Considering the popularity and widespread use of the GeForce GTX 1060 in gaming laptops, the new RTX 2060 is set to be one of the key offerings in Nvidia's latest lineup.
https://www.techspot.com/review/1804-geforce-rtx-2060-laptop/
Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop GPU) Review
- Thread starter Scorpus
- Start date
I think that Nvidia will release the 1660ti for laptops and it will become more popular.
m3tavision
Posts: 1,438 +1,222
Imagine how much more powerful (& cheaper) those laptops will be at gaming, once they are outfitted with the consumer friendly GTX chips..! (GTX1160ti, etc)
Don't know anyone buying a laptop at 1080p that cares about DLSS, or Raytracing... thus no point in RTX laptop. Though a GTX laptop sounds about right.
Don't know anyone buying a laptop at 1080p that cares about DLSS, or Raytracing... thus no point in RTX laptop. Though a GTX laptop sounds about right.
Vulcanproject
Posts: 1,698 +3,210
I would imagine it has something to do with the fact they don't have anything to compete with it?
What gets me about this is the Max Q 2070 is basically pointless. The bigger GPU is so power constrained in laptops it can't beat the RTX2060 by any significant worthwhile margin.
A discounted GTX1070 laptop would be a bit of a bargain considering how the RTX mobile chips haven't really moved the game on.
QuantumPhysics
Posts: 6,306 +7,258
I really don't see the benefit of Ray Tracing - especially at the expense of frames per second.
When we play games, we move through levels so fast, we rarely have time to slow down and appreciate small details - especially shadows and lighting effects, unless they somehow impact gameplay.
I have a 2080Ti and I'd be lying if I said I've seen tremendous differences over my Titan Xp
When we play games, we move through levels so fast, we rarely have time to slow down and appreciate small details - especially shadows and lighting effects, unless they somehow impact gameplay.
I have a 2080Ti and I'd be lying if I said I've seen tremendous differences over my Titan Xp
Sausagemeat
Posts: 1,597 +1,423
I think it depends on the game, in BFV I didn’t much care for ray tracing, it didn’t seem to give us much apart from some pretty explosions, it’s not worth the frame rate hit. although I don’t really care much for that game myself. But on Metro I find ray tracing to be much better to the point where I would struggle to go back to non ray tracing. I guess when a game is designed and appreciated for its visual style, atmosphere and story etc then it matters but on a multiplayer fps with fast action it’s not very useful.
In general I agree with digital foundries conclusion and that it is a revolutionary feature and will definitely become more prominent in the future but right now it feels like it’s only for those of us with larger pockets and those people are effectively beta testing it. I imagine by the time tensor cores and ray tracing becomes readily available with decent enough performance on cheaper cards that most people buy we will all get much more from it.
At least right now ray tracing doesn’t cost us much extra. With exception to the 2080ti and RTX Titan which don’t have competitors, RTX cards seem to cost no more than non ray tracing counterparts from AMD or Nvidia themselves.
cldmstrsn
Posts: 234 +236
Good to see that the 1070 (non max q) on my laptop is still one of the best cards you can get in a laptop.
Nocturne
Posts: 220 +116
Knot Schure
Posts: 431 +206
It would be nice if Dell would sell me an Area 51-M, sans GPU.
I really want a 9900K in my laptop, but I feel no love for RTX over my 1070M.
I really want a 9900K in my laptop, but I feel no love for RTX over my 1070M.
Truth is that my Acer Predator Helios 500 with a Ryzen 7 2700 and Vega 56 would disagree.
Vulcanproject
Posts: 1,698 +3,210
That's a 17.3 inch screen, 1 inch bezel all around, 4KG (over 8lbs) desktop replacement. It's a brick, when closed it's 1.5 inches thick. The wall power supply is monstrous, fully charged it has about 90 minutes of usable battery life!
Despite all this, Vega 56 inside isn't faster than an RTX2060 part. It's a tad slower if anything. Quite obviously, that AMD part would never fit in anything smaller while at that performance level. It's incredibly hot and power hungry (120w versus 90w) compared to an RTX2060, which does sit in machines far smaller and slimmer. You have a wide array of model choices with the Nvidia, hardly any with the Vega 56.
IF your plan is to buy a massive desktop replacement, then yes, it's just about comparable.
But for anyone else who wants to pick up their laptop, carry it away without putting their back out and then use it for at least long enough to see the credits on a movie, it isn't.
Last edited:
Theinsanegamer
Posts: 5,446 +10,219
Because if you included AMD in the graph, all the nvidia bars would be indistinguishable from each other, smashed into the end of the graph.
AMD isnt competitive in mobile. It hasnt been competitive in mobile since the 290x mobile chip. AMD's lack of efficiency (hello fanbois that claim power usage doesnt matter) restricts it so badly in mobile applications that it is completely worthless. The 290x was better, but AMD's graphic switching tech is FAR behind nvidias, and that is part of the driver AMD still lags on constantly.
Apples to oranges. You might as well compare CPU performance of an ultrabook to those eurocom monsters that use server grade xeons.
Power hungry? Yes, and even more so after using the Wattman utility to raise the GPU TDP from 120 to 163 watts. Hot? No, its one of the best cooled laptops going. I can run the 2700 at 3.95 ghz and the Vega 56 at 1485 core/925 mem and my temps in games and 3dmark loops average around 79/77.
Performane in games is excellent next to the gimped 2060 that goes into laptops with an 80 watt TDP.
Heavy. Yea but I guess I must have super hero strength because I can carry the massive 9 1/2 lbs.
Battery life. 90 minutes? Are you nuts? The best I ever got to 10% battery life from full is 72 minutes.
Oh, ummm, shut up
Vulcanproject
Posts: 1,698 +3,210
Power hungry? Yes, and even more so after using the Wattman utility to raise the GPU TDP from 120 to 163 watts. Hot? No, its one of the best cooled laptops going. I can run the 2700 at 3.95 ghz and the Vega 56 at 1485 core/925 mem and my temps in games and 3dmark loops average around 79/77.
Performane in games is excellent next to the gimped 2060 that goes into laptops with an 80 watt TDP.
Heavy. Yea but I guess I must have super hero strength because I can carry the massive 9 1/2 lbs.
Battery life. 90 minutes? Are you nuts? The best I ever got to 10% battery life from full is 72 minutes.
Oh, ummm, shut up
Hot, because 120w GPU in a laptop is going to be a lot of heat to dissipate. Too hot to fit in anything other than the paving slab you call a laptop that is the Helios 500.
Performance in games for your paving slab is irrelevant if you want a smaller laptop, as the vast majority of people who buy laptops do. Anyone with sense would just buy a separate desktop machine and laptop.
Yep, battery life as tested with stock clocks ran to just 90 minutes. The manufacturer quoted this to reviewers!
This test managed 90 minutes: https://www.pocket-lint.com/laptops...s-500-review-gaming-laptop-with-144hz-display
This test managed 93 minutes: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/acer-predator-helios-500-amd-ryzen,5566.html
"You'll probably not think about taking it out of the house too often anyway." - Pocket Lint
The first test pointed out gaming performance without being connected to the mains was abysmal, because the inefficiency of the Vega 56 GPU means it throttles so hard it's basically useless without being plugged in. RTX2060 machines aren't. They are easily faster not plugged in to boot.
So in summary, you are claiming that the Vega 56 is comparable to RTX2060 in gaming laptops. Yes, only if you want to buy a paving slab always plugged into the mains, and not a normal laptop you can use on battery for at least 3-4 hours.
Ha.
Goodbye.
Last edited:
Damn man you completely missed the points of my post.
Why do you keep talking about size and weight? I dont want a childs laptop with a GPU so restricted
that it is no where near fast enough to justify a $700 + premium over the previous gen that performs so badly.
And read more carefully. I cracked a joke about battery life telling you that I dont even get the 90 mins. quoted.
And lastly. I cant game on battery because when I do it shuts itself down.
Ha
See Ya
Why do you keep talking about size and weight? I dont want a childs laptop with a GPU so restricted
that it is no where near fast enough to justify a $700 + premium over the previous gen that performs so badly.
And read more carefully. I cracked a joke about battery life telling you that I dont even get the 90 mins. quoted.
And lastly. I cant game on battery because when I do it shuts itself down.
Ha
See Ya
For those who want to see the laptop I have. In the interest of fairness this is the least
favorable review I could find.
favorable review I could find.
urbanman2004
Posts: 172 +56
Better off sticking w/ a desktop GPU to game especially w/ the exorbitant prices for laptops w/ RTX cards in them for very little ROI in comparison
I think the main thing is that a desktop GPU in a laptop is very expensive next to the mobile version.
Non Max-Q of anything is more meaningful brother.
A sincere and honest apology and thanks to the Moderators.
