Razer Blade (2014) Owner's Lounge

Exactly my plan as well. I wouldn't trust any manufacturer to drop a top of the line drive in regardless. Always planned on upgrading PCIe.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

There's not a lot of information out there, but from what I can tell M.2 socket *IS NOT* compatible with MSata:

Can i use mSATA SSDs on a m.2 socket? [Solved] - SSD - Storage

https://www.sata-io.org/sata-m2-card

 

There are two things going on here. M.2 DOES support mSATA but not with the traditional mSATA connection. It requires a new connector not found on current mSATA SSDs. In addition to mSATA, M.2 also supports PCIe through the same connector. Drives that are both PCIe and mSATA are available with the new connector. It looks as though the drive Razer is supplying only uses the mSATA pass through of the connection (based on their listed specs). I would love for that to be wrong but we have to assume that's what they're doing.

What we have to hope is that the motherboard firmware supports the PCIe pass through, ether out of the box or with an update from Razer. It is possible that the hardware connections are there but firmware isn't for PCIe.

The whole selling point behind the new M.2 connector is that it supports both, although it doesn't physically support the older mSATA pins. It s possible that someone may release and M.2 to traditional mSATA connector though, BT I'd rather hope for PCIe support.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

That is correct, they are two different drive types. But it gets even more complicated. M.2 (or NGFF - Next Gen Form Factor) comes in a couple different styles (notches) for SSDs. SATA based M.2 drives are mostly keyed to the B+M notches (Crucial or Toshiba as exambles) or sometimes just the B notch (Intel), versus PCIe native drives (which can be substantially faster, like 3-4x and up) which use the M key (Samsung). These keyings seem to be general practice but are not requirements of the spec, meaning an M keyed only drive could be SATA but the manufacturers seem to be keeping things a little bit clearer.

Anyhow, the drive in the Razer Blade appears to be of the SATA type, my guess is either the Crucial or possibly the Toshiba. Based on availability now you can save almost $200 by getting the 128GB from Razer and upping it to 512GB aftermarket.

Here's a little bit of infos on different drive types: Understanding M.2 NGFF SSD Standardization (Or The Lack Of) | The SSD Review.

 

Damn. Your explanation was better then mine. I blame having to write it up on my phone, haha.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

It's not, it's supposed to replace it. M.2 is SATA 3.0 compatible though. That's the improtant thing to realize. So you'll still be able to purchase drives at roughly 50-75 cents a GB that are SATA 3.0, or you can utilize the newer PCI-E drives that are up to twice as fast but twice as expensive. The connection opens up a lot of options. I wish it was mSATA compatible but unfortunately that socket is too limited to go much farther than it has already.

 

Lol, and as I typed it on my phone, two other responses were posted.

 

Are you guys 100% sure that a PCIe M.2 drive will work in the Razer Blade? Is it possible it's engineered to only accept SATA and not be functional for PCIe bus or is that not possible and it has to support both interfaces?

 

I'm sure it's possible but it would be totally messed up for Razer to do something like that. They would basically have to intentionally engineer and limit a standard socket. There's really nothing for them to gain by limiting it. There's also the possibility of them limiting it somehow in the bios. That would also be messed up... I would hope for spending this amount of money they wouldn't limit their customers that badly. Considering they voluntarily put a spare mSata and allowed RAID 0 in their last model, I would think they would not intentionally do that.

 

I'm not sure how strict Razer is with their "Void if opened" warranty. But if they actually are strict then the $200 could be worth it for a warranty.

 

I would be willing to bet rather large amounts of "I told you so" that the Blade is definitely not compatible with PCIe native M.2 drives, though it's still speculation on my part. I've only played with a few adapters for both the SATA M.2 and the PCIe M.2 and the two adapters/drives are not interchangeable with the other. As I understand it they can be made to be cross compatible with some hardware negotiation but if Razer had done this with the Blade I would think they would have included the higher spec'd drive at least as an option. The retail difference is only about $100, $200, or $300 different between SATA and PCIe native M.2 drives based on the three size options.

 

It's not about price. It's about speed and power consumption. The Samsung XP941 (which HID says the computer can be configured with: HIDevolution New Razer Blade 14 QHD+ GTX 870M) is way faster than any SATA drive, and probably more power efficient as well. It's possible, though, that HID is working miracles or selling something that doesn't exist/

 

Yeah, after digging deeper, I think I may be incorrect in assuming they were compatible. There are a couple laptops out there that are indeed M.2 SATA only. I'm baffled really because I always thought the whole freaking point of the new connection standard was to open up the compatibility and speed capabilities of future SSDs. If I were a system designer, why would I want to replace mSATA with a longer M.2 slot if it's still limited to SATA 3.0 speeds? If that's the case, I wish they would have just stuck with mSATA.

Edit: HIDevolution just updated their options to include SATA drives only. They are only showing the crucial now.

 

Well, I'd say that settles that question. It's really unfortunate, to say the least. The crucial sucks up power at a ridiculous rate according to the review on Amazon. I have absolutely no idea why Razer wouldn't go with the patently better option: faster, more battery life, etc.

 

They're still guessing at that second slot too.

 

The actual power draw of the drive does look high, but in reviews I've seen battery life same as or better than Samsung. I'll see if I can find review. I'd pay more attention to reviews with actual system battery life comparison than just strict power ratings.

 

Hello guys,

After having enough with this ridiculous company called "Dell" and their piece of garbage laptop "XPS 15 Haswell" I decided to ask Dell for a refund. If the refund request goes through I am planning to get the top tier (512GB SSD) Razer blade. Of course the XPS 15 haswell has superior hardware specs but at the same time it has problems with EVERYTHING. So... I would like to ask you a couple of things but also share my thoughts before I take the decision and switch to Razer Blade:
1) Dell XPS 15 has a BIOS option that will optimize the battery usage for users who mostly use the laptop when they are hooked on the AC adapter. As a results the battery lifespan can increase substantially. Does Razor Blade 2014 have something similar?
2) The Razer Blade 2013 had a "Killer" or something NIC adapter that did not support WiDi (wireless HDMI). The specs of Razer Blade 2014 show an Intel NIC adapter. Does this mean that it supports WiDi? (Dell XPS 15 supports WiDi)
3) Dell XPS 15 supports 2 external monitors through hdmi and display port. Unfortunately Razer Blade only has 1 HDMI output. Can someone verify the following: a) the maximum resolution of the HDMI exceeds the simple FullHD b) when the external monitor is connected the laptop monitor is still enabled.
4) The Razer blade has a PCIe hard drive. Do we know the exact model? Does anyone have a crystalmark benchmark from the Razer Blade 2014? If it has the same hard drive with the MacBookPro Retina late 2013 then Razer Blade has really BAD SSD performance. The 4K read/writes on RetinaMacBookPro is worse than the cheapest SSDs out there. Only when transferring big files is really fast but you don't really need those speeds anyway. You need good 4K speeds and if Razer Blade has an identical SSD with MBPr then this is bad news.
5) Another disadvantage is the fact that Razer Blade doesn't have a card reader. Although this is not a huge problem, I could just buy a usb2card reader pendrive.
6) Does Razer Blade have any GPU or CPU throttling?
7) Is there any other issue with Razer Blade that I should be aware of?

Thank you very much.

 

I didn't know the problems of macbookpro retina with 4k read/write...good to know!

Inviato dal mio SM-N9005

 

The XPS15 does not have superior hardware specs to the 2014 blade. The 2014 blade should run circles around the XPS15 in everything but physical panel size and memory. If you're not running VMs or intense work requiring 16GB. Gaming will go to Razer.

 

it doesnt. it uses the samsung controllers that are used in the XP941 that everyone loves, aka 840 pro

 

Unfortunately a lot of the questions you are asking are questions that we are all asking as well but we don't know since no one seems to have a unit and there are little to no reviews. Also of these questions you could have answered by just looking at the razers page.
1) This won't be known until the system is released and one of us gets out hands on it.
2) The new Razer uses an Intel Wireless chip, which could be found on the razer page but still here are the specs for the wireless adapter. I am pretty sure its WiDi capable, since its a newer Intel adapter.
3) This I am not sure about but the laptop monitor should be useable with an external display of at least 1080p, this may be one of the things you have to wait until they ship to find out.
4) I don't know about anything on the SSD, you might have to wait until this week to figure that out. What we do know is that it is an SATA M.2 interface.
5) no card reader and if you need a reader definitely get a usb card reader. (Also are there any HD card reader combos? those would be interesting/useful)
6) This will have to wait until the reviews come out. A lot of us are concerned with the heating and fan noise from this beast. They may have throttled the GPU/CPU to keep the thing from overheating. we are not sure yet, should know as soon as the damn things ship.
7) Razer has not let out much on the machine, so issues will come as soon as it ships and users/reviewers can get their hands on it.

 

Sorry if this has been answered before, but is there any way to upgrade the 8gb ram on the blade to 16gb without voiding the warranty? Or even WITH voiding the warranty is there a way?

 

If I am not mistaken, Blade 2013 had the ram modules soldered on the motherboard. Dunno about the 2014 though...

 

Extremely unlikely that it's possible.

 

Why didn't they put in also 16 gb option?? If I decide to spend more than 2000 dollars, I decide to do an investment for the future... I can't have only 8 gb of ram. In razer they are completely fool...imho

 

8GB RAM is more then sufficient for 95% of games coming out in the future. The other 5% are most likely games that were ported horribly to the PC, considering the 870m has 3GB VRAM onboard. At 8GB it also has more RAM than the majority of other laptops in its form factor. Razer has made it clear that the Razer Blade is its gaming ultralight while the Razer Blade Pro is its gaming/working portable.

While 16GB would have been nice, 8GB isn't a deal breaker for me.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

Not for you, but for many they use it for more than a gaming machine. It's a bit shallow sighted of Razer IMHO, especially since the RAM is soldered and can't be upgraded. People who use the laptop for any kind of video editing or VM's will eat up 8GB in no time. Not to mention the limited storage options. Despite m.2 being "faster" it's also more expensive and has lesser capacities, and harder to find. They could easily fit two mSATA drives in there with user upgrade option for 2x1TB mSATA's if they really wanted it.

 

Because it's designed for portable gaming first. Soldered-on saves space.

Laptops are not an investment, especially gaming laptops. They are entertainment devices. Expect to replace it in two years.

They sell plenty to their target market. There are now plenty of other alternatives if you don't like what they are selling.

 

Do you do decide if a laptop is or not an investment for me? help me understand...

 

I don't think he meant any thing personal by his comment, just that they will go down in value very quickly and performance will not keep up games in general. It will run games worse and worse until finally you either replace it or it stops running new games as well. This tends to happen much quicker in devices like this because we pay a premium for the portability and form factor. Also we give up much upgradability as well.

 

He means that the value of the laptop will not appreciate in value after purchase, similar to purchasing a new car. If you are purchasing the laptop in hopes that it will benefit you with many hours of future gaming then I suppose it could be considered an investment in that regard. But you'll never be able to sell it for more than what you paid for it.

 

Investment for the future implies you expect value to be retained/grow over time. PCs are not investments in that sense. Technology advances so rapidly that the value is halved each year or two.

 

Just so you know... I have a 2013 Razer Blade 14 with an upgraded screen that I'm selling in a few weeks. It's still 1600x900 resolution but it is a high color gamut screen so the image contrast and colors, blacks and viewing angles are so so so much better. It even has less ghosting than the original too!

 

Uh. I wouldn't run VMs on anything this small anyway. VMs are pretty hardware intensive and I'd rather use something that cools more reliably and has no throttling. In the world of virtual servers and cloud services, I know very few people who run personal VMs anymore to begin with. Even courses I've taken recently had me log on to VMWare servers. Portable standalone VMs are becoming somewhat redundant. And like I said earlier, the Pro easily covers those use cases anyway. Sure upgradable everything is super cool fun time, but is really unnecessary for the majority of people. The main point is that this laptop will game, and it will game like crazy for its size. If you want an all-around machine, there are plenty of better options.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

Where'd you get the screen replaced? What kind of screen is it?

 

I replaced it myself. It is an LG screen but I don't remember the exact model number just now. I had to partially disassemble the screen frame in order to custom fit it into the original frame recess. It was a pain in the butt to do, but I'm also very picky and wanted it to look 100% as if it came strait from the factory that way.

 

Nevemind..

 

In my country technological devices have a useful life of 3 years (in terms of obsolescence)

Inviato dal mio SM-N9005

 

It's a Windows laptop, with hardware to game. VM's aren't processor intensive, they're RAM intensive, and I don't think you see the point of a VM, it's for either isolating programs from the rest of your system. You're effectively running an OS in an OS, each requiring their own RAM to run effectively. And recommending a 17" instead of a 14" is like recommending a minivan for someone looking for a sedan. In any case its a moot point. I don't know why people try to defend a company when in the end getting more RAM and adding user expansion options will only benefit everyone.

 

Not trying to defend. Just not constantly attacking something whose specs are set in stone. Its not like Razer is going to change it now, and you have other options.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

It Isn't so much recommending as it is pointing out Razer's product differentiation.

This isn't the place to mull over what could be, though. This is the owner's thread, not the 2015 wish list thread.

 

Exactly. I really hope detractors leave once legit owners exist and join the other thread. If you own the device and have cons to report that's one thing. If you're just here to complain about Razer not building the laptop you wanted you can always start another thread.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

You're right. This probably belongs in the 2015 Razer wish list thread.

 

Alright, I meant to post this a long while back, but I don't understand how HiDPI scaling works. I mainly intend to use X-Plane 10, Civ V and the occasional shooter. So we're told that the Blade comes with a 3200x1800 screen that's twice the pixel density of the previous screen. So assuming I set my game resolution to 1600x900 or 1920x1080, wouldn't upscaling make the image more pixellated, since the rendered image is smaller than the screen? I understand that gaming on the Retina MacBook Pro works about the same way. So does the image look worse or is it anti-aliased in some way?

Sent from my One M8 using Tapatalk

 

I have 2 4k screen. I can sure you it doesn t blur. 1600x900 on xplane will looks great. Because 1600x900 is exactly half the res.
Of course playing native on civ5 will make it hard to play anything low res like full hd. It s not like it s blur, it just makes 1920x1080 look old. My ps3 on 4k screen looks better than any full hd panel. But i got used to 4k pc gaming... So my expectation on what is acceptable went higher. Full hd on any native panels feel pixelated to me .

 

The other important thing to remember is that this is a new IGZO panel. It has extremely thin transistors, resulting in VERY closely packed pixels. To the naked eye even cutting resolution in half or going to 1080 should be as crystal clear as a native 1080p screen if not more so. I had a Fujitsu Q584 with a 10.1" 2560x1600 IGZO panel screen and that thing was beautiful, even with reduced resolution. I have high hopes the Razer Blade 2014 has a similarly vibrant panel.

 

I cannot agree more. That s the main reason why i ll change my mbpr for the blade.

 

I put in a ticket and asked Razer a couple questions about the M.2 slot. Unfortunately it's M.2 SATA only and there is no second slot. Kind of a bummer because that is actually a step backwards from last year's model... I'm trusting the validity because I was redirected through two people who honestly said they didn't know and ended up with a Tier II support team member.

 

Sucks about the lack of a second slot. Wish I had gone for the 512... can't change it now...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

Don't change it - there's a $500 difference in the 128GB and 512GB models. The Crucial M.2 480GB is only $250 and you can sell your original drive.