Brace yourself: NEW MAXWELL CARDS INCOMING!

Any legit leaks yet?

 

Yeah, it may be based on GTX 870 we saw earlier since the TDP sounds very promising. Should be atleast 20%+ faster than 880M I think.
2 of these babies in a notebooks should give quite a bit performance for games. Not to mention it will be interesting to play with overclocking wise.

Nothing. Nada. Zero.
23 days left until the big event. Sigh, painful to wait

 

Yeah, i actually really like the iMacs a lot to be honest. But the weak GPUs are putting me off getting one. Plus I'd rather one with windows.

Yeah, but i really want something with a higher than 1080p panel... 1080p is just too small (workspace wise) for my type of work these days.

 

Will the 970M be a MXM 3.0B card do you think?

Reason I ask could it work in a Dell M6700 maybe with a bios update?

 

Considering that my 770Ms is 3.0B, its safe to assume 970M will too.
Isnt the M6700 a workstation notebook btw? Wouldnt it be better to wait for quadro cards based on GM204? Or do you mainly game?

 

Yeah mainly game I do just really love the M6700 workstation with the slice attached amazing machine

 

Real quick off-topic post, but related to my previous ones a few pages back - about the infected ads on this site causing false & malicious Java Update popups. It looks like this problem has now been cleared up. I'm not getting those popups anymore, but I do find it annoying that the admins said that the ads weren't infected & that we should clear our browser cache to resolve the issue. I had cleared my browser cache & I was still getting the problems. There was a thread on this problem here:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sit...-resolved-psa-malware-infested-ads-nbr-2.html

I'm actually annoyed that they closed the thread stating it was resolved & that no malicious ads were found - pinning the problem on people's browser caches! It clearly wasn't the problem, but the popups are no longer happening so something's changed. I just don't like their attitude of closing the thread & inferring that the site was never infected & that it was/is a problem with peoples machines(browser caches). Yes, I'm a bit annoyed about that, because it clearly wasn't the case, but at least the popups aren't happening for now.

 

Agree. Seems a bit rash for locking the thread so early. But I'll just create another one if new problems arise.

 

Weird that you mention that. I use ghostery and usually it blocks 8-11 trackers on NBR. Now it's blocking nothing, as in nothing is showing up. They must have changed something for now.

edit: I take that back, now it's blocking 5... nevermind me.

 

That is a strange bit of correlation you've made there. The 970M is could to be 3.0b, but I can't say the 770M means anything to the end result.

 

Malware infected ads are back again today!! I've started a new thread here:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sit...ed-ads-these-forums-take-two.html#post9753349

Note, you can use AdBlock in Google Chrome (one example) to be able to use this site without the malicious popups.

 

No wonder I never noticed the malware... I've been using that for a while!

 

Seriously, just use Chrome and set plug-ins to only run when clicked on

http://lifehacker.com/5685352/set-chrome-to-run-flash-and-other-plug-ins-on-demand-only

Better than ad block because it stops all plug-ins.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 on Tapatalk

 

MXM 3.0A = Max 55W
MXM 3.0B = Max 100W

GTX 860M = 45W
GTX 970M = ?

670MX was type B, 770M was type B, 765M was type B etc etc.
I think its safe to assume GTX 970M will be above 55W and will be type B just like the rest of the upper midrange

 

I'm surprised there haven't been any leaks.

 

I don't think there is a power limit on the 3.0b spec though. The 780m and 880m clearly draw 25-30% more power than the 680m and they're both classified as "100W" cards. Either the 680m is really 75-80W or the 780m and 880m are 125W-130W.

 

780M = 110W
880M = 125W

Its pushing specs just like AMD did with the PCI express specification and the R9 295X2.

 

According to Meaker MXM isn't as rigorously defined as PCIe, so it technically doesn't specify an absolute power draw upper limit.

If you read page 5 of the MXM technical brief, all it says is that type A is "cost optimized" for 35W, and type B is "cost optimized" for 75W. (just google "MXM specification" and it should be the 3rd result)

 

If what we're reading about the GTX 880 being a 230W card is true, then the mobile GPU's must be lower as well. Maybe dual PSU mods won't be necessary anymore?

 

They will be if you overclock. Also I don't think they meant it won't be mxm, more that with mobile cards nothing is guaranteed. They could make a wider card for a 384 bit memory bus, you never know.

 

And that would be about dang time.

 

Although Maxwell are very efficient with their bandwidth, I think I remember it being concluded that you can take Maxwell's bandwidth figure & double it when comparing against Kepler bandwidths - something to do with the larger L2 cache on Maxwell chips (as seen on 750ti). So, praps a 384bit memory bus is not as necessary as we think. I would guesstimate that 256bit would be perfectly adequate for Maxwell flagship on 28nm.

 

Yeah there was a guy here earlier that worked with MXM that said that as well. MXM have no 100W power limit (see further down). According to wikipedia Type B have a 100W limit as well it can be max 256bit. There are ways around that as well, so I think it is guidelines on how it is generally done.


I do think GTX 680M was below 100W. Maybe it have an upper limit within vbios that allow it to go up to 100W but I think it consume less than that in 99.9% of the cases. It ran way cooler than GTX 580M which also had a 100W limit.

It is 100% not a 230W GPU. GTX 870 is said to be around 130-150W somewhere. There is no way GTX 880 is even close to 230W. Not only would that be an embarrassment because 780 Ti is 250W, but there would be miles apart between GTX 870 and GTX 880.

Technically MXM 3.0 can supply up to 200W I think. If its "cost effective" or thermally possible, thats an entirely different discussion though. But I think the table below is the reason why it is possible to run GTX 780M with very high clocks as long as the vbios doesnt get in the way

 

Still excited for a new flagship. As AMD is traditionally cheaper, may go with the R9 M295X if it's close enough performance wise...

All this talk has shown me is that maybe it's time for a replacement for MXM. A true PCI-E style standard would be so nice...

 

I was just referring to several articles I read. Sorry for being wrong, but my source was also wrong, which lead me to be wrong, assuming you're right.

But back to my original question: If the GTX 880 has such a low TDP, then mobile must also have a much lower TDP, which would mean that we may not need dual PSU mods anymore for overclocking combined with Broadwell's "claimed" 30% less power consumption as well? Haswell was the main reason for needing such modifications, but the GPU's didn't help much either.

 

Wow 200W for MXM3.0B? Didn't know that.. I can't imagine how powerful such a card would be... Also the heating ^^

 

Yeah, I don't think it's the power draw that's the problem, it's the cooling.

 

Yeah good luck cooling a 200W card with the current designs. I mean look at the cooler on the 230W desktop 770, then look at what we have in laptops lol

 

I'm sure Clevo would accept the challenge, by making a 5 inch thick monstrosity with quad 12V cooling fans.

 

Yeah Clevo isn't afraid to engineer the maximum power sucking components in a "mobile" package.

 

donno why they afraid to go 18" or even dual screen. i would have bought it in an instant.

im going "mobile" replacement with pcie desktop GPU and haswell/broadwell E
http://www.ssiportable.com/products/portable-solutions/spark-s9t/

with built in speakers and hopefully battery too.

 

Honestly at 5" you're probably better off with a mini-ITX build anyway.

 

They've already got that crazy beast of a machine with the LGA2011 socket for the six core desktop extreme i7-4960X CPU!

 

That's a desktop PC not a laptop...

 

Yeah that's an all-in-one desktop with a massive dock. Yikes.

 

With trying to dissipate 200W, I'm thinking you start needing either external heatsink assemblies or vapor chambers. Even then, it would be a challenge to incorporate either designs in to something like an Alienware m18x sized machine.

 

Noob engineer is a noob engineer

In those case unicorn hair is the nest solution with a sprinkle of fairy dust for overkill cooling in the heatpipe

 

I don't know why they don't do a more elaborate cooler solution in laptops anyhow. I mean look at this GTX 770 cooler:


It's just a fat fan with heatpipes and fins. The "vapor chamber" is nothing more than what's used in heatpipes anyhow, It could be contained within a couple inch thickness. Sure it would require a monstrosity of a chassis, three inches thick at the HSF, but the most powerful cards would have to be restricted to the fatty laptops anyhow.

 

EDIT: Nevermind
Tesla M40 is based on the same old GM107 Maxwell chip
http://pci-ids.ucw.cz/read/PC/10de/13bd

http://forums.laptopvideo2go.com/topic/31065-inf-v5011/

 

That says Kepler. And 12GB vRAM? Holy cow!

 

Thats nothing, we have had 16GB for a while now.

 

With mobile GPU's?

 

Ive been looking at pcie registry and comparing the entries there.
All "DEV.13xx" from the OP is all GM107/GM108.
All "DEV.16xx" should be the new GM204 I think:

NVIDIA_DEV.1617 = "NVIDIA N16E-GX"
NVIDIA_DEV.1618 = "NVIDIA N16E-GT"
NVIDIA_DEV.1619 = "NVIDIA N16E-GX-B"
NVIDIA_DEV.1638 = "NVIDIA N16E-Q5"
NVIDIA_DEV.1639 = "NVIDIA N16E-Q3"
NVIDIA_DEV.163A = "NVIDIA N16E-Q1"

Out of these 6 cards, 3 is Geforce cards while the 3 other ones are Quadro cards (N16E-Qx)
2 of the Geforce cards are GTX 970M and GTX 980M. The third one, I`m not so sure what will be. Could be a GTX 960M incoming with many cores disabled, or a GTX 975M placed between 970M and 980M.

 

N16E-GT will be 960M or 950M, and GX-B should be the 970M.

GT is always x60M or x50M.

 

I am not sure what 12 GB Graphics Card you are talking about but I doubt it is mobile.

 

12gb is overkill, even I readily admit 8gb is

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

Not for doing computations

 

Very happy to hear there was some new movement, I kept getting so close to picking up a msi gt-70-407. I'm really hoping this GPU series goes smooth. After this last one I have started to lose faith in Nvidia. Has me thinking to try the AMD side.

 

I gotta say, that X79 4930K desktop build I always dreamed about is looking more and more attractive at this point...

(yes I know X99 is literally a month away, but DDR4 only means I'll be paying through my nose for equal or less performance until 2016, so yeah no thanks)