New Clevos with Max-Q?

This. The only thing that isn't disposable is gold... Because you can always, always exchange it for money. It only depends on how much you'll get.

 

I do find it amusing everyone is going ballistic over results given by Acer of all people and listed by notebookcheck.

What happened to at least having an ounce of patience people?

 

Like they say at /r/AMD... Bait for wenchmarks.

 

I have no understanding of that word.

 

so today the benchmark will be released?

 

It looks like the release countdown clock still has 6 hours and 46 minutes...

https://www.asus.com/us/Laptops/ROG-ZEPHYRUS-GX501VI/

 

I guess now that the NDA is over, they can market Max Q name....so the Asus site does mention Max Q....at least that.

 

I didn't know Asus didn't list Max-Q... I thought it was only MSI...

The new MSI GS63vr is Max-Q, but the product page doesn't mention it, although it does say 1070...

GS63VR 7RG STEALTH PRO
https://www.msi.com/Laptop/GS63VR-7RG-Stealth-Pro.html#hero-overview

"Most powerful ultra slim 15.6'' gaming notebook with GeForce® GTX 1070"

Here are the specs of the new MSI GS63VR and GS73VR with NVIDIA GeForce Max-Q GPUs
http://laptopmedia.com/news/here-ar...vr-and-gs73vr-with-nvidia-geforce-max-q-gpus/

And, there's still almost 3 hours left before the NDA is over:
https://www.asus.com/us/Laptops/ROG-ZEPHYRUS-GX501VI/

 

NDA lifted.. but still no info on benmchmark etc

 

@GenTechPC uploaded a review and benchmark for the MSI GS73VR that has the Max-Q 1070, and here are the results as a snapshot from the video, and the video too:

@GenTechPC also uploaded a nicer image in the GS63VR thread, and I also posted in the GS73VR thread, you might want to reply there too:

Spoiler: Clean Fire Strike Results image

Review + Benchmarks: MSI GS73VR 7RX Stealth Pro w/ GTX 1070 MaxQ

 

14600ish FS gfx score
Proper 1070 laptop, 16000-18000

Also needs to be noted that long term thermal limits or the temp-related pascal throttle often aren't revealed by one short bench run that barely heats anything up

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1070-Laptop.169549.0.html

 

At least it's faster than a 1060
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobil...060-Laptop-Benchmarks-and-Specs.169547.0.html

1060 Fire Strike
11,400-12,300 Graphics vs. 14,670
9,600-10,300 Score vs 12,060

It's not too bad, it's probably about as quiet as a real 1070 laptop detuned to put out that score. Note the ~40dba noise reading during the run. I think a real 1070 detuned in a larger frame would run quieter and with lower temps.

It's right smack in the middle of performance between the 1060 and 1070, it could be properly called a 1065 to represent the performance numbers. About 20% faster than a 1060 and 20% slower than a full 1070 laptop.

@GenTechPC

Does MSI's Dragon Gaming Center have a "Sport" option for better performance? Is the Max-Q mode labeled within MSI DGC?

What does that DGC control center look like for performance tuning?

Is there a way to bump up CPU / GPU and unlock the quiet mode for full performance?

During an hour or more of gaming how does it hold up with limits disabled for full performance?

 

The issue is that boost clock varies with the temperature, we need to run 10 sessions of 3dmark in a loop and then post the average score. By the looks of it, the Max-Q are nothing else than the old M versions of laptop video cards.

 

The M versions usually had cut down specifications and clocks too.

 

1070Max-Qrippled +-15500P in 3DM11 Notebookcheck.net

 

- benchmark

 

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Nvidia-Max-Q-WhisperMode-Information-Initial-Benchmarks.230426.0.html

 

From my post in the MAX Q thread
How the Asus ROG GX501 Zephyrus performs with Nvidia's Max-Q technology


"The result you see here is likely to set off some alarm bells in gamers looking for the absolute in performance.

At the top, you can see MSI's GT73VR . It's a great laptop , but it's more along the lines of the classic, heavy-duty, huge and thick laptop people have come to expect if it's meant for gaming. In second place we have a virtual tie between the latest Razer Blade Pro (2016), which also has a GTX 1080 inside."

+21% lower performance in 3DM FS Extreme 1.1 vs. normal 1080 graphics, and this with the more crippled fully locked 7700Hq. Or put it in better light, +-2.4% faster than a stock 1070.


And Yeah, As expected... Razer put in *first version* Max-Crippled 1080 graphics from Nvidia!! And almost same score!!

 

Asus ROG GX501VI Zephyrus 120hz IPS (GTX 1080 NVIDIA MAX-Q) FULL Review

UNBOXING! New ASUS ROG Zephyrus Laptop with Max-Q Design

Hands-on with the incredibly thin Asus Zephyrus gaming laptop

 

I'd never run FS Extreme before on my 2017 RBP so I just gave it a go. Got a 9097 with 9778/13663 graphics/physics.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I still don't understand why they wouldn't do this, it would be the most accurate naming convention.

 

You think they used it as a testbed since it's Razer and the wider community would just chalk it up to Razer being Razer? That would make sense. I figured it was something Razer did software-side after realizing that putting a 1080 in that form factor would reach fusion temperatures on boot.

 

TL;DW: GTX 1080 Max-Q = GTX 1070 performance; GTX 1070 Max-Q = "GTX 1065". I believe the 1060 Max-Q will be the closest to the 1060's true performance, but we shall wait and see.

 

I kinda figured they wouldn't bother with a 1060 MQ and just let it ride since it's already pretty low impact on the system.

 

The Max-Q version is about 10 - 15% less powerful than the original mobile 1060, performance probably landing somewhere between the 1050Ti and that.

 

The Max-Q version of the 1060?

 

In terms of performance, I'm guessing it would look like:
1. 1060
2. 1060 Max-Q
3. 1050 Ti

Going off of the specs on notebookcheck.

 

Asus ROG Zephyrus: Slim, Sexy Chassis, Crazy Powerful Gaming Performance

 

here a german review for that gx501
https://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Asus-ROG-Zephyrus-GX501-Laptop.226328.0.html

 

This still stands firm!!

Conclusion!! Translated. Damn nice with the more *powerful* and more expencive 1080 1070 Yeah, You get what yoo pay for!!

 

From this article:

Could be interesting...

I believe Prema said Clevo had designed Max Q notebooks that were able to cool their non Max Q counterparts (but had gone with "Max Q" for marketing reasons)

 

If they made it do you could switch back and forth, that would be pretty nice.

 

ASUS ROG Zephyrus: Thinnest laptop with a GTX1080 EVER?!?!

 

One thing that is noted in KitGuru's video is that the Zephyrus more or less succeeded on a technical level when it comes to noise (and by extension temps). Even accepting the fact that the GTX1080MQ runs more or less like a full 1070, it does so MUCH quieter than most full 1070 machines.

ie. most thin-ish 1070 machines (such as the Clevo P650) sit around the 50dB level which is a huge difference compared to 40dB. Something like the Aorus X5 (which I believe may have been the previous thinnest GTX1070 machine) puts out a whopping 53-57dB.

I'll be interested to see what the full NBC tests look like for a 1070MQ machine. Most current thin 1060 machines cannot meet the 40dB requirement and yet the 1070MQ is going into those chassis types.

 

A Max-Q laptop is designed to run within a power and thermal envelope, one that reduces the performance of the GPU used down to the GPU model one level down in the line. A Max-Q 1080 becomes a 1070 in performance.

You can't add power or thermal handing capacity to a physical design already made. The size and mass of the thermal hardware is a fixed physical thing, you can't switch it on demand.

You can't all of a sudden switch from Max-Q power and thermal design to a "real" laptop with full power and thermal capacity.

And, if you start with a full sized full performance laptop, you can't "switch on" Max-Q to reduce weight and size.

You could "switch on" an "Eco" mode that wouldn't get louder than 39dba fan noise, and reduce the performance to that of a Max-Q laptop, but many full sized laptops already have that feature for quiet running.

 

You mean, swap the noise with Throttle? Yeah, everything is possible. Depends what should be prioritized Some like less or shall we say crippled performance. And 7700hq is weak from before

 

Well here's the thing, the chassis is simply not capable of running a 1080 at full power. Now that you get that out of the way, you'd also find that similar thin chassis are also not capable of running a 1070 at full power at that noise level. Hell, most "thin" machines can't even run a 1060 full speed at 40dB.

So as I said, they've succeeded and the only problem people seem to have is with the name. If they called it a "1070 Quiet Edition" instead of a "1080 MaxQ" people would think it's the greatest thing ever, despite the fact that would be more of a lie than the current naming scheme.

Here's a reality check. The fact is: it works. It's thin, light and plays games damn fast.
Jump on the NBC benchmark sheet for the 1080MaxQ and the FPS numbers are pretty much green across the board: https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1080-Max-Q-GPU-Benchmarks-and-Specs.224730.0.html

Some people just want to play games with good frame-rates on a thin-and-light laptop without all the noise associated and Max-Q does exactly that. Most people don't give a toss about what it's called.

You'll just have to get over that

 

The thermal capacity is largely impacted by fan RPMs. Assuming the fans can go faster than the 40dB limit then you basically increase thermal capacity at the same time.

 

And at what cost? Notebooks are already bad value—we pay more for less. This Max-Q is just that, magnified thrice over. The only thing that's better off are noise levels and size, but everything else is worse, from thermals, performance (I mean, go tell the desktop users that you've got a 1080 that's throttled to perform like a 1070, see what they say), to even battery life. What's the point of having a thin-and-light, if you haven't even got the battery life to prove it? The Zephyrus gets 2.5 hours, new. Give it a year of fairly heavy usage, exposing the battery to 60—70°C temps, and see the useful life go down to an hour, which then utterly defeats the purpose of the portability of the machine.

 

I'm not saying it's good value or bad value. Some people will just pay for it if it's worth it to them in the same way people have always bought the popular Razer Blade and MSI GS60 despite their many drawbacks and significant price premiums over fatter and similarly equipped models. At least this time, you get the added bonus of "less noise" to the somewhat lesser valued "thinness" and "build quality" for your money.

Furthermore, everyone keeps holding the Zephyrus up as the benchmark to judge Max-Q by when it is neither going to be the most prevalent model nor the most practical use of Max-Q. It's basically a concept car of laptops. It's more of a statement of "1080 in a tiny box" than anything else as evidenced by it's utterly useless keyboard/touchpad arrangement and tiny 50Wh battery.

As far as battery life well...lets just get into that can of worms with a nice list:

1. Battery life is dead simple: Battery Life = Battery Capacity / Power Draw. If you want more battery life you either need to draw less power or use a bigger battery (point 2). There's no magic want that'll let you get 1080 performance for half the power draw, lets be real here.
2. There is a 100Wh legal flying limitation on batteries so everyone keeps them below this. Doesn't matter if it's a massive P870 or a tiny W230. Funnily enough, the Aero14/15 and Aorus x3/5 series use some of the largest batteries (94Wh) and yet, are some of the thinnest machines available.
3. If the Zephyrus gets 2.5 hours under load that doesn't sound very good. Until you consider that it has a tiny 50Wh batter AND 2.5 hours is still much longer than any full 1070 equipped machine.
   For example, the P650HS-G has a 60Wh battery and pulls 1:50 under load. If the Zeyphyrus gets 2.5 hours with similar performance AND a smaller battery, then that's a pretty serious increase in battery life.

If we extrapolate based on the Zephyrus, then something like an Aorus15 equipped with 94Wh battery could get close to double that life. Lets go really conservative and say 4 hours under load.
That's still well over double what any other 1070 laptop has pulled and especially one without Optimus (since it's G-Sync 120hz).

For reference, the current Aorus X5v6 with a 1070 and 99Wh battery only gets 1h40m under load.

The battery life "sacrifice" is just false because even the "big" laptops often don't use the biggest battery possible (Alienware15 is the rare exception). Even the biggest Clevo P870 tops out at 89Wh.
You aren't sacrificing battery life because even the biggest laptops have poor numbers because the power draw is still the same.

 

I believe that is exactly the result we'll get if what Prema and Notebookcheck reported add up. I don't know about implementation, though. I think the article mentions the possibility of setting different target values. Who knows? It may be a couple of clicks to switch it on/off or a completely different firmware...

 

Basically that's what MSI Dragon Control Center does with Performance profiles: Eco, Normal, Sport modes, and a section or separate tool (Silent Option) to create a custom fan curve.

Asus and other vendors have similar tools.

 

Haven't seen it posted here yet but there's a video and some benchmarks of the MSI GS73 7RX (1070MaxQ) by GenTech which I think really accents what I've been getting at, which is that the 1070MQ is the real winner here:


So to comparing it with the GS73VR-6RF (on NBC), the 1070MaxQ machine is:

1. Faster. 14670 GPU score vs 11506 for the 1060. That's a bit over 27% faster which is not huge, but beyond what a regular mobile 1060 is capable of (highest recorded GPU score on 3dmark.com is 13597).
   For reference, the median 1070 mobile score is 17131 which is another 16% faster than the Max-Q.
   Similarly, the fastest desktop 1060 that isn't running SLI, LN2 or eGPU (lots of eGPU results skewing things actually) is 15847. Highest I've achieved on my desktop card is 14307@2088mhz bouncing off the 116% power limit.
2. Quieter. 45dB seen in the video with the sound meter right up against the vent. The GS73 1060 records 47dB on NBC which tests 15cm from the noise source.
3. Cool?*?. 69C under Firestrike in the video but Firestrike is a pretty short test (hence why I put Asterisks since it's not totally comparable to NBC's test). The GS73 1060 Firestrike graphs look almost identical so I'd say temperature development on the GPU side is likely very similar.

If you're after a thin machine that's faster than the 1060 then you can now get it (for more money obviously). And it's quieter than the 1060 as well.

 

And we already have a not-so-thin but not-so-heavy laptops with a powerful 1070,1080's in it and you get what you paid for.

But people complain that they are too bulky, too heavy, and too noisy and all that kind of whining...why not just get a GYM membership and a good noise cancelling headphone? That is the most logical and practical thing to do but then again that's just me.

 

That's the weakest justification I've ever seen (pun intended).

Thin/light laptops have been incredibly popular for years. How are there still people who want to pretend this is not the case?

 

I'm not justifying anything just sharing my opinion.

Thin and light laptops...we all want that but not how they perform for such an expensive price tag.

 

@Stooj—Aftershock has released the P950 with the Max-Q 1070... I'd like to see how it performs. I'll probably pop over to their showroom and try out a couple of benchmarks...

 

@Ionising_Radiation Also, for comparison, see my benchmarks from June 8th in the below post:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/new-clevos-with-max-q.805381/page-32#post-10542576

 

There's a lot of money on the line, lots of people with lots of hardware to move, I'm not saying there will be misleading benchmark's published to move hardware, but I'm already seeing impossible results being published.

I'm seeing "impossible" performance results in some benchmarks - matching full power 1080 330w vs Max-Q 1080 230w vs RBP 250w, which of course is impossible.

Not to mention the slim case's not having enough thermal cooling capacity compared to the full frame laptops to sustain high performance results, especially when cooling is limited to 39dba noise output

I'd say buyer beware, and use your common sense to help guide your purchases. If you end up stuck with a laptop that doesn't perform as you expect, return it, and be sure to check the restocking fee situation before putting your money on the line.

If you want to buy a Max-Q laptop, be critical to the point of verifying performance claims when you get your laptop home, and use the acceptance period wisely to make sure you want to keep it long term.

I hope everyone that buys a Max-Q laptop keeps it, enjoy's it, and finds it's well worth the money invested.

 

@hmscott You're right and that exactly one of the reasons why we haven't gone all out in launching as soon as they are available. Imediately on Computex we started getting enquiries about XMG with Max-Q, of course we'd been testing for a while before the launch but we just didn't see exactly where they would fit into our current line up and of course marketing them is a little tricky!