Pascal: What do we know? Discussion, Latest News & Updates: 1000M Series GPU's

I think part of it can be explained by the fact that it is cheaper to make Pascal chips vs. Maxwell chips because the die size is smaller. 314mm vs 398mm for 1070 vs 980M, meaning 22% less area and therefore cost (holding yield and all that constant). Of course that didn't stop them on the desktop side

 

Pascal is a new node. The enrollment cost to switch and R&D is huge compared to fully matured nodes. Now, they waited for 14nm/16nm to be researched and paid for primarily by CPU, ARM, and RISC chips of certain types. This means TSMC was pretty well retooled. But the cost is still huge, hence the premium on desktops. Laptop market already has such huge margins, which explains not wanting to shock the market as much...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Clevo P650RS-G starts at 1579 with no OS (from avadirect). Just uh... trust me on this the pricing is very good, the post I said earlier about a 100 dollar increase etc... is right. The leaks are just confirming what I know.

Edit: removed being mean against a brand.

 

It's not needed to counter every non-Clevo laptop with a "this Clevo is better" "cause XXX brand sucks".

It gets old real fast.

Please try to resist the urge

 

I edited it. To be fair I don't do that, its more XXX brand is better than the one I mentioned. I wouldn't say that about any other brand like MSI etc. While I like Clevo a lot I actually do like other brands more for different uses believe it or not lol.

 

This is totally true, but keep in mind people are comparing the launch prices now vs the launch prices then, and when we made the 40 -> 28nm switch we also didn't see a huge spike in prices from what I remember.

On the huge margins in laptops, I concur. When I saw how much large manufacturers pay for the mobile graphics chips, I almost wanted to stop buying laptops

 

The price is good if the reseller is a Prema partner to unlock these beasts! I'm still waiting on overclock benches on these cards, but without the right firmware, these cards (and the CPU support) will be good, but not great. AVADirect is where I got my HM from and at a good price, but days have changed... HIDEvolution, Eurocom, Mythlogic, ClevoCenter, Avell, and Dream Machines are the ones to price check against!

Those prices on the 10 series seem reasonable depending on what the 1060 costs. I'll find out soon enough with my ZM upgrade...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Heard that there may be a 1050, 1050Ti, and 1060Ti launching next week as well. The Ti series bringing GDDR5X. Curious to find out if that's true.

It will be interesting to see if those make it to mobile or not. Probably not, but we will see.

 

Can anyone enlighten me about the benefit of having 2 LAN ports? Some of the models shown lately feature 2 instead of 1. What's the big benefit?

 

With a proper modem or router, you can double the bandwidth. And redundancy is always another reason. Some people use one for web browsing and one strictly for gaming, too.

Unnecessary feature, in my opinion. But it is primarily for desktop replacements. And no, I don't want to debate it - you asked and I answered.

 

You forgot to mention IT professionals for server maintenance, LAN parties, etc.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I would prefer intel ethernet over the Killer one.

 

Can't wait for the P775DM3 to be released, I'll spec it up with a 1070 or 1080 if I can afford it. Just wondering which network card to get, to get the best connectivity? I have heard mixed reviews, and honestly the Killer network card in my x7200 did not impress me much.

 

The Ethernet options are not customizable, but the WLAN chip, Intel is always preferred. At least in my case.

 

I've never had issue with Killer Networking or Killer Wireless-N network cards. Those that complain about these cards usually do not know how to handle driver updating and whatnot.

They're optimized for low latency, so I'd always recommend them to gamers.

 

________________________________

I think that people (such as myself) are/were expecting a very large increase in price for Pascal, mainly because of the initial R&D and manufacturing costs involved, and expressed expectations of consumer fanaticism involved in the hype of what Pascal does, which would invariably lead to higher prices from Nvidia that would allow them to capitalize upon this.
Quite frankly, I am stunned (and thrilled) at how relatively low the prices are for the 1070-based laptops. I was expecting much higher prices, and see that AVA has a 1070 laptop for $2225.
I am loving that.

 

Not many people wants to spend 2000+ for a laptop. I think the most profitable market should between 1000 to 1500.

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using Tapatalk

 

The longer it's on the market, the cheaper the product is. They will have at least two generations of Pascal. I've been hearing Volta is actually on schedule for a summer '18 launch.

Wouldn't surprise me to see the 1080Ti around October/November and then an early announcement for 11 series Pascal in May at Computex.

 

I never had issues with mine, I've heard of others having problems with drivers though. I'm just not impressed as the latency was exactly the same as with my old previous laptop which had a regular intel card + the connectivity range was literally equal, too. The only extra that I had with the Killer card was that its software could control the network usage of my applications, which can be done with third party software too.

I also think the GTX 1080-based P775DM for ~2,200€ seems tempting... too bad that this configurator doesn't allow for an i5 6600"K" though.

 

Note that time frame coincides with the Zen launch and the rumored push up on Greenland release!

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

This is only one company so i'm sure there will be another offering that configuration, also why not spend a little bit extra for the i7 6700k? Considering how much you're spending on this laptop.

 

The biggest thing has nothing to do with Pascal I think. It was the fact that the mobile cards are now desktop cards. I would have thought nVidia would milk that as a premium similar to how expensive the 980 desktop was on mobile. If there still was a 1080m I would raise an eyebrow at the price drop but wouldn't be as surprised as I am not with a full desktop 1070 dropping in price.

Edit: Also prices were terrible for the desktop cards on desktop the 1080 was priced above the 980 Ti for the most part instead of where the 980 was.

 

I'd recommend you wait for Sager's version of the new laptops. They often times offer more configurable options at a discount. For example, the 6700k upgrade is usually about $100.

XoticPC is a good place to shop. They ship internationally.

 

Honestly, because HyperThreading is 100% useless in games (actually decreases performance in some games), and the little editing that I do is not worth going for the 6700K. Thus, an i5 with unlocked multipliers would be probably perfect for me.

I'm running my i7 980 with hyperthreading disabled since 2013 when I found out how useless it is.

 

Right on man!!! I don't meet many that have figured this out

Some benchmarks will show performance improvements for hyperthreading, and some show a decrease, but overall in applications and gaming the Hyperthreaded cores only add heat and not enough performance to make that extra heat worth having.

The non-hyperthreaded CPU is the optimal configuration

You might even get a higher OC out of it as well, generate less heat, lower the fan speed and noise, and draw less power - more available for the GPU's.

Good move

 

More people should get aware of this tbh, unless they do extensive compiling/rendering in applications that can not use CUDA (GPU) cores instead, the 150€ upgrade from 6600K to 6700K is truly not worth it.

 

Some of my work needs the hyperthreaded cores, but when I am going for high OC for straight-line single core performance, or optimizing for gaming, disabling Hyperthreading opens up resources you can use for better full core performance.

If the CPU you want isn't in the configurator, chat with the vendor and they will likely accommodate customization.

 

Well thanks for the information, you have opened my eyes to the negatives of hyperthreading in most games!

 

Yes they doo ship internationally, too bad the shipping fee is insane to Europe...

 

There are a few good 2 core, 4 core, 8 core gaming performance comparison videos, here is one:

 

I actually watched this after sirana mentioned the hyperthreading performance degradation in games, but thanks for the link!

 

Nice

I haven't found an actual 6600k vs 6700k comparison, the video you linked is close, it simulates the 6600k by disabling Hyperthreading, so I guess that's close enough.

I like the one I linked because in addition to comparing 4 core and 4 core HT, it shows 6/8 core can actually have "worse" performance in games, and 2 core / 2 core HT takes a real performance hit - including not being able to run Farcry 4.

Fun stuff

 

Actually just watching your linked video shows only one game that under performed with hyperthreading enabled on 4 core under a certain preset...i'm confused

In the end i am still getting an i7 6700k and will take note of games that perform faster with hyperthreading disabled.

 

Yes, that's what we are saying, Hypthreaded cores won't help in gaming where the games rarely take advantage of more than 4 cores.

You already have 4 full cores, so scheduling jobs over 4+4HT= 8 cores increases overhead, so you lose performance if the game tries to use more than 4 cores and finds itself using an HT core.

That's why the 6C and 8C performance in some games goes down from 4C performance.

It's rare to see a game respond better to 4 core HT than 4 core alone.

Hyperthreading can give a 12% boost in some applications, enough for long running batch jobs to enable it to reduce run time.

On average short duration use - normal interactive use - performance doesn't benefit from Hyperthreading - at least not enough to justify powering them up

 

I remember reading reviews saying that that the i5-6300HQ was actually pretty close to the i7-6700HQ for gaming because the 6300HQ is also quad-core.

Can you guys confirm that the 6300HQ is a legit choice for gaming in a way that it makes you save sometimes up to $200. And when you're limited in your budget $200 is a big difference.

2nd question to the "experts": I haven't been able to find an explicit grid where it says the difference of heat produced by GPU like 960m vs 970m vs 980m or even compared to the leaks on the new pascal mobile cards.

 

This makes me wonder if AMD Zen and AMD async scheduler, if implemented on their 8 core SMT cpu could actually help in gaming...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

IDK, noone has made a good implementation of multi-core mapping to single thread performance improvement. That would be a big win if someone can pull it off

Otherwise any core count above 4 is just wasted energy for most games.

 

I understand what you are saying. In my mind anything above a 4 core CPU is just ridiculous unless you are dealing with a lot of concurrent computations that don't affect each other...which is not many applications, and on top of that most applications (including games) don't utilize more threads (cores).

My view was that if you are spending so much on a laptop, an extra $100 or so on the i7 6700k isn't going to break the bank. I was enlightened on the potential performance degrade of hyperthreading on game though.

 

Given the base price of ~1600$ and the price difference of the i5 6600K and i7 6700K amounting to ~150€ (referring to e.g. XMG's configurator of current notebooks), it is almost a 10% extra for ... no added benefit for most users.

 

I agree, but look at the async wins on fury over Maxwell and Pascal (which is better than Maxwell, but still not fury level of efficiencies). Intel is even making better multi-core mapping and scheduler for upcoming CPUs. It's not here yet, but if AMD succeeds, they'll meet their debt obligations in 2018 without issue.

ARM is also making strides in this regard as well. So then software will need redesigned to fully utilize it on any of these platforms...

Edit: this isn't saying fury is better than Pascal, just utilizing async is better...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

It's $100 that can reduce your performance... yes, you heard me correctly, less performance.

Most laptop BIOS's won't let you disable hyperthreading like a normal desktop BIOS will.

So you are stuck with hyperthreading on, powering those superfluous cores, generating heat, lots of heat if you have 100%/100% High Performance enabled. Reducing the headroom available for a stable OC.

I think on the Clevo, the base BIOS won't let you disable hyperthreading, but Prema's modded BIOS will let you disable hyperthreading.

The 6700k with 4 + 4HT, will give better "benchmark" numbers. So if that's part of your "scene", you'll want to get the 6700k over the 6600k.

But, that's only if the 6700k/6600k OC to the same speed.

If the 6600k uses less power, generates less heat, theoretically it could OC much further, erasing any Benchmark advantage the HT's give.

 

2 things:
1. My locked x7200 BIOS at least allowed me to disable HT while all OC functions were locked away.
2. 3dmark gives extra points for having HT enabled, in my case between 1500 and 2000 points for literally ZERO performance difference in the CPU test. It just adds bonus points for Hyperthreading to make i7 look better, which is hilarious and deceiving for buyers.

 

Does this performance decrease on HT work on Sandy Bridge cores? (2630qm) As far as I remember i could disable HT from bios but never disabled it.

 

The performance decrease is minimal, don't expect a large FPS boost if you disable HT This should be read as, don't expect having better performance in gaming for choosing an i7 over an i5. BTW, you should be able to disable HT in both the BIOS and Intel XTU.

 

Newer titles coming out this year and next year will support hyper-threading and will be developed around DX12. I wouldn't say it's useless, but most certainly unnecessary at this point in time. You will benefit from having a 6700k in the near future.

And if you're spending $2500~ on a laptop, odds are, you don't plan on upgrading for at least a couple years. An extra $100 upgrade may go further than you think, and may also help retain resale value.

 

While true, you gain extra MHz and boost clocks and have the potential for usage in hyperthreading (when applicable). Base price is a misnomer, almost everyone adds a little bit extra to the cost on something

 

The real benefit to running with CPU HT disabled (or an i5 over i7) is less heat and less power used that can be redirected. You may also be able to reduce CPU core voltage further with HT disabled.

And, that extra power and thermal headroom can be used by OC'ing the CPU's real cores further.

 

This has been said for 3 years straight now, and nothing changed yet.

 

That's why you get the 6600 "K" to overclock with cooler performance...

 

You should add that this refers to the i5 for people reading over this thread.