MAX Q

The most telling thing to me was the fact that the cooling solution still could not manage to keep the temps down when the system was under load.
Don't get me wrong, it is a sweet piece of tech, but it is not quite "there" yet IMO. A good first step into the world of ultra light gaming systems, but needs more work.

As for the build quality, based on the Asus systems that I've owned, it is not surprising. I have yet to lay hands on an Asus ROG laptop that was not suffering from lots of flex issues here and there.

I would buy one if I had money to burn, but I don't think it would surpass my 15R3 for daily usage or my M15X for that matter .

 

It's a little weird, I wouldn't want to move it around when it's open because of how the bottom opens up when the lid is open, but otherwise it seems fine.

 

Can someone say MAR-KE-TING. I am willing to bet anyhow. Have sales dipped for the 10 series GPU's? Maybe they are trying to spur some sales.

 

Doesn't seem like it, but interest has remained high on MQ even from people who are told what it is, so maybe they're just filling a hole in the market.

 

Is Nvidia Max-Q A Scam?!


He does a fine dance to justify the Max-Q

He shows the Alienware 1070 performance is the same or higher than the Alienware Max-Q 1080 performance.

I wish he would have taken the opportunity of having all 3 Max-Q laptops (Asus, Aorus, Alienware) in hand to do some actual testing, measurements, and comparisons and presented those results instead of giving generalizations.

Finally he rests the value on 39dba measured noise output from the fans, but it's clearly much higher when gaming under load. We've seen this in video's, and @Darkhan 's measurements:

From what I've heard from video's the fan noise has a much less offensive tone / pitch, just as forceful sounding, but less offensive. And, shaping the sound as well as directing it out into the room instead of back at the user is awesome.

I hope Asus and other makers make the same effort to shape and direct the fan noise in future full sized laptops too.

 

@D2 Ultima

Actually, what happened to your comment on Max-Q on NBC ? I saw it this Saturday on the german side, but a few hours later it was offline. Nvidia didn't like what you had to say ?

 

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Opini...-efficiency-minimum-performance.232038.0.html

 

Thanks, exacty what I was looking for.

 

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop) vs GTX 1060 (Max-Q) – performance, gaming and temperatures
http://laptopmedia.com/comparisons/...max-q-vs-regular-edition-which-one-is-better/

 

LOL

so its a 1050ti....

 

at least 20% faster.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

The gap between GTX 1050ti and GTX 1060 is much bigger, like 30- 35%. This is right between at 15%. Still disappointing. I figured that they should be able to tune a GTX 1060 much better and get within 5%

 

The 1050ti is up to 40% slower than the 1060?

If the Max-Q 1060 is 7%-20% slower than the 1060, then the 1050ti would then need to be 27%-40% slower than the 1060.

Does that sound right to you?

 

That's what I thought too, in fact I thought the Max-Q 1060 was supposed to be at the same TDP as the full 1060, but I guess the clock drop is just too high on the Max-Q 1060.

Not sure what the Max-Q 1060 is buying anyone, in the article they say the laptop itself isn't any thinner than any other model.

Has any vendor announced a purpose built Max-Q 1060 like the Asus Zephyrus Max-Q 1080?

I think a *really* thin Max-Q 1060 laptop akin to the Asus UX550 would be possible, but I haven't seen any announcements.

 

Yes. Firestrike graphics GTX 1050ti is about 7800... GTX 1060 is 11500. About 40% right there

 

Also both laptops cooling was rubbish for thick machines

 

And the max q in the review got 10400 graphics.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

Cool, thanks for checking

The Asus UX550 has a 1050ti, and it's really slim with 14 hours of battery life(!).

I was hoping a Max-Q 1060 might be offered in a slim laptop like the Asus UX550.

The Zephyrus is nice and slim, but it's not a UX550 class slim.

That's about the only part of the range I think Max-Q makes sense. Really slim, really powerful, long battery life.

Like the Asus UX550, but 40% faster

 

I Agree.

They should have never made the 1080 Max-Q.

And the others should have been named something different. They should have been ultra-book graphics without gimmicky features like opening bottoms and track-pads above the keyboards (Acer) and keyboards moved to front for cooling.

 

Yeah the more of these chips they launch the worse the Max Q story is becoming. I was hell bent on buying the Alienware 15 r3 with a 1080 max q until coming here and after launch when reviews started coming out..... Ending with a 17 r4 as a travel gamer (not super travel friendly but it will do just fine).

 

Yeah the more of these chips they launch the worse the Max Q story is becoming. I was hell bent on buying the Alienware 15 r3 with a 1080 max q until coming here and after launch when reviews started coming out..... Ending with a 17 r4 as a travel gamer (not super travel friendly but it will do ).

 

I just got back from a trip to DC with my 17 and it wasn't bad at all... just have to get the right backpack. (I use the newest lenovo Y series backpack). The extra real estate of the 17 inch display helps and overclocking a 1070 to 1080 numbers or getting the full 1080 (not max q) is the way to go.

Max q has its place in thin and lights but in an alienware that's fairly thick to begin with... nope.

 

Can you link that bag? I was thinking the Everki Titan.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Lenovo-GX40L...554209&sr=8-1&keywords=lenovo+gaming+backpack

 

Hi! May be it will be interesting cause there are no many tests about max q cards. I have bought recently Lenovo y520 15-IKBM with gtx 1060 3gb max q. It was 10300 in Fire Strike Graphics and 55 FPS in Rise of Tomb Raider 1920*1080*Very High benchmark. So I have only overclocked it's base gpu core from 1063 to 1263 Mhz using MSI Afterburner. Now it's stabil 11700 and 70 FPS!!! CPU and GPU temperature max 73 C!!! So gtx 1060 3gb max-q could work the same as gtx 1060 6gb no-max q!!!

 

Nah, that's still 2000 FS points behind the regular 1060 (about 15-20%). The 1060MQ is basically on the level of a 980M. More potent that the 1050 Ti/970M but not as powerful as a 1060

 

There is test for regular gtx 1060 laptop: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobil...060-Laptop-Benchmarks-and-Specs.169547.0.html.
So average result for regular gtx 1060 (laptop) in FSG is 11457!!! And note that average result in ROTR 1920*1080*Very high for gtx 1060 (laptop) is 61 FPS!!!

 

Indeed 11700 is about the same as the standard GTX1060 notebook with no overclocking. However, overclocking the notebook 1060, it can go to 12500.

 

It's true but price of new laptops with 1060 max-q is very good! And you could just overlclock it to reach results of more expensive regular gtx 1060 laptops. And also it's great that 3 Gb version of gtx 1060 max-q as fast as 6 Gb version if you have 16 Gb ram in system.

 

RAM is irrelevant. And most 1060 laptops that I've seen do about 13000 in FS post tweaking. 11500 is an average of all models tested. That includes the ones that overheat and throttle hard. Not to mention that 3GB on such a card is very very limiting for modern games that require 4-8GB

 

In ROTR i had 48 fps (1920*1080*very high) with 8 Gb of ram. And 55 fps after adding another 8 Gb. 7 fps is about 15%! It was before overclocking.

 

Also I think in case with 1060 max-q - it's the same cards just underclocked by nvidia. And also with low voltage. But after overclocking of gpu core by 200 mhz it gains the same performance with low voltage and low temperature!

 

The 1060MQ price should be about the same as the regular 1060, maybe a little less because of the 3GB, but there is a regular 1060 with 3GB option also, an Asus model has it. Checking the Lenovo site, with the 1060MQ, i7-7700HQ, 16GB, 256 SSD + 1TB HD, the price is not cheap....there are some options with the regular GTX1060 at more or less that price point....unless you got a major discount or something. Eitherway, nice to see that with some overclocking the 1060MQ performs on par with the regular 1060 with no OC.

 

There will be great discounts! 100%! I have already bought my y520 with 15% discount!

 

That's because you went from single-channel to dual-channel, if you had a 4x2 config prior, then the difference would be 0. Also shows that your CPU is bandwidth-starved.

 

Good Morning to you too. Yes, we know the Max-Qrippled cards are the same as the normal cards but wit an aggressive underclock and power limits. Hence why they're about 15-20% slower than the normal cards. Yes, you can get some performance back with an overclock but you're still behind an overclocked regular card.

 

Agree! But there is test of gtx 1060 6gb max-q: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobil...060-Laptop-Benchmarks-and-Specs.169547.0.html.
51 fps in ROTR. I had 48 fps with my gtx 1060 3gb and 8 gb ram. But i think 8 gb is not enough to keep the rest of very high textures in ROTR above 3gb of video memory. But if you have 16 gb of ram ROTR use it and you gain more fps.

 

If the RAM was the issue - you'd see a LOT of stuttering and lag. Not lower fps. What you are describing is not possible.

 

Ok, if I set up ultra settings in such demanding games as Witcher 3 which need more than 3gb - why don't I see stuttering and lag?

 

Ok, if I set up ultra settings in such demanding games as Witcher 3 which need more than 3gb - why don't I see stuttering and lag?

 

Because some games hide the "Ultra" setting when it detects a GPU with less than 4GB. Look at Mirror's Edge - the 970 is literally incapable of running Ultra textures due to it only have 3.5GB of VRAM whereas the R9 390 is able to select that setting.

 

So every game I run on my config is playable on ultra settings. Nothing is hidden. 3 Gb memory, no shuttering, no lag. Today I have played Witcher 3 on 1920*1080 on ultra settings, with hairworks on - 40 fps stably.

 

Witcher 3 @ Ultra @ 1440p barely uses 2.5GB of VRAM. Not exactly a good way to tax your VRAM usage Try ME or BF1 - I'm pretty certain you'll start dropping frames. Take it from someone who has been using a 3GB card for 2 years - some games will not be playable with maxed out texture settings due to VRAM.

 

Ок, I'll try and wright here) Another think I would say - it's interesting that integrated video (hd 630) is working and not switched off. I have had Asus gl502vs (gtx 1070) recently and there integrated video have been svitched off.

 

Because the GL502VS uses G-sync which means that the display is connected directly to the dGPU. In your current device, the iGPU is the one who controls the display and the dGPU does the heavy lifting under a 3D workload where the iGPU functions as a pass-through. This is how Optimus is set up.

 

I've heard about Optimus but thought that it works in Auto mode. But I can choose which gpu is working for each app manualy. Is it normal for Optimus too?

 

You cannot control whether Optimus is enabled or disabled unless your laptop comes with a MUYX switch (yours does not have one) - so you have no direct control over it.

 

But actually I CAN choose manualy in nvidia drivers which gpu works with each app! For example I can choose hd 630 for 3dmark and gain about 1000 in FS. Also I can choose it for every game.

 

That doesn't affect anything. The drivers have no control over the OEM firmware or the display controller. To put it this way, if you disable the iGPU, the system will no longer be usable a you would NOT be able to get a screen displayed.

 

If it doesn't affect anything why I really get 1000 in 3dmark if I choose hd 630 in nvidia control panel? And also I've tested DOOM and got about 8-10 fps.