Full fat RTX 2060 vs 2070/2080 Max Q

Am I right in thinking going for the full fat RTX 2060 model will allow for more mod-ability re flashing the card with different VBIOS for higher performance? From what I've experienced with this 1070 Max Q is that the Max Q chips are very locked down, my RB 15 2018 won't take any other 1070 Max Q VBIOS ...

 

Not really. the 2060 is in a sense also a maxq version compared to the desktop GPU but they are coming pretty much only in a single SKU now while for the 2070 and 2080 they also have a higher tier version (Still off compared to the desktop counterparts though).

But they are locked down with a reason, the Razer Blade chassis just cannot handle more. At stock the 2060 and 2070MQ GPU's are hovering around 73 to 77c under load already. This with the shared heatsink which in return would also heat up the CPU more. In the end the heat in the chassis will become too high and accelerates the dreaded battery bloat for which Razer machines are quite known.If I where you I really wouldnt mess with it. If you wanted higher performance you should have gone for a laptop with more room for it. The GPU mosfets arent cooled too well in these machines. Running a higher TDP would heat up those even more too.

At stock the Razer blade 15 is already on edge, undervolting is needed to keep it all in check.

 

I'd say wait for the next gen, also see if AMD has anything to offer, I'd still choose NVIDIA though.

The improvement shows that the strongest 2080 Max-Q (100W) brings (23000 Graphic score in FS) is only 32% faster than a 1070 Max-Q that scored 17300 Graphic score in FS.

And 2060 is only 0~7%.

In the past when 680M just came out it was at least 80% faster than a 675M ( 580M rebranded).

When I made the jump from 675M to 680M to 970M to 1070 Max-Q the improvements for each stage were 80% > 100% > 70% when it is thought this way the money is really well spent .

 

Nvidia rectified that with the 6XX MX series ofcourse. 32 is quite a lot of performance vs the 1070MQ in FS considering that it doesnt do anything with the newer functionalities of a GPU.

 

Nah, consider 2-3 years usage for a laptop for usual, 1 year is way too soon, RB15's 1070 Max-Q model only just came out last year, if the next gen comes the improvement felt would be much larger, this gen feels more like an experimental gen.

 

Thats Razer their own mistake. the 10XX is already for about 3 years on the market by now?

But if the Tensor cores are in use, the performance difference is much larger. The issue is that not many games use it still. The only game that I played which benefitted from the Tensor cores in terms of adding graphical fidelity without degrading performance too much was Control.

 

In other words, Ray tracing still needs refinement, which I think that's what the next gen will bring, even though the 10 series has been on the market for so long, but if you just look at the RTX itself and the current performance, the value just doesn't seem all that better. That's just one way of thinking, making a bigger jump every purchase.

 

Yeah cases can be made both ways. Developers have become so good when it comes to rasterized based rendering performance while they have to start all over with real time based ray tracing. BFV and Metro ran pretty crap performance wise with the tensor cores enabled. Looked very nice though. The performance even then is still loads higher than all previous generations. In that case the jump is quite large. But how usable is it would be the question then. THats why I mentioned Control which is one of the few games which looks great, runs pretty well with DLSS enabled while retaining good framerates. But that game has been made for it. Doom Eternal will have native support for it as well so hopefully that game would shine. If the games wont come, the tensor cores of this generation are kinda useless.

The nice thing with the Blade 15 2019 is though that it offers equal performance as full fat 1070s and 1080s from last gen thicker laptops in a thin chassis.