Is AMD truly finished this time?

>>56122966
That thing probably weighs as much as a desktop.

>>56122976
They actually don't, but the battery life and heat dissipation is terrible.

Although this kind of tech is really neat, people are striving for more power in a smaller form factor.

12th time's the charm.
Surely this year AMD is dying!

>>56122966
Yes, that laptop is also very cheap for the very low price of just 3999.99 usd, only for the gamers, by gamers!

It's as fast as a GTX 1070 founders edition.

Non-reference is still better.

File: Screenshot_20160817-011405.png (169KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1080x1920px

>>56122976
But that's wrong.

>>56123157
>3999.99
https://newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=N82E16834234297

>>56123180
14"
Underpowered CPU
Overpowered GPU
Tiny SSD
Awful panel

???

File: yourfacewhen.jpg (115KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1000x800px

>>56122966

>probably costs several thousand dollars
>"hehe I get 12 more fps in LoL than these pleb skrubs, how can amd fanboys even compete?"

>>56123208
boy are you stupid

>>56123215
This. AMD's RX 460 is aimed perfectly at the mainstream laptop market.

File: _20160817_012255.jpg (204KB, 1080x1063px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1080x1063px

>>56122976
>>56123154
>>56123157
>>56123208
>>56123215
MAXIMUM DAMAGE CONTROL

>>56123242

1/3rd the price, slightly less performance.

It's not about raw numbers. It's about common sense. If you want to spend more money and feel technically superior just buy apple already.

>>56123242
>paying 1.7k dollars just to play some shitty ass games
I will never understand this, with 1700$ you can build a fucking 4k monster pc while that fucking laptop will probably get underclocked when hitting 70c at medium settings. If you really are that desperate for framerates and portability don't fucking look into this, it's just a waste of money and you will be better spending those money on another hobby. Laptop are used for their small frame and portability, not power and heavy usage.

>>56123242
I have a friend with the current generation of this laptop. It's ridiculously cumbersome. I hate the awful gaymer look too. I don't care anything about laptops though.

>>56123262
Good thing 14" 4lb 1060 laptops exist.

>>56123260
>>56123262
You do realize that this, the Razor shit, and extreme mini-ITX PCs are paving the way for small form factor being even more affordable and powerful?

I mean, this shit is overpriced as fuck, but it's really nice that someone is striving for this.

>>56123295
Yes I know, having a gtx 1070 (whatever m or laptop version is) in a laptop with an i7 is amazing but it's simply not worth buying it.

>>56123309
>(whatever m or laptop version is)
It's basically the desktop version. Some website said faster than a founders edition.

File: amd1.jpg (71KB, 552x661px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 552x661px

>>56122966
DELETE THIS RIGHT NOW

Were mobile GPUs ever be relevant?

>>56123338
What did he mean by this?

>>56123338
>mobile
Spotted the AMDrone still stuck in the past. :^)

>>56123260
>1700$ you can build a fucking 4k monster pc
not that anon but lol no, I spent ~$1350 on a pair of GTX 980s when they were current and another $1250 on the display.

>>56123338
The clocks are slightly lower in this but it has more CUDA cores and one more SM unit.
>the GTX 1070 in laptops is going to be faster than the desktop Founders Edition.
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/laptop/95650-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-mobile-asus-rog-g752vs/

File: image001_w_600.png (61KB, 600x531px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x531px

>>56123338
>mobile GPUs

console shitters literally BTFO

>>56123400
>1070 for laptops is better than the desktop ones
What did they mean by this?

File: bench.jpg (93KB, 672x568px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 672x568px

>>56123338
lol nope it's par with desktop 1070 and 1080

pic related desktop vs laptop.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Nvidia-Pascal-for-Notebooks-In-depth-Benchmarks-for-the-Geforce-GTX-1080-SLI-GTX-1070-and-GTX-1060.171566.0.html

>>56123392
>>56123400
>>56123422
>desktop users cucked by laptop users

What a time to be alive.

The only games I'll play on laptops are emulated games and certwinly not modern AAA ones.
I got a big and fast screen and a good keyboard for that in my room.
I don't need a 1070 to emulate Fire Emblem

>>56123260
Not everyone lives in his mother's basement you know?

>>56123419
>>>/v/

File: MSI-GTX-1070-GAMING-X-8G-2.jpg (143KB, 1024x819px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1024x819px

>>56123435
It's expensive and something like pic related is still better.

>>56123453
It depends on how high the laptop variant can be overclocked.
Laptop 1070 has more CUDA cores than the desktop variant, but at a lower clockspeed. So depending on the laptop, it may have potential to be faster than a desktop 1070, as seen in >>56123400

>>56123453
>being poor :^)

>>56123490
That laptop 1070 seems like the best of those GPUs, because the 1060 is clearly inferior to desktop 1060 and likewise the 1080.

Of course only if you're filthy rich.

>>56123498
??

>>56122966
When nvidia releases a GPU that can run games in medium-high settings at 1080p without reaching over 50c. I will buy instantly.

>>56123513
>clearly inferior
Not quite, they have identical specs. Only the 1070 is different from its desktop counterpart.
That said, whether they actually are inferior or not depends entirely on how capable a given laptop is of running them, same with the 1070.

It's basically the same story as the GTX 980 laptops that perform identical to the reference desktop 980, except this time laptops are even closer to the desktop variants since manufacturers are allowed to overclock the chips from the factory, and overcloking is generally better supported on these new Pascal laptops.

>>56123561
They already have, you just need to slap an aftermarket cooling solution on them.
You have an aftermarket cooler on your CPU so it can stay below 50C too, don't you ?

>>56123587
I am talking about laptop gpu, laptop gpu. Get it? I want to be able to have a mobile device to enjoy my casual games or whatever.

>>56123595
Then...
Buy a laptop with a 1080 and lock your framerate to 60fps ?
It'll sit at like 60-70% load and stay cool.

>>56123625
I will wait and see how the 1060 performs.

>>56123587
No, the laptop 1080 is at 1,556MHz core clock speed where as the desktop is 1,607MHz.

>Only the 1070 is different from its desktop counterpart.
The 1070 is the only one that is BETTER than the desktop reference equivalent.

>>56123430
>>56123400
Are the Desktop versions just gimped by drivers so the laptop GPUs look revolutionary?

>>56123646
>No, the laptop 1080 is at 1,556MHz core clock speed where as the desktop is 1,607MHz.
So overclock it to match ? It has the same amount of CUDA cores, same bandwidth for VRAM.

You're saying that the 1070 is better than the desktop reference equivalent because it has more CUDA cores, while it runs at a slower clock speed in order to match the desktop variant out of the box. And then you're claiming that the laptop 1080 is worse when, in fact, it has the same amount of CUDA cores at its desktop variant and can just be overclocked by 50 whopping MHz to be exactly the same as its desktop counterpart.

Do you not see how this is hypocritical ?

>>56123842
Stop rambling and understand what my point was. It's that:

The laptop GTX 1060 is inferior to the desktop 1060.
The laptop GTX 1070 is SUPERIOR to the desktop 1070.
The laptop GTX 1080 is inferior to the desktop 1080.

So clearly the best value is in the 1070.

Probably trying to make a 1080 that's better than the desktop variant took too big of a hit on the battery life and heat, so they couldn't repeat what they did with the 1070.

>>56123842
>So overclock it to match ? It has the same amount of CUDA cores, same bandwidth for VRAM.
Actually it has slightly more CUDA cores, so given equally good cooling, the laptop version would actually be slightly faster, and even possibly a better overclocker since they're putting all the low-voltage binned chips in there.

I wonder if it's possible to somehow adapt MXM to standard PCI-E..? That would be a cool project if possible.

>>56123921
But the laptop 1070 is not, by default, superior to the desktop 1070.
It has POTENTIAL to be superior to the desktop 1070, if given clock speeds equal to or faster than this.

You're saying that the laptop 1070 is better than its desktop variant based on the fact that it has more CUDA cores. This is true, but out of the box it's clocked slower in order to match the desktop variant in performance, making it equivalent - not superior.

If you can call the laptop 1070 superior to the desktop version, you cannot at the same time say that the laptop 1060 and 1080 are inferior to their desktop counterparts because these have the same amount of CUDA cores, and as such are the same.

>>56123982
The websites that are reviewing say it's faster. End of discussion.

This thread now has two sources. End of discussion (until you prove it isn't).

>>56123208
the cpu in that laptop is FASTER than fastest amd cpu
the gpu in that laptop is FASTER than fastest amd gpu
it's very power efficient because it's a laptop.
sure it's expensive i can carry it arround while you're stuck in your mom's basement.

>>56123995
>This thread now has two sources.
One of which is showing the laptop 1070 running slower than the desktop 1070 in all of its benchmarks.
The websites that are reviewing are saying different things because, once again, it depends on the clock speed, and you're a fucking hypocrite for making the claim that one is superior and the others inferior to their desktop counterparts.
See: >>56123430

One has potential to be faster thanks to more cores, the others are the same fucking chips and as such are equivalent to their desktop counterparts - not inferior.

>>56122966
>huge as fuck
Damn, gaymers are fucking retarded.

>>56123828
Nyet, the laptop cards have way more cores.

>>56124092
See:
>>56123400
See:
>>56123392

I know you're a butthurt desktop 1070 owner, lol.

File: gpuoc.png (3MB, 1602x927px)

3MB, 1602x927px

>>56124242
>I know you're a butthurt desktop 1070 owner, lol.
Huh.
This is news to me.

File: tmp_17670-1471426141031s-805718603.jpg (4KB, 116x125px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 116x125px

>>56123242
P..Please. s..stop

>>56123365
Well for that money now you can easily buy a pair of 1080,not that you would need them since 1080 does great in 4k.And decent 4k displays are ~$500 these days.

Why are they so expensive?
The 1060 versions costs as much as a 780m would've costed back in the days. This price inflation is unreal.

>>56122997
Well these are meant as a portable desktop replacement, so battery life is probably low on priority list.

>>56124588
Because there's no competition. AMD doesn't exist on the mobile market anymore.

>>56123255
>1/3rd the price
what? build me a pc gtx 1070, i7-6700, 16gb ram, 1tb hdd, 256gb ssd and 1080p monitor for $566

>>56124588
>>56124659
soon, the gtx940m gtx950m and gtx 960m can be had less than $900.

>>56124808
that laptop with 1070 cost like $1600+ so in 5 years we will see a lot affordable gaming capable laptop.

File: Screenshot_20160817-074424.png (415KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 1080x1920px

>>56124021
>Faster than the fastest AMD CPU
>Slower than a low end AMD 8 core at over 5 times the price
>Laughingwhores.jpg

File: readImage.jpg (8KB, 205x246px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 205x246px

>>56124862
>that laptop with 1070 cost like $1600+ so in 5 years we will see a lot affordable gaming capable laptop.
Poor console peasants for real.

File: Screenshot_20160817-074945.png (181KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1080x1920px

>>56124921

File: Screenshot_20160817-075029.png (175KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 1080x1920px

>>56124950

>>56124948
HBM2 will be a godsend for laptops, they should get even more powerful just as Scorpio and Neo come out.

File: amd.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

>this thread
>nvidia laptop card is faster than amd dekstop card which fries your pcie slot

>>56124977
Kek, it's pretty funny tho. And if RX 490 is not as fast as the 1080 then the 1080 laptop beats it still.

>>56123242
>paying more than $1000 for a laptop

>>56122966
>impyling anyone gives a fuck about gaymen laptops.

>>56125017
>Implying anyone gives a fuck that you're poor

File: 1471006318398.jpg (235KB, 866x1300px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 866x1300px

>>56125085
(you)

File: amdfag.jpg (3MB, 8624x3896px)

3MB, 8624x3896px

>>56125127 (You)

>>56123260
Hey there

I spend third of my year travelling for business. Hotels dont usually have good enough internet so I could steam stream via vpn from my home, while this is sometimes possible.

I have a 6500u laptop currently but in the future I'll definitely consider something more powerful.

>>56125142
>2560x1440 144hz monitor
>only a 380
poor kid

>>56123260
>with 1700$ you can build a fucking 4k monster pc
No you cant. If you a build a completely new rig you will spend 1700 and barely even get a 1080 in it, and thats without peripherals and monitor.

http://pcpartpicker.com/list/yGMQD8

1550, assuming you pirate the OS, have screen and peripherals already, dont get an HDD etc. And that machine will not run 4K in a reasonable manner because the 1080 is too weak for it. You have no fucking idea what youre talking about. 1700 bucks are literally nothing if you want to build a 4K system.

>>56123242
Worst part is that youre not even paying that high of a premium for laptops anymore. Gaming laptops might soon be more efficient than desktop setups if this development continues.

>>56123242
1070 with a 15" screen is pretty dumb. Even running that at 720p is almost 100 ppi.

>>56125648
And this is GDDR5 we are talking about. HBM2 will run cooler.

>>56123260
http://pcpartpicker.com/list/X83nLD
$2200 about the best you can do here.

>>56125502
>1080 is too weak for it
you can run 4k with a 1070 even if you don't demand ultraaaaa 60fps like a dumbass.

>>56125502
>>56125799
You can play at 4k with only 17k $ but he didn't said how it would play, for example, you will be able to play at 4k but maybe not at solid 60fps or more, and it really depends on the settings but it's possible.

>>56125816
Whatever its an exaggeration that faggots on here can't help but nitpick just like with any other declarative statement. He should have just laughed at $1700 to run a 15" screen and moved on.

>/g/'s AMD hate boner is so strong that they suddenly give a shit about Gayman laptops

>>56125968
>/g/'s AMD hate boner
>/g/'s
i think you mean the /v/ spillage

>>56125816
He said a 4K MONSTER, what the fuck is that supposed to imply? A system that runs 60fps at lowest settings? Monster, at least to me, implies max settings at 4K with a stable 60+ fps, more obviously are better.

File: df410f93_383866_10151156684350548_643540547_22584380_1030797769_n.jpg (50KB, 720x537px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 720x537px

>>56126028
Maybe he meant something else by "monster" :^)

>>56124950
>>56124960
CPUBoss is NOT a reliable source.

>>56125799
>you can run 4k with a 1070 even if you don't demand ultraaaaa 60fps like a dumbass.
There's no point going for 4K in the first place if you're going to be making other severe compromises to image quality. If you want to stand a chance to get 60+ FPS in the most demanding titles, in 4K, with max-ish settings (with no AA or some post-processing only) you need GTX 1080 SLI.