RTX v RTX Max Q?

In my case, what impresses me is the performance per watt, at such low limit. At 90w tdp, we have basically desktop RTX 2060 performance. This is huge in comparison to the 200w tdp, which doesn't double the performance, yet it doubles power draw for less than 50% gains.

 

Which tests show 2080 Max-q performing on the level of the RTX 2060/2070 Max-q? Can you find benchmarks which would show this on same hardware (same RAM, same CPU, same cooling system, same drivers)? I hope you are not judging it by Notebookcheck comparisons because they are utterly useless since they compare different hardware. I am genuinely curious to see that because it does not make sense for 2080 Max-q to be slower than 2060 in same exact notebook model with same exact hardware.

 

he was comparing 2080 max-q to full fat 2060 and 2070. its between the two, performance-wise.

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

Not quite, the 80w 2080 Max-q on par the 2070 and the 90w model is slightly faster than the 2070.

Unless you're talking about a desktop 2060 then it's not in the same league.

 

yes, naturally i was referring to desktop 2060 and desktop 2070

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

Ah, in that case the 2070 will be slightly faster with than the 2080 Max-q assuming it's using the i7 8700 (no oc) and the 2060 will be about 10-20% slower

 

I could be wrong, but I though maxq was more about high quality build for gamers that would rather have business grade laptops. MSI prestige series is a good example.

 

Thats what they want you t on think, so they can have an excuse to charge more for a more "premium" sku.

Oh and the MSI P65 and GS series build quality isn't "good" by any stretch of imagination. It's quite flimsy even if its an all metal build.

 

They spin it that way but they are just the same cards cut down or down clocked.

Because "hey we hear you want small and light so here is the same gimped cards we used to give you for mobility focus" dosent seem to have the same market traction.

Not gonna say they are bad but in all honesty I would rather have a XX60 card paired with a decent CPU and features than a XX70 maxQ for the same price as a regular XX70.

like I get what? 10% more performance for 30-40% more price. That's OC range imo.

Sent from my LM-Q710.FGN using Tapatalk

 

*rofl* perfect spin! i love it and it fits 100%

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

It's pretty well true. Lol

IIRC a max Q GPU is is the same difference between the desktop GPU and the old mobile GPU.

In all honesty I would like it if they went back to the old M mobile designation for the max Q cards. Made life a bit easier IMO.



Sent from my LM-Q710.FGN using Tapatalk

 

definitely more transparent to the consumer. but because of that, they wont, would be bad for business

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

What's worse is that some of laptop manufacturers even omit mentioning that their laptops contain the Max-q versions of the gpus. *Cough* acer *cough*

 

Cool little video I found.

Sent from my LM-Q710.FGN using Tapatalk

 

Own or

OWNorDisown probably has the best 2060 vs 2070 Max-Q faceoff imo:


In dual channel the 2070MQ's minimum fps advantage is really impressive in some of the titles tested.

I still wouldn't pay more than $150-$200 for it over the 2060 though.

 

This is apples vs. oranges comparison, just like any garbage comparisons on Notebookcheck. Look at video from Steve at OWNorDisown, this is the only right comparison because Steve uses G5 and G7 both of which have same CPU, same exact cooling system and same RAM (Steve used same RAM he bought in both of them).

 

Jarrod's video is a realistic comparison between many different laptops that shows the large variance between builds in performance - with the 2060 models beating out the Max-Q 2070 in many things. And, the average between all the 2060 / 2070 Max-Q showing there's not much noticeable difference, even if it's measurable.

2070 Max-Q is worthless next to a good 2060 implementation in laptops. Often the Max-Q "thin and crappy" laptops also have poor CPU performance - which is another reason the performance of the 2070 Max-Q laptops sucks compared for a full performance 2060 laptop.

And, OWNorDisown shows that single channel memory - as in most stock laptops - really kills the 2070 Max-Q performance even further. For the "flipped" motherboard laptops this is a real problem.

$1800 RTX 2060 Laptop v $2400 RTX 2070 Max Q - Single Channel
OWNorDisown
Published on Mar 10, 2019
Most laptop manufacturers ship their RTX gaming laptops with single channel RAM. Some put people off doing upgrades by using warranty stickers and some have the RAM under the mother board like the MSI GS65 Stealth and MSI GS75 stealth making RAM upgrades harder.
RTX 2060 laptops can be about $600 cheaper than RTX 2070 Max Q laptops, so how do they compare in a single channel configuration?
I used the Dell 5 RTX 2060 and Dell G7 RTX 2070 Max Q for my tests, both with the same BIOS and 1 x 16 GB DDR4 2666 MHz RAM.


IMNSHO, Max-Q sucks, RTX sucks, Nvidia Sucks.

 

To be honest unless people are willing to hack together solutions I doubt we are ever going to see propper apples to apples comparisons.

So the best we can get is to zoom the picture out and look at the averages. Same with those notebook check and user benchmarks.

Everyone disparages it as worthless trash but I think it has merit in seeing how things interact in the wild with average users, because in all honesty in the era of cherry picked review samples and bought off reviewers I'm gonna trust raw data for my comparisons.

After 2 generations of watching the whole MaxP/MaxQ debate it really seems like if you are gonna buy the max Q it's not worth it unless you need some of the secondary or tertiary features.

Sent from my LM-Q710.FGN using Tapatalk

 

The "extra" features, like RTX, are reduced to even lower points of performance as the mobile RTX GPU vs desktop RTX GPU throughput. Tensor / RT cores are reduced in performance - therefore usefulness - across the spectrum of applications.

The reason for Max-Q is to create thin and light laptops that pose as if they are something they are not.

Thin and light laptops without the power and thermal cooling of a "real" laptop suck far more than understood by the average consumer that is just trying to get something cool.

Max-Q is bad enough unto itself, but the costly deceptions enabled by Max-Q are far worse.

What would you expect from Nivdia? Truth and value?

IMNSHO, with RTX and Max-Q Nvidia are purveyors of deceptions meant to trick you out of your money, for a bag of magic beans.

 

The comparison by Steve is pretty proper and even if he did not test many games - it shows the rational assumption that a GPU with more shader units would be always faster, provided they are tested in similar conditions and similar cooling system and similar power limit ;-)

Here is another apples-to-apples comparison of Razer Blade 17 with same CPU, same RAM and same cooling system, one with 2060 and the other with 2080 Max-q:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Razer...t-Compare-to-the-RTX-2080-Max-Q.428425.0.html
I am actually surprised finding it on Notebookcheck, but unfortunately it is the only one they have.

Not really sure what you mean. Let's say I want to buy Dell G7 or Gigabyte Aero 15, nothing else, and let's say I want a GPU which would be faster than 2060. The only options available in these chassis are 2070 Max-q or 2080 Max-q, due to cooling and physical design limits. Would it still be "not worth" buying? Sure, the price increase is not the same as performance increase when comparing 2060 and 2070 Max-q in same chassis, but if I am willing to pay that price - why would I stay with 2060 if 2070 Max-q is faster in all games in same chassis and I can afford paying for this option?

People still fail to realize the reason Max-q option exists. It is meant to provide an option of having faster GPU with higher performance in same chassis. For that, it works well. Would it matter if the "Max-q" part would be replaced by some other letters or if "2070 Max-q" would be renamed to "2065"? Absolutely not, if you are interested in buying a specific chassis, where the only available options go from 2060 to 2070 Max-q to 2080 Max-q.

 

That's what I was thinking, or name them like the GPU they're similar in performance to instead of the one the chip was based on. I understand wanting the naming convention to follow the chip, and also understand that just slapping an M on the end would likely confuse people just as much, but I think what it would gain in user expectation accuracy would be worth it.

 

@Papusan knows. MAX-Q stands for Max-Qriple.

 

You lack the second P. Otherwise correct

 

Max-Qwap, or Max-Qrap

 

xD

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

Max-q is so unfortunate because it doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's displacing full notebook GPUs. When Pascal came out, nvidia made a big deal about how mobile GPUs had finally reached "near parity" with desktop GPUs (within 10% of their performance) -- such a big deal that the company dropped the "m" from mobile GPU names. And manufacturers were investing resources into making those GPUs work, including in thinner and lighter notebooks. Then nvidia pulls the rug out from under everyone by introducing Max-Q. Now, what incentive do notebook manufacturers have to make the regular "near-parity" notebook GPUs work well? None, because they can just stick an easier, lower-perfoming Max-Q GPU in their notebooks, and most consumers won't know the difference. Indeed, nvidia has even given manufacturers the perverse incentive of obscuring the "Max-Q" part of the name as much as possible so that even educated consumers are tricked into thinking they'll get more performance when they buy a notebook than they actually will.

So is there a place for Max-Q? No. Not for consumers. If nvidia really, really wants to make lower-perfoming cards, then it should be clear about that and call them something completely different, like a "1065" rather than a "1070 max-q." Anything else is unethical trickery and should be condemned by consumers everywhere.

 

Nvidia are totally running wild screwing their own customers, desktop and laptop alike. They've grown real good at it over time. There's even little point calling them out for their illogical BS, it is just that, they know it as does anyone who's been around a few gens - the challenge for them is to see how far they can push while collecting $ without major backlash. Nothing will change until people boycott their BS or some competition forces them to pull up.

 

Renaming at this point would make a lot of sense. I like the XXX5 idea, or back to "M", just because consumers see "Max" in a name and immediately think "Maximum performance" and do no further checking, while M implies "Mobile" to me and indicates lower performance. I can see several non-conspiracy-to-defraud reasons why they might not want to go this way, but if AMD starts pushing with any seriousness into higher cost mobile platforms, that's going to be a major weak point to attack.

 

here is to hoping! the 5700 cards are actually nice contenders for mobile cards

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

Hope so

 

Yeah I remember when Max-Q was introduced and I had to explain to some people how it worked.

But see it works, people without prior knowledge or make the effort into researching things get caught up and eat it. Even with the SKU replacement Nvidia did with the 20xx series had people confusing 2080 Super as being better than 2080 Ti lol.

 

Been perusing a few different 20** laptop models. Gotta say it seems websites do their best hide when a card is MAX-Q.

 

They usually do. Lol because who wants to pay double the cost for a step down in performance. Though most customers won't notice without a frame of reference.

Sent from my LM-Q710.FGN using Tapatalk

 

I haven't been seeing double the cost but I generally agree that the MAX-Q model's performance doesn't fairly match its cost. Seems like it is just a way to continue the stagnation of laptop cooling and power delivery designs.

 

Comparing performance full GPU vs mobile GPU vs price the best deals are still the full GPU from the "down number" model's, it's not as cool with model numbers that suggest less performance 2060 vs 2070MQ, but as long as you pick a well cooled model either one will be good on a good sale.

Watch out for the thin and hot laptops, their batteries fail / inflate frequently, probably the worst part of thin and light laptops when you are trying to game on them - overheating the battery on heavy current draw in / out kills them quickly. Thin and light gaming laptops are a bad idea in that respect.

 

Valid input. "Thin and light" would classify models such as the Asus Zephyrus/Scar, Razor Blade, and MSI G75 Stealth correct? I have not been able to find much good information on the anticipated longevity of these models when sporting RTX non-maxq cards. Time will tell.

 

Most laptops with Max-q I'd say.

 

The proof is in the owners reports of swollen / inflated batteries, and Zephyrus is the one I've seen most of the battery problems.

The others I haven't seen swollen batteries... anyone have links?

Razer is out for being such a long term fail in reliability and customer support. Every new release people hope it's gonna be better this time, but so far it hasn't been better, just different.

If you can see the layout of the heat pipes and cooling vs battery location and heat maps before buying as it's too early to get direct owner reports for a brand new laptop it's still a gamble - will the gaming load drive the heat up so high the battery fails in the short term like the Zephyrus?

It may be a good idea for vendors to drive the laptops from a battery / charger pod external to the laptop, at the thinness they are trying to ship to gamers now.

 

Not RTX graphics but you can clearly see the problem with wrong design vs. hardware ... This is what you get.

The beauty of the smaller AW13R3. But its easy clean the inside after a couple of years use No need for a screwdriver

How to fix this? (side popping)

 

"No need for a screwdriver" LMFAO

 

Ultrabook Review has a pretty detailed review of the 2019 Zephyrus models. You can see the battery location of the -G series here:

 

You would think that would help, but those batteries are still overheating and going bad. It's away from the heat source, but also away from the ventilation, so as the laptop continues to heat soak it can't expel the heat from the battery. The longer you game - at high heat - the worse it gets.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...e-GX501VI-laptop-s-battery-is-a-lemon-already

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?104841-Zephyrus-(GX501)-Battery-Swell

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?104200-Zephyrus-GX501-Swollen-Battery!-Please-check-yours

 

plus, gaming away from.the socket (which i bet most "thin n light" gamerboys will do, obviously) will cause the battery to generate heat all by itself, entering a vicious cycle...

Sent from my Xiaomi Mi Max 2 (Oxygen) using Tapatalk

 

The best way kill the battery. And the OEM / ODM's sales team know it



Yeah, Battery matters After the sweet itch, the fire comes

https://www.reddit.com/r/Alienware/comments/bvdjvg/how_can_i_boost_performance_of_m15_while_on/

 

Never seen anyone even mentioning gaming unplugged before in any thin and light forum.

Framerates will be so **** most don't even consider it a feasible option.

I've only ever seen casual gamers play unplugged and your average casual gamer ain't dropping the cash to get a thin and light.

 

LOL that graph is so bad it makes nvidia's graphs look good.

And even worse, that battery life claim is not even achievable in a best case scenario, to say nothing of gaming.

I'm surprised nobody has sued them yet for false advertising haha

 

Agreed, I can't imagine that being a pleasant experience. Not sure if I classify as a casual gamer but thin and light is what I'm looking for productivity purposes. With the option to plug in and play when I have time. How's the 2080 maxq in the G75 working for you?

 

Well, if you're mainly focused on productivity and only game occasionally it makes sense to go for a thin and light. What I meant by casual gamers are people that play games, but aren't too picky about the framerate nor quality setting they play at. Neither playing competitively nor are enthusiasts. Casuals.

And my GS75 is doing fine. Though I'm continuously trying to make it run faster

Just got my highest firestrike score yet


Still working on getting the 150w 2080 vbios to work properly though. It flashes fine but gpu boost is not kicking in so it's actually slower than with the stock vbios.

 

Yes, I don't understand why manufacturers don't provide better cooling for battery area, all they need is to add few intake holes around the battery.

 

Pfft. If you aren't gaming on a DRT with a 10-core LGA CPU, 2 desktop 2080TIs in SLI, 128GB of RAM, 5TB NVMe drive, 5k 240hz Gsync Micro-LED panel, two mux switches, and that will also do your laundry, why even game bro? /s