MAX Q

It doesn't affect how the display controller and the way both GPUs interact. On a software-level, you can force a game to run on the iGPU if you want to save power.

 

Basically in an optimus system the iGPU is always being used, even when the default is NVidia. So think of it as picking whether you're using iGPU and dGPU or only iGPU when you do it on a software level (yes, I know it's more complicated than that)

 

Hi again! I've tried ME and BF1 ultra + all settings on max this weekend, no memory use restrictions. No shuttering no lag. 40 fps ME, 60 fps BF1 stably. GPU temperature 55 max! CPU 75 max. ME uses 3 gb vram + 10 gb ram on ultra + all settings max. If I set only ultra - 3gb vram + 6 gb ram.

 

The 1060 MaxQ actually performs pretty well, not much less than a full 1060, which is great. I am just surprised that some vendors are not mentioning MaxQ at all, at least for consumers to know that they are getting the gimped version due to the chassis and thermal design of the chosen machine. In this case, the Legion Y520....yes the 1060 MaxQ performs reasonable well....yet no where on their site I see mentioned that it is a MaxQ at all....just a GTX1060.....so as a consumer, even though the MaxQ performs reasonably well, if I would purchase such a product thinking it would perform like a full 1060, like in plenty of other notebooks, I would be disappointed. I would say...in such a fragmented market, at least a clearer marketing would help everyone. Some want full performance, others want thinner and quieter, fine....but clarity helps, no? Otherwise, a purposeful lack of clarity helps only the sellers and not the consumers.
At least some third party vendors have been trying to remedy such a situation, i.e HIDevolution, XoticPC, GentechPc, among others.....sometimes one of the few sources to clear any confusion over these myriad options.

 

Because it's only beginning of max-q laptops. It's awesome with 1060 max-q but not so great in case with 1070@1080 max-q. It's magic that 200 mhz overclocked 1060 max-q works even better than non-max-q version and something near desktop version. But it has low temperatures.

 

Whoa....that is a pretty big claim you are making, saying that the MaxQ overclocked performs better than the standard GTX1060 in a notebook or even near desktop version. Since I have a GTX1060 notebook, you would have to prove me wrong for me to believe that claim, sorry. It would be great if you could post some graphics scores.

 

Ok, I will post it soon. If you have non-overclocked 1060 notebook how much FPS do you have in Rise of Tomb Raider benchmark (1920*1080*ultra settings)?

 

We mostly try and communicate what MQ is for and how it differs from the regular chip because matching someone with the right machine for their expectations the first time is better than doing it the second time after they returned the first one because they didn't know what they were buying. The cost savings in time/labor for the returns process alone is worth it.

 

I'll run some tests with my 13 R3 and also a desktop with a 1060 when I'm back at the house and have time, although that possibility wont be until tomorrow, but I'm skeptical that the Max-Q version has is going to much better than the base 1060, let alone a Desktop card, with only a 200Mhz boost considering that it's already 11% behind the 1060N.

And if performance did jump that much I'd be curious if it could be sustained or if throttling would kick in since the Max-Q throttles at 75c instead of 82c if I remember correctly?

 

I have 55-max 60c gpu temperature, no throttling. Lenovo y520 1060 max-q has the same body as non-max-q 1050 ti one. 70 FPS in ROTR benchmark 1920*1080*ultra, is it good or not?

 

Please provide proof. Take a photo showing it's you on the ROTR benchmark screen or something. With an afterburner overlay if possible.

 

Shadowplay video proof with MSI AB + RTSS system statistics shown, like this:

 

It's basically the same as a non-overclocked 1060N and still less than the 1060D.

Edit:
Also, you shouldn't base your maximum temperatures off what is displayed in the settings menu since that's very different from a real in-game load.

 

I mainly wanted to see your temperatures, which you claim to be very low with very high clockspeeds, hence the video request. Your end picture didn't have the statistics up either.

 

overclocking the MaxQ by 200MHz, which is a lot, basically makes it close to the standard one, within 5%, which is kind of expected. Just wasn´t sure how well the MaxQ would overclock. I ran that benchmark on a 1060N and got 71.8....overclocking (+170) it reached 78 . GPU ~71C during the benchmark but it goes to 79 when gaming.

 

Ok, I'll post screenshots with afteburner statistics during test. But I didn't saw temperatures of gpu more than 55-60c.

 

I'll post it today!

 

I have 1063 mhz in base with boost to1265 mhz. 200 mhz gpu core overclocking is max for my max-q. It's interesting that I saw 1780-1820 mhz in afteburner statistics during the test.

 

If you take a look on average results of 1060 desktop: https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1060.167603.0.html, you'll see it's equal with my results.

 

If you notice the median firestrike graphics score of 12816, it means that it does perform 13% better on average with no overclock.
I think you meant to point out the average fps in ROTR, which notebookcheck average is 67FPS, but that is not the game´s benchmark. For comparison the 1060 notebook average on the site, is 61 FPS.
Nobody here is really arguing that the 1060 MaxQ in the Y520 overclocked well, and you are getting performance close to the standard notebook 1060. After all, the MQ is basically a downclocked 1060, so overclocking it should bring it up close to the standard one. What I haven´t seen here is how well the MaxQ overclocks, and you showed that the 1060MQ, at least, overclocks well. The 1060MQ though is the same price as the standard 1060, and makes sense only in laptops that can´t handle the full TDP 1060, and since it seems that the cooling on yours is good, perhaps they should of just included the standard 1060, keeping the same retail price of the machine.

 

@drandulet1980, those temps are certainly impressive. My 1060N gets significantly hotter (71C), but then again, I am testing on a Razer Blade, not a very good reference point...hehe. We can see that MQ is getting very good max FPS in the benchmark, but the min is quite low also, so on average the score gets a hit.
Here is firestrike scores for comparison on the same machine.
No OC on the GPU
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21059277?
OV GPU (+175/600)
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/20728716?
This overclocked results basically catches up to the desktop 1060 with no OC.
Note: this benchmark in ROTR was with it overclocked +170/400


Have you tried to OC the memory as well?

 

Ok, you are right! It's interesting that 1060 3gb maq-x has 1280 shading units instead 1060 3gb non-maq-x has only 1152.

 

Well that's pretty good temps. A little CPU limiting in some places, but both temperatures are pretty good, especially the GPU. I gotta hand it to Lenovo there.

Sadly your core clock fell and stayed down in the test, to what most normal 1060s seem to stay at, so TDP limit seems to be an issue, but that's not bad, and with such cool temps whisper mode seems to be unbroken.

Now if only we could test a 1060N in the same cooling situation, and an undervolted 1060N as well. Mmm...

 

If you can overlock the 1060 max q to within 5% of the regular 1060 then is it safe to assume you can do the same with the gtx 1080 max q? I have been looking for overclocking data for the alienware gtx 1080 max q cuz i was interested in purchasing one in the aw 15 r3 but had a hard time finding any. Only things ive found is one guy on the asus forums who has a zephyrus with the 1080 max q and he claimed that his 1080 max q overclocks really well...and was using it to power an external 1440p monitor and says it runs everything in ultra settings. And i know most people say dont waste money on the max q line but i want the most powerful gpu i can get in the 15 inch r3. I dont want the big 17 inch alienware. So that why i was considering the gtx 1080 max q. If anyone has any overclocking data for it id sure appreciate it. Thanks

 

I have no idea how well it overclocks but like d2ultima mentioned, it "might" have tdp limiting issues under sustained load and thus affect the clocks. When more people with the MQ post we will have a better idea on how well it can mantain an overclock over longer periods.

 

You cannot unless you unlock the vBIOS somehow. 1080 Max-Q is limited by TDP

GTX 1080 Max-Q is limited to 110W TDP. Regular GTX 1080 can pull 200W. To get within 5% of regular GTX 1080 you will need like 180W.

However, some notebooks have a 150W GTX 1080. You may get within 10% of those.

FYI the big 17" Alienware is not much bigger than the already massive Alienware 15

If you want a 15" laptop with GTX 1080, get the MSI 16L13. It even has desktop K CPU and weighs 1.3 lbs less, and smaller (x, y), but a little thicker (z) than the AW 15

 

I don't know what you think I did, I just wanted to see a fair comparison (since Mini-Q is pretty much undervolted due to lower speeds, but it seems to keep when OCing).

1080s are 150-220W on mobile, varying by vendor, with most at 180W

I'd say they could probably get closer, the Max-P cards are pretty inefficient in the voltage curve while Mini-Q are not. I think the breakpoint efficiency for a 1080N is somewhere around 125W-130W, give or take, with a good voltage curve.

 

Yes, I have tried to OC memory by 300 mhz but with no result.

 

See, Guru3d.com does not even mention Max-Q with a single word when they promote Gigabyte Release Aero 15 X on their website. Not with a single word!! It's Scam!!

"Gigabyte announces its new AERO 15 black series: AERO 15 X gaming laptop PCs. This 1.9cm thick unit houses GeForce GTX 1070 shoehorned into a frame with near-borderless 5mm bezels."

New Aero 15 Configurations:

• 
  
  • NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 GDDR5 8GB Graphics
  • 7th Generation Intel Core i7-7700HQ Processor
  • Ultra-slim 5mm bezel
  • X-Rite Pantone Certified Display
  • FHD 1920x1080 WVA High-Res Display
  • Thunderbolt 3
  • 2x M.2 PCIe SSD / 2x DDR4 Memory
  • 94Whr Battery with Long Battery Life
  • Dual 4K output with HDMI 2.0 & mini DP 1.3

l Dimension: 356(W) x 250(D) x 19.9 (H) mm / 2.1kg


On Gigabyte's own website you have to scroll far down before Max-Q is even mentioned. It's Scam!!


Yeah, All can see the small thin font almost in the bottom. It's Scam!!


Not even in their own

• Specification

notice... Max-Qrippled aint mentioned with a single letter. It's scam!!


@Mr. Fox @j95 @TBoneSan @tilleroftheearth @Ashtrix @Phoenix @ajc9988 @Falkentyne @Vasudev @Mobius 1 @Cass-Olé @hmscott @Donald@HIDevolution @bloodhawk @aaronne @Prema @syscrusher @Huniken @ole!!! @Arrrrbol @ThatOldGuy @Tanner@XoticPC @cj_miranda23 @ssj92 @D2 Ultima @Stress Tech @Georgel @Mobius 1 +++ All not mentioned here, but not forgotten.

 

Perhaps they failed to castrate it in a brutal enough manner to be in compliance with the NVIDIOT guidelines for Max-Q poopiness.

 

Read the small yellow typo in the bottom pict *With Max-Q Technology.

 

Déjà vu

 

Not sure why they would even want to do that. Way I see it, they can't get good numbers from how MQ does if half the people who buy it think they're buying something else. I say if you're implementing a new tech, no matter how controversial, you should own it.

 

If point of sale doesn't have "with Max-Q technology" or "with Max-Q design" on it, as far as I know that's breaking Nvidia guidelines and they can be reported for it.

 

The problem is I don't think there's anything that says it has to be somewhere prominent, just that it has to be there.

 

NEVERMIND!

 

A tiny little note like this below (*With Max-Q Technology) may be more than enough, to not breaking any of Nvidia's guidelines if they have it.

 

That isn't point of sale. It has to be point of sale.

Nvidia says so. If you're listing the GPU it has to say "with Max-Q design" or "with Max-Q technology". I said to them I would've rathered naming it "MQ" like "1060MQ/1070MQ/1080MQ" instead of "1080 with max-Q technology" but they figured it was good enough, and stated to me that they MUST include it in the name.

If they're not including it point of sale and you have to go find the banner, I think you could make a case against it. I'd seriously look to contact Nvidia about that.

 

I mean, we list it in system specs anyway just to be thorough, but a lot of people just look at the promo stuff.

 

It's supposed to be unmistake-able.

 

Well, if you read the whole page it is, but I prefer it to be more obvious than "*with max-q technology" showing up at the bottom.

 

The Max-Q 1070 or 1080 is called out on the configuration page for the GPU too, right? That should be pretty clear

 

Yeah, in power search they are selectable separately, and then on the config page the GPU will say it's max-q on it.

 

If it's on the config page and you can't buy it pre-built, then that's fine.

 

Gigabyte has updated it´s product page after reading your post, now mentioning the MQ unequivocally. Still BGA though....hehe.
http://www.gigabyte.us/Laptop/Gaming-Laptop

 

I just quit my sales job to pursue my business. Now I'm at liberty to tell you. None of the customers I explained Max-Q to cared and this is exactly what huge corporations are banking on. I didn't even say it was a scam. I just told them "this 1080 doesn't perform like a full 1080 because of design constraints." and they still walk away happy they got a "1080".

Some lady bought an "i7" from me because "i5s" are old.

While it looks like 60 pages of unearthing Max-Q is a lot, it is not even a blip on the radar; average Joe doesn't give a damn and Nvidia loves it.

Then I scroll down to the bottom of this forum and read the ads and just wonder what has happened to the world I live in.

Lol if you ever find me for a job I guess you can rest assured I'm honest as !@#$

 

Talking to our frontline sales reps gave me the impression that it was something that was confusing customers. They did say that a surprising number of people seemed to actually know what it was and wanted it anyway. Take that how you like.