DuhSesame
About
- Username
- DuhSesame
- Joined
- Visits
- 117
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,260
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 1,278
Reactions
-
Microsoft reveals ARM Surface Pro X, Intel Surface Pro 7, AMD Surface Laptop 3
Performance claims from manufacturers often are misleading. Pick the best sample/benchmark/environment comparing to the worst of your competitor surely makes a huge difference. Ice Lake isn't that different in terms of IPC than that 8th-gen, so I doubt it can do 3X more.KITA said:
He's not wrong.canukstorm said:
The MS presenter did state that the new Surface Laptop is 3X faster than the new MBA. So take that for what it's worth.ericthehalfbee said:So my guess is this is a Snapdragon 8cx derivative with an added AI core.
Still can't keep up with the A12X from last year, and the A13X is right around the corner. I really would like to see an A13X powered MacBook. It's time for Apple to take their complete control of the entire stack (hardware/software/dev tools) and apply that to an ARM MacBook.
The MacBook Air uses a 7 W 14nm i5-8210Y (2 cores / 4 threads, 3.6 GHz turbo) with UHD 617 graphics and LPDDR3-2133 RAM.
The base model 13.5" Surface Laptop 3 uses a 15 W 10nm i5-1035G7 (4 cores / 8 threads, 3.7 GHz turbo) with Iris Plus G7 graphics and LPDDR4x-3733 RAM.
Besides, 8210Y is already one year old, where Ice Lake was just announced.
-
Microsoft reveals ARM Surface Pro X, Intel Surface Pro 7, AMD Surface Laptop 3
So the SQ Processor is based on 8cx, which itself isn't any faster than Snapdragon 855 Plus, not as fast as the iPad Pro nor a quad-core Us.
The 15" laptop, on the other hand, is based on low-power Ryzens. Sure it's faster than the Air, but so does every quad-core Ultrabooks, what's the point.
-
Carbon fiber inserts could create ultra-thin MacBook display
You've mentioned "On the go", well carrying a 6700K (or 9900K) around won't do, it canceled out the fact that "large chassis allows more battery", which all of the gaming laptops suffered.tht said:
It does not have to be either-or. It can be both. Apple thinks it has customers with Xeon powered iMac Pros and Mac Pros. If so, they’ll have customers for “desktop portables”. They have a lot of customers that do video editing on the go, and with YouTube, speed is king. So, there is a market for FCPX, or whatever editor, to get a video out as soon as possible while on location. They can price at $3500 and above so customers need not be confused on what to get.DuhSesame said:
Umm, that kind of laptop is such rarity... Those were truly portable desktops, which I don't think anyone other than die-hards wants. A "mobile workstation" can be smaller and portable, crossing over with multimedia laptops, which I think is the most well-rounded choice.tht said:
When I said 200 to 300 W, I was thinking of desktop chips in a laptop form factor. So, 90 W Xeon with say 256 GB to 512 GB RAM support, 150 to 200 W GPU, and a 17” to 18” display. 6 to 8 lbs.DuhSesame said:I'll focus on the last part. The biggest power-consuming component is the GPU, which can go as high as >120W. Everything else combined could barely get that high (I know, i9 may be an exception, but soon it will fade away).
If the Pro is moving towards eGPU, there's no necessarily needs for more than a hundred watts.
Speaking of "Mobile Workstation", this is a Mobile Workstation. This is also a Mobile Workstation. The term is also another marketing gimmick.
The linked Dell is basically what Apple offers in their MBP15” lineup.
Maybe 20 years ago, they had to triangulate down to a limited number of models due to selling 5m units per year, and they were just recovering from inventory messes from the 90s. Today, they are selling close to 20m PCs (mostly laptops) per year and JIT manufacturing is normal. It’s more than past time to stretch the lineup and to try to catch more and more of the niches. They don’t have to go to every niche, and can still be quite judicious on what to offer.
People need power and will never stop asking for it, but if that's your only goal, you'll always find computers that were faster. I think most of us just fall into this phenomenon where "Apple doesn't care about the performance at all", so "we must ask for the best performance on the planet". No, like everything else, there's a line where you find the performance satisfied, that anything beyond will only give you diminishing return -- unless it's faster by a ton, twice at least.
There were gaming laptops and huge workstations well back in 2006, later offering quad-cores well before an i7, except Pro(sumer)s weren't complaining then as they did now.
-
Carbon fiber inserts could create ultra-thin MacBook display
Umm, that kind of laptop is such rarity... Those were truly portable desktops, which I don't think anyone other than die-hards wants. A "mobile workstation" can be smaller and portable, crossing over with multimedia laptops, which I think is the most well-rounded choice.tht said:
When I said 200 to 300 W, I was thinking of desktop chips in a laptop form factor. So, 90 W Xeon with say 256 GB to 512 GB RAM support, 150 to 200 W GPU, and a 17” to 18” display. 6 to 8 lbs.DuhSesame said:I'll focus on the last part. The biggest power-consuming component is the GPU, which can go as high as >120W. Everything else combined could barely get that high (I know, i9 may be an exception, but soon it will fade away).
If the Pro is moving towards eGPU, there's no necessarily needs for more than a hundred watts.
Speaking of "Mobile Workstation", this is a Mobile Workstation. This is also a Mobile Workstation. The term is also another marketing gimmick.
The linked Dell is basically what Apple offers in their MBP15” lineup.
-
Carbon fiber inserts could create ultra-thin MacBook display
he can't see the words.dysamoria said:STOP OBSESSING OVER THINNESS!!!
This is PATHOLOGICAL!!!SpamSandwich said:
Is this thing on?Yes.
