage were relatively expensive, but you can upgrade them yourself and I just asked for a discount. Originally, I was looking at the m17. But to pay more and get less performance, when I was looking at a workstation alternative, for the sake of thinness and weight didn't make sense. Also, I was afraid the m17 is going to have poor cooling (it turned out better than I expected). One unfortunate thing is that you need at least RTX 2070 in the 51m to get the full cooling system.

I don't agree. The reality is that this thing isn't that much bigger than a 15" business laptop from about 15 years ago (the beginning of Core architecture). And while it's heavier, back then a 15" was around 3 kg without special accessories like second internal battery. I carried a machine like that every business day for years. You really can't compare the convenience of packing up a laptop and packing a desktop system, even if the computer itself is small. I have a Corsair One. And I have a purpose built Pelican case for it (plus display and so on). So I know first hand the difference. To me, this thing is like every other laptop. As far as packing and traveling. Except it has two power supplies (it can run on one with reduced performance) and battery life is negligible (I treat the battery as a built in UPS, like on mobile workstations). Well, you're not going to use it in flight. Even in a car with small luggage space, I don't really notice the difference. That can't be said about the Pelican case. Sure, if everything else was in place and I needed just the computer, the One would make a lot of sense. It's a little marvel. I could just throw it in a holdall with my clothes and be done with it.

However, bear in mind that there are not that many small computers that can match this thing for performance. And I wouldn't expect to save much money (my One was more expensive, but also better equipped).