New Clevos with Max-Q?

I know, but right now is my statement valid. Alienware + Apple None know what will come.

 

Here's to hoping for an MXM that will be compatible...Hoping to go crossfire....

 

Keep positive, maybe it will happen.

 

Even better, thought slightly less likely.

 

I really doubt Vega will be on laptops. I even doubt that Vega will be a lot faster then a 1080...
Maybe next generation.

But keep the hope up. Maybe I'm wrong.

Enviado do meu MHA-L29 através de Tapatalk

 

The Perfect Gaming Laptop!

 

You are talking about the same price range

$2700-$3000++

Those AW 1070's are already too expensive as configured usefully, then add on $400 for what? Less performance from a Max-Q 1080? Why?

You can OC that 1070 for better performance with 125w TDP headroom, vs 110w for the Max-Q 1080.

It's a rip-off either way.

Get a nice 1070 for around $1700-2000, and save a bunch of cash

 

I do like the combination touchpad/keypad on the version but I would argue about the "The Perfect Gaming Laptop" title. It's only advantage is the portability and it comes for a ludicrous price.

 

Yeah, he's doing that for clicks, Max-Q won't get enough clicks.

He starts out saying there's no such thing as a perfect gaming laptop, and he's still correct

 

I agree....I just pointing out that the price difference between the 1070 and 1080M is around $400, which is about the same as upgrading from the 1070 to a 1080 in notebooks that allow it, I.e clevo....so they are charging the same for the 1080MQ as the 1080 standard notebook version.

 

Well the latest Vega frontier results show 1080 perofrmance for 300w......

 

Hopefully it will get a bit better by the time the RX is released and they offer a good price.

 

In laptops that are already too expensive.

The point of Max-Q is to make expensive things even more expensive to make more money for providing less.

You don't need a $2600 laptop to get a good 1070 laptop, you can spend, $1700, or less on sale.

Right they are charging 1080 prices for Max-Q 1080 laptops, and you don't get the 1080 performance... so... why?

Yeah, I get it, Max-Q is quieter... so run a frame limiter set to refresh rate and make the noisy laptop with better performance quieter, when you want it to run quieter.

 

A bit better? For notebooks it needs to be around HALF that power consumption....

 

How many times did AMD say "PLEASE DON'T DO GAME TESTING ON OUR PROFESSIONAL GPU!!!" ?

What's with the brain freeze around this issue??

It's not a gaming card, wait for RX Vega... sheesh.

 

Same silicon I'd give them some leeway sure but half the performance per watt?

 

sorry, i got lost in translation... so what did you mean by this? AMD Vega should only need 150w to match GTX 1080 performance? Meaning it still far behind Nvidia? or the other way around?

 

IDK, it depends, right?

If it's a full performance 1080 laptop, then it's somewhere between 180w-220w+

If it's a mid-range laptop 1080, then it's somewhere around 140w-170w.

If it's a low-end wanna-be 1080 laptop, "Wow!, look!, I've got a 1080!!" Max-Q laptop, it's 90w-110w.

I don't think AMD is worried about power levels yet, they are just trying to get the best performance for the price. Desktops will be much higher power usage.

 

The desktop 1080 is around 180w and this is releasing far later and with less mind share so wants at least some advantage.

 

Isn't setting the fan profile to automatic in the Clevo control center already makes the system quiet?

 

Yeah, sure, if that's quiet enough for you to use it. Otherwise set a custom fan curve. Tune it for your needs.

Giving the fans less thermal energy to expel from the laptop helps that fan curve out, making it easier and quicker to quietest operation.

For 99% of gamers, if you have a 60hz /120hz refresh, use g-sync or an FPS limiter to stop burning through so much CPU / GPU load rendering so many unneeded frames.

If you want to emulate Nvidia's detuning of GPU's with Max-Q, just drop the GPU and CPU load through tuning. Game settings tuning can help too.

If you are willing to accept 1070 performance from a 1080, then I'm sure you can make your 1080 or 1070 under perform and run quieter too

 

Not All Nvidia Geforce 1080 Max-Q's Are Created Equal | Alienware
Alienware - "TGP"


IDK, doesn't this seem a bit "bad" for even Alienware... it's almost like their youtube channel got hacked and someone posted this as a joke...

Alienware even put into this video benchmark comparisons between the AW 15 1070 OC vs AW 15 Max-Q, and the 1070 OC beats the 1080 Max-Q!!

How Cool is that?

 

Clevo fans are not quiet.

Personally I prefer less performance (say, 10% less) and a quiet system.

I sent a clevo p670 back and got an Asus g752vs just because of the noise. The Asus is whisper quiet under load. The quality of the fans is really important.

I know there are systems that can be 10% faster then mine with similar hardware. But It doesn't really bother me.

If it wasn't for the exaggerated price premium I would say this Max-Q would be fantastic if regular gpu were also given as a choice.

Enviado do meu MHA-L29 através de Tapatalk

 

It's Alienware totally dumping on the whole Max-Q idea

Finally AW stands up for performance over BS. @Mr. Fox

I think AW is gonna get some heat from Nvidia from this, but hey, Dell / AW are probably Nvidia's largest desktop / notebook GPU customer, so Dell / AW should be able to speak up when something dumb like Nvidia Max-Q comes along

It is nice having AW confirm what we've been saying all along, a good full performance 1070 OC will outperform the Max-Q 1080 performance, for a lot less money.

 

Yep and the 1070 oc will be chewing a fair amount more power.

 

That's probably why Alienware lists the 1070 as 125w TDP and the 1080 Max-Q as 110w TDP in the laptop configurator.

So, more performance takes more power, is that really a surprise?

Or, even an important point to make?

 

The idea that $(small performance increase + lower noise output + thin light form factor) = $(larger performance increase) isn't really problematic in my eyes at all. I mean, I'd go for the latter any day of the week, but that's my own preference and if I did want a thin/light/quiet system I don't think I'd settle for a detuned bigger heavier system.

 

Of course you'd be saying that, you've got pallets piled high with Max-Q laptops still steaming fresh...

The good news is those Max-Q laptops are so darned thin and light, the pallets of them stacking up in the warehouse won't take up as much room, and they'll be lighter and easier to move around, as the years go by...

 

Yup, the maximum TDP of 1080 Max-Q we should see is 110W.

 

We've got way more full sized non-MQ systems. Wanna buy one?

 

IDK, if you don't want one, why would I want one?

 

And alot of people would have had their back for standing up... had Alienware not already taken a dump on it's loyal customers. It's too late for AW to complain now that BGA got too BGA for their liking.

 

Missed the "but" in that statement, I was saying I *would* go for the bigger higher performance one. To put it differently: Bigger, higher performance = I would buy. Smaller, lighter, quieter, lower performance increase = I would buy if I needed more portability. Bigger but detuned to be more efficient/quieter = I would not buy.

Also, now that I think of it, we don't have any pallets of MQ sitting around, everything that came in for launch is already sold and we're back to pre-order on everything.

 

nice, so there are high demands for MQ GPU laptops.
i'm not surprised though, i believe Nvidia marketing and sales division already done their homework.
heck, if not for the large price gap between non-MQ and MQ, i probably would buy one too.

 

But more performance per watt so the machine can run quieter at a level of performance that would be impossible to tell apart side by side.

 

Yeah, I think they need to specify that it's still an upgrade, but not a performance one so much. So a branching upgrade, you pick whether that upgrade gets you a different form factor or whether it gets you more performance. Either will cost money because they're still upgrades, it's just what you want to spend that upgrade money on pretty much.

 

Nvidia marketing dept know what they are doing.

Engineering the market with a 'thin light n quiet' package for gaming laptops where perf per Watt is the critically important aspect of the package

... when AMD is struggling to get out a product, whose perf/W looks as comparatively atrocious as any other from the last few years

 

I would actually consider a GTX 1060 Max-Q. Not the GTX 1080 Max-Q, that one is a ripoff , unless I was some wealthy Arab prince .

 

Yeah, the 1080mq is more for those where budget is not a concern.

 

There's enough of a difference to let the same AW 15.6" laptop chassis benchmark 1070 OC outscore the Max-Q 1080, according to Alienware.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/max-q.805420/page-36#post-10555881


It looks like the small added TDP for the full power 1070 (125w) let it outperform the detuned Max-Q 1080 (110w).

Clearly Nvidia could have used a tuned 1070 instead of an expensive detuned 1080 for the same performance results for far less money.

Further demonstrating that the Max-Q 1080 is an embarrassing disaster.

 

And whose level of research stops at "bigger number = better"

 

Asus ROG Zephyrus/ GTX 1080 Max-Q Review! The Most Powerful Thin and Light Laptop?

 

I agree with DigitalFoundry on the naming scheme of the GPU....maybe gtx 1075

 

Why did you ignore the first part of my quote?

You can either get the 1070 regular and overclock it, have it consuming 130-140W or have the 1080mq at stock give the same performance in real terms (if they were side by side you would not be able to tell the difference in a game) at 110W giving you quieter machine.

Don't want to spend the extra? The 1070 is still there.

 

Can most part of the 1070 pull up to 140w?

 

Electronics are typically less efficient at higher power levels, no exception with video cards. It's plausible that the MQ cards running at lower power will yield similar performances to their full beans younger brothers. Lower power, less heat, less cooling requirement, less noise.

That said, it kinda feels like buying a 12 cylinder Ferrari with 4 of the cylinders deactivated, but paying full price for the 12 cylinders. Perhaps similar performance to an 8-cyl Ferrari but...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Except nothing is fused off, it's just running at lower clocks, car analogy is hard in this case. More like it's speed limited.

 

Good point. Lower capacity fuel injectors perhaps?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Source: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-8gb-pascal-performance,4585-8.html



Similar curve but you get savings by having the GDDR5x and fully enabled core.

I am not recommending this for most users, but for those where form factor is more important but you still want the best then these are an option.

 

Update:

I guess it was wishful thinking then?