Razer Core discussion & benchmarks

Being a long time alienware fan and having used the amplifier I have been very interested in the razer core. I love the fact that its just USB-c and it can charge the laptop and handle usb/ethernet. Who here is planning on getting a core and if so, what card are you putting in there. The price was just released and it looks like it is going to cost $499 (-$100 if you bundle it with a new laptop). I am a little upset about the pricing, but eh, it looks good and I am sure people are going to buy it.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/3/16/11224856/razer-core-graphics-enclosure-price-availability

 

The pricing is ridiculous. For the same amount of money you can get a full size proper motherboard, full size decent PC case and a decent powersupply. Razer is ripping everybody of with these prices. Makes me buy other products instead.

 

And the Core is sold out... :-(

Razer's price seems right.

For $500, you get a fairly small enclosure, GigE, and four USB 3.0 ports, all across a standard Thunderbolt connection. That makes it usable with not just Razer, but any other Thunderbolt-equipped device.

Alienware's Graphics Amplifier is limited to use with Alienware hardware. It's significantly larger than the Core. If you don't mind those things, the Graphics Amplifier is $200.

MSI's Gaming Dock Station isn't even trying. It's the same size as a mini ITX case and you have to dock the laptop to the top of the case. Also seems to be sold out. Asus's ROG XG Station 2 isn't available yet.

At $400 with the purchase of a Razer system, the price seems in-line with other Razer offerings - a premium-designed product at an elevated price point. If you don't agree with that tier, well, you can go Alienware?

 

For Razer, Yea. Figure $100 for the case, $25 for a USB 3.0 4 port Hub with ethernet, and I'll be *EXTREMELY GENEROUS* and say $100 for the R&D/limited manufacturing run on the mainboard. I'll again be EXTREMELY GENEROUS and say $50 for the obligatory 250w generic [but custom] PSU to power the whole thing.

So that's $275, add in $100 per unit for R&D cost and prolonged testing, and $125 Razer Tax. . . and I think I just shot myself in the foot. I came here to make a disparaging comment about how this thing should only cost about $199, but if you stop and break it down I guess it isn't as grossly overpriced as I thought. Knock off $100 for ordering a stealth [This needs to be applied to the 2016 blade] and it's maybe not as insane as it sounds as you first read it on the page.

If you'll excuse me, I need to go slam my head into my desk for awhile at thinking something Razer designed and produced ISN'T bat guano insanely overpriced ><

 

I know that I'll be either going with the Razer Core or ASUS' XG2. If I go for the Core, I will most certainly not be buying a Stealth or the new Razer Blade...I'll wait until it get verified to work with a cheaper laptop. The MSI GS40 is basically the same specs as the new Razer Blade (a little thicker and only has 3GB of VRAM) and it does have a TB3/TC port. I currently have a GS70 Stealth so I'm very content with MSI's build quality. It may not be as good as Razer's but the extra $500 I'll save buying the GS40 over the new Blade will go towards a GTX 980Ti. I will definitely not be buying a Stealth, though. I'm fine with the 5-10% performance decrease over TB3 but I'm not going to let the 6500u in the Stealth bottleneck anything, I'll feel much better with a 6700HQ.

ASUS' XG2 really appeals to me. They have an ultrabook with a 6700HQ, 16GB of RAM, in a good form factor that apparently doesn't throttle. If they can sell it for $1000 or so to match the Stealth and sell the dock for $300 or so, it's an instant-buy for me.

 

The Alienware price isnt even right. So the Razer isnt as well. There are aluminum enclosures for the Macbook older TB2 ports that do exactly the same, the same size etc and cost 260 dollar. Its nothing more than a PCI express port with a TB3 cable and a USB hub also connected to a smaller PCI express port.Intel developed the technology, NVidia & AMD the drivers of their GPU's etc. The Alienware graphics amplifier is larger yes but it houses a standard ATX PSU. Something you can actually replace. I do admit the Core looks better but it is overpriced for what it actually is. A PCI express board with a thunderbolt cable and a PSU.

Like I said, you can buy actual complex hardware for the same price.

 

Alienware's price is $199. Enclosure, PSU, two boards (one PCIe, one USB 3.0), and enough to make this worth a production run of a few thousand? I think $199's quite reasonable.

Far as I can see, most TB enclosures from Magma, OWC, and Sonnet, are designed with 80w PSUs and cost $300 to $999 for something that can hold a double-wide card (and not even all of those can hold a full-length card). Even an AKiTiO Thunder2, which is $220, still only comes with an 80w PSU and cannot accept a full length card.

Razer's solution is the smallest available, has a 375w PSU, can take a full-length, double-wide video card, and includes GigE and four USB 3.0 ports..

 

The AW is around 250/300 in europe so i took that price. The akito has a smaller psu but add 50bucks to the peoce for a bigger one and you are ready to go. Razer cant defend this pricing imo.

 

What? No you're not. It's not a full-size enclosure. Even assuming the comments made that the enclosure doesn't support video cards no longer apply, you can't just cram a 375w external box through the DC input port.

You'd end up with a hacked up piece of metal and an external PSU box. Not exactly elegant.

They don't need to. They sold out of their initial run. Consumers have defended it for them.

 

Yeah and that adding 5cm longer enclosure space makes a product more than 100bucks more expensive......


The initial run sold out but that doesnt mean its good.

 

The twice slower Alienware Amplifier with pre-Skylake CPUs was scoring 90% GPU performance compared to desktops. I expect the twice as fast TB3 with Skylake CPUs to score within 95% GPU performance, which is quite acceptable in my book. Maybe with Pascal there'll be more throttling, but then there will be much cheaper options for both laptops and GPU enclosures.

 

Straight from Razer's CEO Min-Liang Tan:

https://insider.razerzone.com/index.php?threads/razer-core-399-for-blade-users-499-standalone.12294/

 

I assume you're talking about the ones with a quad-core HQ CPU. The I7 6500u alienware was scoring about 30% less, so I'd expect the stealth to be about 75% the speed of whatever card is in the core and the blade to hit 90

 

When I initially posted this I was fishing for a response about the price. I felt that it was outlandish but figured, maybe razer fans accept this and will pay it no matter what. I am glad that I am not the only one who thinks that 499 is way too much. I would pay 299 max, and even that would be a bit of a stretch.

 

Yes, we do.

Not the only one? Anyone who isn't a Razer fan thinks it's overpriced. That's a pretty big chunk of people, which is good because Razer's ability to keep up with demand is... problematic.

Congratulations! Dell has you covered.

 

Been using the AWA for a while now

 

I really want someone who either owns the new Dell XPS laptops, MSI GS40, or some other TB3 laptops to buy a Core and be the guinea pigs. I'd do it myself but I haven't had too much money to burn recently. Hell, on Razer Insider, there are people who bought the Stealth and then immediately bought the new Blade + Core as soon as it was announced. I want their income!

 

I just had a thought.... Razer could have struck a deal with some company to add video cards at the time of purchase. I mean, at 499... even a measly GTX 950 included would make it sorta worth it. The 950 is better than the HD520 by quite a large margin. It would make it plug and play opposed to having to order/wait/install whatever card you choose. Just a thought and if the RAZER gods are listening.... feel free to use my idea

 

I would rather buy my own personally. Razer will just mark it up they don't have the volume.

Sent from a 128th Legion Stormtrooper 6P

 

I have the AWA and its loud and clunky looking performs decent though.
I don't know how loud the core will be but in looks it blows the AWA away and for me I don't mind paying the price.

 

The AWA is not twice slower, in fact its exactly the same. a pci express 3.0 4x interface. These are just the only lanes available for a mobile platform unfortunately. This goes for the Asus and MSI solutions as well.

He created a wonderful business, but here he/Razer takes a lot of credit which are deserved by others such as Intel, Nvidia and AMD.

Intel developed thunderbolt years ago and it was already a pretty much done experience with only some sleep and disconnect issues which the gpu manufacturers had to solve with their drivers and did recently. They just put it in a box and adjusted their I guess laptop bios for it. I mean PCI express hotswapping is not new at all and years old. The missing link where the videocard drivers.

Also that remark about companies copying the blade. Its a machine with heat issues and not many manufacturers want to take that risk. All thin laptops have the same flaws unfortunately.

I do agree the Core looks great. But you can see where they take the design cues from, the same as with their laptops (I mean they are pretty much black anodized macbooks) .

The fact stays that you can buy a wonderful unibody style PC case, full sized motherboard and proper PSU for the same amount of money. It maybe sounds like moderately expensive for the category but in terms of absolute production etc it is overpriced. The manufacturing is not above the standard of a Silverstone fortress 3 ITX case which has the same type of aluminum construction, the PCI express board is nothing compared to a full motherboard and the PSU is pretty much just what it is, a PSU.

 

If we see it has zero problems at launch and no other manufacturers yet have the solution in production, we can say Razer did it first. He's good at marketing but he's not wrong.

Sent from a 128th Legion Stormtrooper 6P

 

No alienware etc did it first. Razer etc just used a now standsrd connector.

 

He's specifically talking about hot swappable, he's not saying they made the first external graphics enclosure (plug and play). There's a bunch of marketing speak, that's true.

Will the AW function with the same features when the core launches? If so then he's wrong.

Sent from a 128th Legion Stormtrooper 6P

 

No clue about the core working on the AW laptops. They have the AGA version ofcourse which takes 4 lanes. No clue of the Thunderbolt 3 on the AW laptops are routed to a pci express 4x lane as well.

 

Unless they've updated it recently, the Alienware Graphics Amplifier is four lanes of PCIe 2.0, not 3.0, and it is not hot swappable.

Wrong.

Intel created a spec (three revisions of the spec, actually). They did not create a product beyond the controller chips.

nVidia and AMD want their products used in an enclosure. They have to write drivers that'll handle hot plugging. That's on them if they want to hop on the small desktop/laptop bandwagon or not.

Razer has produced the first TB3 enclosure that will fit a GPU, it's smaller than any of its predecesors/competitors, and it's cheaper than existing TB2 enclsoures that can take full size PCI Express cards. There is zero reason for Razer not to take credit for this.

You don't know much about Thunderbolt's history if you can say that with a straight face.

Razer's systems have no heat issues (outside one-offs). I've run mine for hours at a time in-game - Blade, Blade R2, 2013 14" Blade, 2014 14" Blade, and Edge, with no overheat problems.

Based on the Core's external dimensoins, I can fit a Core and a Blade into the Razer Tactical pack. I can't do that with a desktop. The closest you can get is a Gaems M155 (which is an awful screen for a PC) and an Alienware Alpha. Go beyond that and you're either too cubic, or too wide, to fit in a backpack.

Compared to existing TB2 enclosures that can handle a GPU, it's quite inexpensive. To get something that can physcially handle a GPU is around $1k today. This was the person who got it to work, and the caveats are ridiculous: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7987/running-an-nvidia-gtx-780-ti-over-thunderbolt-2

So what you're saying is you don't understand that this is a niche product with design and fabrication costs which cannot be ammortized across a large number of units.

 

The aw is pci express 3.0 4x and always has been but there has been a faulty bios that let it run on 2.0. With the latest drivers from nvidia and amd it became hot swappable. This is not a razer thing but an amd and nvidia thing.

Thunderbolt was since the lightpeak days already working and sony had a pretty much flawless implementation with the vaio z2 and its external graphics card. The tb2 enclosures were made by extremely small companies with very limited support mostly created for apple macbooks that have no proper gpu drivers support whatsoever. Ofcourse on these machines it has not been greag. For pc it was a different matter and only the hotswap function wasnt available till the graphic drivers were ready.

If nvidia and amd didnt step their game up together with intel on the external gpu issues the razer core wouldnt be what it is today. Intel actively pushed this and they have shown it on multiple trade fairs.

The housing costs are minimal, you can get an equally created silverstone fb3 itx for around 120buck as a consumer and that is a fact. The other housings are just even cheaper. The fb3itx is pretty much a niche case as well. Hell i pretty much expect that the core already sold more units did than silverstone sold fb3itx cases past 6months.

Oh and all the blades run above 85c under full load and cpu's cant even hold their turbo speeds because they touch the 90c to 95c mark. These are heat issues. The solder in these cheaps will surely deteriorate over time. The blade with the 765 was excellent, the 870 version however runs too hot and you can bet that in time more will break down. The units on the market now are just around 18months old which isnt that long. I actually wanted to buy one and that changed when I actually studied the design.

But dell could have put more work in the AWA chassis though I do agree on that. Silverstone made an extremely well don't case with Asus btw which does not cost 1000usd and can handle full size cards 1 year ago.

 

I dunno, I've run mine for countless hours (870M) and it's still going strong after 2 years. Do the fans ramp up on an intense game, of course. Does it still run fantastically without throttling, absolutely.

Sent from a 128th Legion Stormtrooper 6P

 

I am hoping the cooling is a little better though on the 2016, I agree with HFM my brother has the 870 razer and has gamed hours upon hours and its still rocking, only issue he had was psu adapter was dead when he first bought it but other than that solid.

Me I will keep my all my notebooks love the surface book for work, love the 15r2 I have it set up with the awa in the bedroom on a custom bed desk so I use that when I want to lay back and relax.

The razer will be my travel system for when i want more power on the road than the surface book can offer, the aw15r2 is just too bulky for my travel needs.

And the core? Not sure I will use much? But I am still buying cause I am a whore when it comes to notebooks.

Hi My name is Darkhan and I am a notebook whore.

 

I hope you are implying the razer 14 not the stealth to replace your surface book bc the SB actually has better gaming performance than the Stealth seeing as it has dedicated graphics and the same integrated graphics (which is the only solution on the stealth).

 

Acer has made a tiny little 135W dock with a geforce GTX 960m built-in for 350 EUR: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-G...ernal-GPU-support-for-notebooks.161328.0.html

I think this will hit the sweet spot for a lot of people who only want one computer but don't want a giant heavy box or need desktop gpu power.

 

It would be nicer if they used a 970M instead. Most higher end laptops already have a 960m. But nice options do become available.

 

I suspect that's going to screw up the cost + heat balance. Personally, I would like a 970 more, but I wouldn't buy this anyway because I want a full desktop GPU. I think this is a great option for people who just don't want to be completely unable to game. It's certainly an exciting time of disruption of the notebook market!

 

I'm going by the documentation from Dell, which explicitly says turn the laptop off. If Dell is trying to sell me on their solution, they're not doing a great job.

They had a solution that wasn't hot-swap, and was locked to a single GPU in a casing.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/07/29/sony-vaio-z-review-2011/

No, that doesn't make sense. Sony got it mostly-working on the Vaio Z. Granted, it was more inline with online insertion and removal than hot-swap, but the drivers weren't the problem.

Rumors have it that it's Intel which blocked eGPU attempts by everyone (MSI, Asus, Silverstone, etc.) in the past. TB1 and TB2 were never fully baked to realize an eGPU solution that would work reliably outside restricted configurations. Intel seems to have known this and blocked sale. As they're the only source for TB ASICs, it wasn't too difficult for them to do so.

TB3 is a radical overhaul of TB as we know it. Between getting rid of expensive cabling and the protocol updates (PCIe 3.0, HDMI 2.0, DP 1.2), it's finally ready for wider adoption.

You are looking at an end cost. You aren't looking at the design and tooling costs. You're also ignoring the cost of TB ASICs.

They're designed not to. As the battery charging circuits aren't cutting out, the rest would appear to be fine. Any laptop I've ever used that isn't a gaming laptop I've managed to overheat the charging circuit on with a high CPU load.

 

Correction on both parts: With the Graphics Amplifier, PCIe 2.0 x4 was only for the 13 R1 (with Haswell and Broadwell CPUs) and older BIOS versions for the 13 R2, 15 R2, and 17 R3. The 13 R1 couldn't do PCIe 3.0 x4 because the CPU maxes out at PCIE 2.0. The 15 R1, 17 R2, and recent lineup with a more up-to-date BIOS and Command Center allow PCIe 3.0 because their CPUs supports PCIe 3.0. Still limited to four lanes because that's the number of lanes the cable provides.
Not sure about the hot swapable portion as the internal dGPU is still disabled. Unless Alienware makes an update on their BIOSes, Graphics Amp software and Command Center, I'm not sure if hot swapable is possible. Would like to see if the claim holds up, though (I can test if necessary).

Technically, you can restart the laptop if you hook the Graphics Amp to switch from the internal dGPU to the external GPU. If that's not noted in the Graphics Amp manual, then Dell needs to update it (which will be who knows when).
Given that the Blade 2016 is Core-verified, I would like to see how it handles hot swapping with an AMD eGPU given it has an Nvidia dGPU.

 

The solution was hot swap as long when a user disconnected the card in software. SOny was infact one of the first that supported graphci switching without restarting a laptop and could do it on the fly. Except when you were using the GPU at that moment. The switching software was put on hold then to prevent bsods.

It was idneed a set gpu but it showed the concept years before now.

The issues were always the drivers of the graphic card manufacturers themselves. Not with TB and not with the hardware.

This is Intel their game not Razer

and a full size motherboard with TB3 doesnt? A full size ITX aluminum case doesnt? THis is the case with every new product and it has been calculated for other products as well.

Its not the battery itself getting warm. Its the battery being heat up by neighboring hardware parts that arent cooled adequately. I would love to do a poll on this forum on the battery wear of their Razer Blades. To put it in perspective, my old Ativ book 8 which I have given to my mother and is being used now for arbout 3 years has only batterywear for 4%. My old Sony Vaio Z13 had a running batter for 5 years now and has a wear level of 23%. Here users are already reporting dead batteries after a year or 2 of use.

The Aw15R1 and Aw17R2 could do it in the beginning but there was one faulty bios update indeed. Luckily it has been rectified. The New Nvidia drivers added hotswapping though. The key were always the drivers from the manufacturers themselves. Alienware played a part in creating those drivers by the way.

 

My blade had 7.6-10.2% battery wear after about a year. It depended on the mood battery bar was in. I will never buy another laptop that hot.

 

I don't quite get why there is rage against Razer (or any manufacturer) for high prices. If you don't like their product or price, then don't buy it.

Prices are always high for the first-generation tech product. And then they come down over time. If the manufacturing cost of an eGPU enclosure is a lot less than the $500 that Razer is charging, then some competitor will come in and offer an alternative product at a lower price. That is good for everyone.

You also can't compare the Alienware Amplifier to the Razer Core, because the Alienware Amplifier only works with Alienware laptops. Dell isn't *forced* to make a profit on every AWA unit sold, because they can make that money up through laptop sales. And if someone owns an AWA that only works with Alienware laptops, then it will increase the chance that customer will buy an Alienware laptop in the future. It could very well be part of an "ecosystem lock-in" strategy, much like how gaming consoles are sold for loss on the hardware.

With the Razer Core, someone can buy that product without ever owning / buying a Razer laptop. So Razer is forced to make a profit on every unit sold.

I'm not some Razer fanboy who thinks everything they do is magic. With any company... If you don't like their products or prices, don't buy their stuff.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

Delete post please.

 

I wont buy it obviosuly BUt it is still a discussion board. People do give their opinions about products.

Oh and dont think that Dell doesnt want to make a profit on the AWA as well. They most definitely do.

Its jsut their marketing that make people believe that. just like they claim they made the first ultraportable gaming laptops.........

 

Disappointed in the price of the Razer Core. I only really wanted to get one because I wanted a way to bring some extra power with me if I wanted to go over to a friend's house and play games. I might as well just build a cheap mini PC for that price. That Acer Graphics Dock, however, looks pretty cool. Here's hoping it will work with the Razer Blade Stealth.

 

With Steam In-Home Streaming, what would be the advantage of the Razer Core? If I can have a solid gaming PC tucked away at home, and can access my Steam library from my couch with the Stealth (or any other ultrabook), why would I want to get a Core and be limited by a dual core CPU?

 

Ordered my 999$ Stealth,and 399$ Core. Grabbed a Samsung 950 512gb Pro for 269 and a MSI 980 Ti Golden,to bad the Core won't be shipping for a bit.

 

I can think of two reasons why people want some kind of eGPU setup (like the Razer Core):

1) They need a laptop (for work / school), and they also play games. They COULD build a separate gaming desktop, and buy a non-gaming laptop.

But for whatever reason, they prefer to buy a single system (so all of their data, applications, and games are in a single location), rather than buying / building / managing two separate systems. They know buying a single system + eGPU is probably more expensive than buying a separate mid-range desktop + laptop, but are willing to pay that price for the convenience of having a single system.

or
2) They are tech enthusiasts, and get caught up in the excitement of playing with new toys. And a universal Thunderbolt 3 eGPU dock is just another shiny new toy.


Personally, I'm with you on this. I think eGPUs are a cool concept, but I can't seem to think of a use case where eGPUs do the job better than owning a separate gaming desktop + laptop.

 

Core's currently back up for pre-order, shipping after April 29th:
http://www.razerzone.com/store/razer-core

Now time to go look for a GTX 980 Ti...

 

I'd hold off on looking for a GTX 980 Ti for now.

Rumor is that nVidia is going to announce information about Pascal in the next few weeks. It's not the product launch, but at least the announcement will give some more info on what to expect, and when.

So unless you absolutely need to have a 980Ti right now, there's never any harm in waiting. At worst, prices & availability are goign to be exactly the same as today. At best, you might find some kind of sale / promotion / rebate going on a few weeks down the road.

 

Wanting to play Blizzard games, for starters. Wanting to have a "do it all" machine that's ultra portable yet able to run modern games, for another. Yea, you'll have some bottlenecking on CPU intensive games, but that's today.

I'll tell you why I'm REALLY excited for this piece of kit, though. Imagine a desktop computer the size of an Intel NUC or Gigabyte Brix. It has a current gen Hyper threaded quad core with enough cooling to allow overclocking, support up to 32/64Gig DDR4 and has a razer blade sized external 100w power adapter. Oh, and it has Thunderbolt 3 out. Sure, the only ports on it are two USB 3.0 on the front, USB-C on the back and the power connector..and for grins we'll throw in an HDMI out, but it's compatible with the core. Also, because it's relatively bare bones. . it's also in the $500-$600 price range to start, with mass production OEMs driving the cost down within 5 years. Small foot print disposable computing. Now basically you have something with the power of a Blade with WAY more room for thermal cooling in the chassis, mobile quad core [you could probably kit socketed boards for home builders, with possible added size] but it shrinks the hell out of the whole process. No more giant ugly ATX towers, just an elegant, relatively inexpensive modular component connected to another relatively inexpensive [in 5 years or so, when the OEMs catch up] modular component.

And before you complain about "needing" desktop level performance, let's be honest here: Have you actually ever MEASURED CPU usage? I know [via the stats managing app on my wife's 2014 Blade pro] that most of the games and apps my family runs use less than 15% and/or 2 cores at any given time. Granted, that's some light steam gaming, Blizzard games, but still: 99% of the time I feel like I'm just wasting electricity when I'm on my desktop: overclocked 4770k for what. . writing this post? The ONLY time I ever push the processor is when transcoding in handbrake, and statistically that's maybe an hour or three a year.

What we're seeing is the beginning of the evolution of modern computing. It may not seem as rational NOW, when the majority of people still have a giant overpowered desktop in their home, but in 5 years or so, with advances in mobile processor tech I suspect the entire landscape is going to change.

As a long time home system builder I'm not sure how happy I am about that from an enthusiast standpoint, but realistically what I NEED is a lot closer to where they're going than what I'm building.

 

Some games dont even run on 2 cores anymore. and with the 8 core consoles out there multiplatform games surely need the cores for their engine logic to run without rebuilding the engine for their ports.

When I play the division i see CPU usage by the way around 60 tp 70%. The Witcher 3 does the same for example. CPU usage is slowely but surely becoming higher.

 

The thing is, games nowadays do use your CPU. With a Titan X (similar performance to the 980 Ti some want to put in the core), you can see up to 60 fps gains just by going from an i3 6100 to a i7 6700k in games like The Witcher 3, Far Cry 4, Ryse, etc. The CPU in the Razer Blade stealth is lower performance than the i3 6100, so putting a 980 Ti is largely a waste because of the huge bottleneck. In my opinion, I really think it would just be better for someone to build a small, cheap Intel i3 system, since it is a similar price for better performance.