How Dell cripple performance explained by Notebookcheck.net

Then it’s confirmed. Nothing has changed from Dell. Maybe about time DELL stop use soldered dGPU graphics in their notebooks and just use iGPU? Unified heatsink design is the Devils work. And Tripod mounting attachment doesn’t make it any better.

Alienware and Dell’s XPS lines General Vice President Frank Azor confirms the ugly truth!!


https://mobile.twitter.com/AzorFrank/status/996075296406286336

 

Azor confirmed, it is broken on purpose. The Devil's work is accurate. Dell Hell on earth to be precise. But, they are not alone in their sins and crimes against humanity. The difference here is he was crazy enough to admit to flawed and foolish design and spin the malfunction as if it is some sort of goofy advantage. That's just nuts. If people like that are making product design decisions that affect the masses, it is no wonder we are surrounded by so much castrated garbage in notebook land. Of course, one man's trash is another man's treasure... so, there's that to consider. No thank you.

 

Mybe he will put out confirmation for the other brand he is General Vice President for? Shouldn’t be a problem as he already has put out the cat.
I can’t understand why Dell continues put in dGPU in their notebooks. But probably the only way to increase and hold max price point on this piece of throttling junk. When will the consumers say enough is enough? I don’t get it.

 

Then why the hell do they make unified HSF design anyway with 6 cores and GTX GPU?
AW and XPS are priced similar and both performs worse out of the package.
Now its time to get separate HSFs now.

 

If the OEM goes for max sized/capacity battery in thinner notebook chassis, they must use battery with biggest possible footprint (battery with smaller footprint is thicker, and can't be used). Due the battery's bigger footprint the engineers has to hit up aka use smaller Motherboard. Smaller PCB means less space for all needed screws. Same for ram slots, ssd slots etc. I'm sure you know Dell have to use half baked 3rd M.2 ssd slots for M.2 2242 SSD (can't use normal size) + only 2 ram slots.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...r5-owners-lounge.815492/page-25#post-10721543

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...cussions-lounge.794968/page-449#post-10471783

 

Sometimes I feel newer lappies aren't better and grabbing second hand haswell/skylakes are totally worth than Kabylake AW/XPS with unified HSFs.

 

YUP, I posted a write up on this very subject with my W110ER and why MacBooks with unified heatsinks are literally wrong. They go against how the heatpipes are designed.. Why can't companies build them like my G46VW by Asus.. Refer to below image Dell, HP, Alienware, and all of the above.. COPY THIS.



That laptop with a 3840QM could handle 70-80 watts on just the CPU alone no problem oh and full GPU load with quiet fans in a 14 inch laptop. One of the best performing laptops ever all with fans you could barely hear.

You know why they hinder performance, so they can choose second hand parts, VRMs, CPUs, and stuff. Sigh, I thought the future would bring great stuff and while the 8550u is a step forward, it's also a step backwards... manufactures are making sure we don't get too excited for mobile stuff.

 

I wonder if the integrated VRMs in the older Intel CPUs would be of help in this.

At any rate, at least MSI's PS42 has that same layout in a 14" laptop (as implied by the manufacturer). Quad core U with a claimed full power MX150.

 

I did disable this service, even shutdown and restarted. Still those invisible power limits are taking hold. Maybe I have to re-install Windows from scratch and this time do not install *any* Intel software?

Just to make it clear: these are not "bad" power limits, and the idea of holding the CPU below 94C is great, it's just that I would like to know who and how they are doing it. How can I stop/start it and how to tweak it.

 

Reinstall clean OS. Secure erase the OS disks. Maybe re-flash bios first (one or two times). Install only needed drivers/software. MEI is important (Intel).

Mind you, Processors handle this nice by themselves. No need for (proprietary) firmware/drivers or software to cripple the setup!!

 

I think I need to reset the BIOS because I have already flashed it 3 times with 1.1.6 and 1.2.1, but do not know how to reset it without opening the laptop and removing battery. Tried the remove all wires and power button for 2 mins and it did not work. For example my keyboard and chassis lights are light green because I set them up so from Dell Command Centre, in the previous Windows installation. This is now a clean Windows installation, no Dell bloatware, and yet the lights are still green. Either stored in the BIOS or in some other NVRAM.

 

The lights is most likely stored/controlled by own chips. Have been like this on older Dell AW models.
Hit up Dell support and demand from them “how you can clear the NVRAM” the proper way.

 

Papusan and doofus99: DPTF driver isn't used anymore since on some system it'll flag event viewer errors. So dell removed the functionality. Now, its just a filter driver that helps in adhering to thermal standards set by industry policy to give a feeling that DPTF will throttle down CPU clocks if its greater than Tskin temps. AW at stock paste and Clean Windows 10 does reach 100C easily.
Only OEM that handles DPTF on gaming PCs nicely are HP,Acer, Asus,Lenovo and Dell XPS.

 

New name, same value. Dell's latest entry into the budget gaming market changes branding but keeps the value.

Awful results from Dell's new Coffee lake lineup. Dell G7 shows disgusting performance results. And the power restrictions as expected (See thread title - How Dell Cripple Performance). Unlocked i9-8950Hk (oc'd or stock doesn't matter) perform worse than almost all other brands low entry i7-8750H. And the weaker 6 core i7 in this G7 does not really shine either. The bottom level? or can it be any worse? Maybe? Take a look... http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...950h-coffee-lake.810891/page-99#post-10781320

 

This site really needs a *laughing* reaction to go with the *like* button. I'd use it all the time, lol.

 

At least it need to be bumped up to first page once in a while

 

And Dell continue cripple their products with nasty firmware Updates. Awful reading in the Dell XPS 15 9570 Owners Thread! When is enough enough? As I have stated several times... The crippling start after some times when the RMA numbers start to increase. Or people the valuable customers complaining about overheating. Cheapest solution will always works!


--------------------------------------

Dell's other brand... The gaming series laptops (Alienwares). Alienware 15 R3/15 R4/17 R4/17 R5 performance issue or battery drain while AC adapter is connected. Dell probably got help by MSI's engineers @Falkentyne THIS WORKING AS DESIGNED. Same as above.

 

Wow, that is absolute b.s. Why market it and sell it as a gaming laptop at that point if they're going to cheap out that hard on the design and sell you an inadequate power supply and battery in the first place?!?

 

I don't know if the GT75 Titan has NOS but the GT75VR (and GT73 and previous) definitely. Some models of the GT72VR did not have NOS working, so when 'NOS' was supposed to start battery drain, the two NOS EC register flags had "00" in it, which would cause BD PROCHOT flag to turn on at the point where battery was "supposed" to start being used ( @heliada ). But anyway, the GT73VR with the GTX 1070 can never exceed 230W of system power no matter what you throw at it (GTX 1070=115W, do you really think a 7820HK can draw 115W in anything without the VRM's tripping?), yet the NOS start point for the 1070 GT73VR was 160W, 1080 seemed to be 180W. So there was no reason for it to start drawing from the battery at 160W.

The 230W power supply can supply 240W to the entire system before it shuts off (about 280W from the wall). The Delta 330W PSU can pull 380W from the wall. Yet NOS exists .......

 

If you don't have much other things to do... Maybe take you some time and read about the very first gen Alienware BGA models (The Echo's from early 2015)... Alienware 15 R1 CPU ISSUE *WARNING* Released with Gtx980M and 180w psu. The reason Dell went with MSI's well known "Battery Turbo Boost". Dell call it "Hybrid Power Functionality"

 

a hybrid of gimp + money sucking

 

Awful reading as always from threads with Dell products... Whats next? Shrink the throttling point further down to 70C ? Then 65C ?

 

By unified heatsink, do you mean all cooling systems that combine the CPU and GPU heat zones, or just the typical MacBook Pro-style ones in which the heat source is under the middle of the heat pipe? It seems to me that pooling cooling capacity between the CPU and GPU isn't bad in itself since one chip can take advantage of the combined cooling capacity when the other chip is under less load, like a 20GB shared data plan for a couple is less prone to overage than 10GB for either person. Plus, since heat always flows from hotter to cooler, having another thermally connected chip never heats up an already hotter chip more than it would be on its own: instead it would sink heat away from the hotter chip.
If I understood you correctly, the problem is instead that most unified heatsinks tend to put the heat source in the middle of the heatpipe instead of the end, right?

Huawei's MateBook 13 appears to be designed wisely. The heat sources are further apart, and each heatpipe is used end-to-end:

Looks good to me especially in this 13" body. What do you think?

 

I agree that it looks smarter. I guess what really matters is how well it works. That will be the ultimate deciding factor. One heat pipe for each side is not very much. But, the good thing, at least based on appearance, is that the pipes are only sharing resources at the radiator and the CPU and GPU are not puking heat on one another.

 

Though I agree with the rest of your assessment, I'm gonna have to disagree with the "puking heat on one another" part. That concept contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Heat can only flow from a hotter place to a colder place, and heat transfer between two objects of the same temperature is always zero. The notion that putting two heat sources next to each other will increase the total heat or maximum temperature, violates the Law of Conservation of Energy.

• When two chips are the same temperature, thermally connecting them changes nothing compared to isolating them from each other.
• When one chip is hotter than the other, thermally connecting them transfers heat from the hotter chip to the cooler chip and equalizes their temperature (assuming similar mass and specific heat).

So for example:

• If two chips are both at 90°C, coupling them has no effect on either's temperature. They're not "puking heat on one another" and making each other hotter.
  • So, in this worst case scenario, a unified heatsink makes things neither better nor worse.
• Coupling one chip at 95°C and another at 85°C equalizes them both to 90°C (assuming same mass and specific heat and good conduction between), since the final temperature = (m₁*c₁*T₁ + m₂*c₂*T₂)/(m₁*c₁ + m₂*c₂).
  • So, whenever you have an imbalance of temperature, connecting the chips decreases the chances of any chip exceeding throttling temperature. That is assuming they have the same throttling temperature threshold (I don't see why they shouldn't).

So, we've established that the effect of thermally coupling two chips is sometimes nil, often better, but never worse. Now, let's take their heatsinks into consideration. Suppose our two chips each get a heatsink of 15W cooling capacity, and you can choose whether to connect the two chips with a heat pipe. Let's break this system down into the two possible scenarios it will encounter—equal and lopsided load:

Because of the laws of thermodynamics, the choice of making a heatsink unified, in itself, is actually advantageous, unless you specifically want to let one chip cook itself up and keep the other one much cooler. The advantages are especially significant when processor performance is so variable nowadays, with Turbo Boost and GPU Boost taking advantage of available thermal headroom. I ran this by my mechanical engineering professor today and he agrees with the above assessment. You guys are welcome to point out any oversights in my analysis, and I'll be more than happy to explore them together. Thank you for having brought this up — it made a very interesting thought experiment!

 

Well, be that as it may, the end results stand on their own. Apparently, nobody that uses a unified heat sink design does it worth a damn, because the implementation sucks. If one of the heat sinks is inadequate to do the job it was made to do and the other side is, the side that is made correctly is going to take on more heat from the side that is not. If neither side is made well, it's going to work even worse. Factor in that getting a precise fit is difficult due to sloppy manufacturing and poor quality control (which is status quo with notebooks, including the more expensive ones).

It is also wrong to assume that the CPU and GPU both begin throttling at the same temperature, or produce the same amount of heat. They have a similar maximum temperature, but not similar operating temperatures, and their thermal behavior also varies. CPUs generally run hotter than GPUs by a decent margin. Since the introduction of Pascal, NVIDIA has made their GPUs begin to throttle as low as 45-50°C (long before they should throttle for thermal protection) and if the unified heat sink normalizes temperature with a CPU running much hotter the GPU is going to start losing clock speeds more so that it would if the CPU was not shedding heat on it.

Sometimes science looks good on paper and fails due to errors in the implementation. This is what happens when we accept what an engineer says "should happen" on face value and never test to see if there are any conditions or variables the engineer was not aware of our could not anticipate. Unified heat sinks are a brilliant design concept that we have not seen produce great results so far. The only things we have seen it accomplish are saving space and cutting costs.

 

That is true. Statistically, there indeed has been a correlation between unified heatsinks and lackluster performance, due to all those practical factors you mentioned. It's quite pathetic that a lot of them don't have enough mounting pressure to make any heatsink work properly. People put extra pressure on the XPS 9575 and greatly improved thermals (although this one's not a unified heatsink but a unified package for CPU and GPU). That makes me weary of potentially horrible heatsink contact in every laptop I come across.

• True, different throttle temps does make things not so black and white. In my earlier post, I mentioned "I don't see why they shouldn't" have the same throttling temp threshold. If I were to make a laptop, I would make both the CPU and GPU throttle at just below Tjunction Max. Not doing that would be a waste of thermal headroom.
• To clarify, I did not assume both processors produced the same amount of heat. What I actually assumed was that sometimes they coincidentally do and most often they don't, and I laid out both scenarios in my chart. In fact, my chart shows, when the unified heatsink shines when they don't produce the same amount of heat, compared to the same heatsink split in half for either chip.

Yeah, how stupid is that? This is a frustrating problem in itself, and although it would be more apparent in systems using unified heatsinks, it's not intrinsically the fault of the unified heatsink.

Since when did testing stop being part of the engineer's job?! Thank you for pointing out the importance in that. The incompetence and neglect in the industry I will enter (engineering at large) saddens me, and it is my goal to do better and improve it (I'm a MechEng freshman at UC Berkeley right now). YOU, good sir, have just helped me with that goal.

One laptop that has a good unified cooling system is the 2019 Razer Blade Stealth. Good news is it maintains 25W at 65°C. Bad news is also that it maintains 25W at 65°C. Razer is a complete wimp for power-limiting the CPU to 25W under CPU-only load and about 15W under combined load. To make things a lot worse, they've hardcoded the power limit into the EC firmware, so ThrottleStop etc. cannot defeat it. I guess you could say "the implementation sucks" on this one too, haha.

 

Sadly the world of engineering is driven by marketing. There are very few engineering companies that are actually ran by engineers these days. It's painful when you know what you want to do to get the best performance/reliability but the marketing team has final say. No engineers are not perfect (far from it), but good engineers think outside the box and try to anticipate things. Great engineers realize that there are going to be problems so they do a lot of running questions by others, testing, and working with people that have to service/use with the product. Anyway, I'll get off my soap box. Sadly I traded one marketing ran career (engineering) for another (medicine). Oh well one day things will work out, lol.

 

Yes, I would say that sucks. I do not think Razer is capable of doing anything in a manner that I would regard as good. If it were good it would be cooling a 25W CPU to near normal ambient room temperatures and running about 40-45°C max under 100% sustained load for hours. A 25W CPU is about 20% of what a "real CPU" would be drawing. But, then again, I'd consider that product a failure on specs alone without any regard for whether or not it had good thermal management. I'm the type of guy that believes that any laptop sporting a CPU with any less than ~95W TDP qualifies as a wuss-book, LOL.

I think the marketing folks are almost always the problem for the rest of us regardless of where we fit within an enterprise. They did not get the memo about "under-promise and over-deliver" and doing the opposite seems to come naturally for them. Yet, they blame everyone else for not being able to deliver what they over-promised.

 

Razer was good at ripping off the macbook pro form factor, that's about it.

 

Hey, I see some good chatter and would like to weigh in. I don't think there is a "perfect" way to cool a laptop. These newer 6-core CPUs do get very hot indeed. GPUs tend to run much cooler. With that in mind, I think that a properly implemented unified heatsink is the best answer for CPUs in the 45-60w range and for GPUs around the level of a 1060-1070MQ.

The main problem IMO is that manufacturers design laptops with throttling in mind. They know that they can just throttle any CPU they want to fit the bill, so they cram i9s into thin laptops like the MBP and rake in the marketing hype that comes with it.

Whoever makes the company money will lead the company. If the only thing you have to sell on is hardware, then hardware engineers lead the company and turn out the best products possible. When marketing makes money, those people get into powerful positions and lead the way forwards. That is what Steve Jobs said a while back. Marketing sold many iPhones. That is why they released the same phone 5 times and every single refresh sold like hot cakes.

According to market trends, the demand for power is less than the demand for a thinner and lighter solution. People voted with their wallets, so thin and light won over thick and heavy.

Niche companies like Razer do turn out decent products now and then, but only serve a small portion of consumers.

 

Sadly it's the perception of who makes money that ends up leading the direction. When you have people with maybe a bachelor's degree telling engineers, PhD's, and Physicians how to do their job, it's not the best way to do it IMHO. I've seen marketing people make changes to a product that ended up costing the company more than the what the product would actually make due to having to warranty and fix the mistake (on more than one occasion). There is for sure a middle ground where things work well, but I haven't seen it.

 

It might not be like that. You would have folks with higher degrees, but in different fields, giving the orders. It is the best way to do things for a company that wants to make more money, so for all companies. For a company like apple, a bad product can sell like hot cakes if marketing is good enough. Some people actually thought they were getting desktop performance in a thin and light laptop when they bought the MBP

 

Accountants run the world which is why the only thing the world's guaranteed to never run out of is money... It sure is a pity every resource we actually need to survive is depleting and can't be magicked out of thin air like money can

 

True

 

I have the same frustration with marketing hype. I felt cheated when my MateBook X Pro's 8550U throttled to below its 15W TDP. But while putting a Y-series in it would make it a more honest product, I wouldn't want that. I chose instead of take advantage to that 'oversqueezing' and mod the cooling system to allow it to sustain about 40W now. The claim of i7 performance is a lie, but it's also an opportunity for mod-happy users.

But for any user in general, I want to stress that throttling itself is not the issue (unless we're talking about premature throttling). Because if your criterion is 'not throttling', then the solution would be to swap the MBP15's i9 for a 8565U or something to make it not throttle any more. That, of course, wouldn't make sense. Other factors held constant, using a CPU with TDP higher and letting it throttle (or boost less, same thing) under load is better for performance than using a CPU with lower TDP and letting it boost to the same power level.

• This is especially true when there is a difference in core count. A quad core 8565U boosting to 40W is less efficient than a 8950HK throttling to 40W, because in practice, power consumption increases quadratically with frequency (since required voltage increases linearly too), whereas it increases much more linearly with core count. This is largely why parallel computing/multicore has been the direction of growth for CPUs, and largely why GPUs have more raw computing power per watt than CPUs.
• Now, what about processors of the same core count? 6-core i7 vs i9 in the constrained MBP? There would still be advantage to the i9 if the throttling mechanism were proper (smooth PID control that stabilizes the temperature right at the acceptable maximum instead of causing it to oscillate). For workloads of fewer threads or shorter duration (which aren't enough to reach thermal bottlenecks), the i9's higher clocks are advantageous. It may look like the system is unable to benefit from the i9's extra performance, but that's only true when comparing all core full load scenarios.
  • One reason I emphasized proper control is because the MBP15's performance is severely worsened by the VRM not supplying enough power and a very lackluster bang-bang-style control scheme. That's the reason the i9 version performs worse than the i7 in long-load tests. If it wasn't for that, the i9 would perform the same under full load, on top of offering less micro-lag in everyday workloads and better single-threaded processing, resulting in a net benefit.

So, "oversqueezed" systems are always more flexible and performance-dense, unless something else is done horribly wrong, like in the MBP's case. If I were designing a laptop, I would first of course make the cooling system as proper as possible, and then cram chips whose TDPs are right about the cooling capacity, and make sure I don't put some nonsense throttling scheme except the necessary thermal protections. You may call that "designing with throttling in mind", but it makes a better-performing laptop than the same laptop with a lower power processor. This way I can achieve the highest performance density.

On the other hand, though, if you're making a case for moving northeast on the performance-size curve altogether, like suggesting Apple should offer a faster (less throttly) but thicker MacBook Pro, that's perfectly valid.

What the CPU model happens to be is becoming less and less important, and the particular implementation is becoming the deciding factor. Just like informed drivers compare not just displacement and cylinder count in a car but also compare power output, acceleration times, lap times, etc., I wish more computer buyers would start comparing benchmarks and stress tests and not just processor models. Even better, manufacturers should start advertising benchmarks front-and-center more too. This way they have to be honest about their performance, or make white lies and get exposed when reviewers verify their own benchmarks.

 

Pretty much every laptop device on this planet does this. Not just Dell, people cant expect a desktop in a relatively small device no matter what and that is what a lot of users do unfortunately. The general public do not want big/thick hardware. So just making big heatsinks isnt a solution because they wont sell. A company cant stay a float and investors wont be happy. They release what the general/largest demographics want.

 

Thats not a bug from Dell, but with the Intel GPU drivers. It is present on all laptops and also display port. It only worked for years if you booted with the lid closed and the external monitor on. When switching it would start to hitch. I reported this problem a long time ago. Alienware for in my case gave me custom drivers to alleviate this. But in the end it is Intel their fault and they never properly adressed it until recently.

 

Isn't that what different models should be used for? For example, the 'truck' market is different than the 'van' market is different than the 'sports car' market. Auto makers don't make vehicles for the largest demographic, they engineer different models that target a specific segment.

Back to laptops... OEM/ODMs should have a model for the thin and light and less demanding crowd - who browse, take notes and email. A model for the general gamer. But then there's the professional/power enthusiast laptop market. They will value 'performance, performance, performance' (meaning safety or crippling features have been reduced) over thinner and lighter.

 

I too like a "stacked" system that runs far too hot as opposed to a "slim" system that can run fine. Something like the ThinkPad E480 with quad-core i7 and RX 550X runs far too hot stock to perform well. With some modding and tuning, that thing can run like a monster, crushing other laptops in terms of performance.

I think throttling itself is fine, but designing a product with throttling as a quick and easy solution rather than improving the thermal system is indeed a problem. If a product's heatsink is designed to be THE BEST it can possibly be and still be feasible to mass produce (like Mi Notebook Pro's huge heatsink), then throttling is fine. But if they clearly could make the heatsinks better and yet still choose to let it throttle, then I have a problem

I know the i9 MBP is far from perfect, but they should have realized that they would have struggled even with an i7. Cramming an i9 is a criminal waste of potential power, and is a valueless proposition for the vast majority of users.

If I were to design a laptop, I would make the beefiest heatsink possible

The Mi Notebook Pro's heatsink is what I would consider a "good" design. It covers a lot of the main hot components like VRMs, CPU and GPU. It has pretty good mounting points with 4 on CPU and 2 on GPU, which is about what I would expect given how hot the CPU can get. This is the best heatsink they could make, so any throttling that happens is fine. They couldn't do any better and still have a feasible design.


Something like this I would consider "disappointing". I could have used the MBP as an example, but that would just be beating a dead horse. The Acer E15 listed above has a heatsink design that is shockingly bad for the CPU and dGPU it has. A single fan and 1 heatpipe in that config is very inefficient from my experiences. Your 1 fan is big, but it is limited by how much it can reasonably cool with 1 point of cooling. It is clear what Acer's design team was thinking "If she gets hot, we throttle, so it's fine". This is unacceptable IMO

Neither of these laptops are "gaming" or "high performance", but you can clearly see the amount of effort they put into the heatsink. I would accept throttling on the Mi Notebook Pro as they did the best they could, but physics prevail. The E15 is set up to fail miserably, I would not accept throttling as that was their lazy and "quick fix" solution.

 

In an ideal laptop world that would be the case indeed. But the laptop market grew a lot thanks to the thin and lights and not because of the powerful machines. When I was still a student I also already played with the thought that I wanted to have a laptop great for gaming. But All Alienwares where just way too heavy so I kept my desktop for that and bought a Macbook Pro. Now Alienwares are luckily more easy to carry so I bought one. Still they are imperfect but the compromise imo is not too big (I dont have thermal issues with mine).

The Mibook pro heatsink is actually pretty crappy, single thi heatpipe with not much capacity and it's more of a dress up than an actually full cover heatsink. In general heatsinks need bigger radiators and thats where a lot of heatsink in current laptops fall flat, next to poor QC with too thick thermal pads that prevent heatsinks from making proper pressure.

 

I'm not sure that the thin/light was driving laptop growth, but I would say other factors like large price drop and market influence of smart phones had a lot to do with growth in addition to ease of use. But just as the sports car markets don't really drive the auto market overall, the enthusiast (or what I call the professional) product market is a niche... or possibly even a niche of a niche.

Also, you've categorized yourself as a user who likes to game, but values mobility and enough 'juice' for gaming. There is a model for that. But there's another market segment who wants more than what those type of products can deliver.

But that doesn't eliminate the want/desire of an ODM/OEM wanting to gobble up that market share (or $$$) or leaving dollars on the table. The question for them is to determine if there's enough demand to offset the cost of production for these models. With the new Alienware Area 51m, there may be a market for this afterall. Otherwise, why bother?

 

I too am a student, but I keep most of my serious gaming at home. I found that even when I could run any game and have a good time, I rarely had the time to do so outside. I found that just gaming at home to be fine, but obviously use cases vary. I know some good thin and light laptops that can also game well, but the thicker ones are usually the best options.

The Mi NoteBook pro's heatsink is MORE than enough for the chips it has. As per TechTablets' review "Xiaomi this time opted for two equal sized fans and a much larger cooling heat transfer pipe in the Mi Notebook Pro. As a result, thermals internally aren’t ever an issue, with maximum temps of around 81 degrees C on the CPU and under 70 degrees C on the GPU. This was with an overclock applied to the GPU of +220 to the core and + 1000Mhz to the RAM. And the CPU running a 40W TDP, up from 15W. So with the stock values, temps are great."

You don't need two heatpipes on a laptop like that, a single one will do just fine. It already performs amazingly well, so making it better would add additional cost for little gain. For more power, you would need a much better thermal system.

I think a triple heatpipe design with good mounting pressure and good coverage could easily handle a 6-core i7 and a GTX 1070MQ without any fuss. Or Vapor chambers if you wanna get all fancy

 

I just ment, that heatsink isnt the best style for gaming laptops in general. They use a similar style in their gamin gnotebook and that one runs quite hot. But it is true, the Mibook pro is pretty decent, especially for the money. I rather would pick that one over any similar priced Asus or MSI laptop.

 

I hope it breaks open the market, options are good and I do agree with what you say about that. Sometimes I wish I was just a millionaire and I could design the stuff that I want to buy myself. Because even though I enjoy smaller laptops. I hate that they did not use all the progress of the last couple of years to also make smaller notebooks modular.

 

When I said it was a good design, I meant it was good relative to the level of hardware inside it. It obviously is bad for a gaming laptop with a hexa core CPU and GTX 1070MQ, but with those specs it is quite alright. The best heatsink designs vary on the hardware they decide to cram into them

 

Same. I would totally design products I would actually buy myself. We could have been so much further if we didn't praise thickness and marketing hype so much

 

People have voted! Both is brand new 17,3 inch models.



----------------------

Dell have been the bell sheep a long time. Just read @unclewebb's thread.

 

And one is modular to boot!

 

But both come with Castrated firmware! Dell will have full control. What is better than offer you an app?



Yea, exactly. As the thread title...