Thursday, January 31st 2019

Mobile NVIDIA GeForce RTX GPUs Will Vary Wildly in Performance, Clocks Lowered Substantially

NVIDIA is in the process of rolling out the first implementations of its RTX 2000 series GPUs in mobile form, and if the going is as is being reported, it's going to be a little rough for users to actually extrapolate their performance from product to product. This is because manufacturers are apparently getting a whole lot of leeway in how to clock their products, according to their solution's thermal characteristics and design philosophy.

What this means is that NVIDIA's RTX 2080 Max-Q, for example, can be clocked as low as 735 MHz, which is a more than 50% downclock from its desktop counterpart (1,515 MHz). The non-Max-Q implementation of NVIDIA's RTX 2080, for now, seems to be clocked at around 1,380 MHz, which is still a close to 200 Mhz downclock. Of course, these lowered clocks are absolutely normal - and necessary - for these products, particularly on a huge chip such as the one powering the RTX 2080. The problem arises when manufacturers don't disclose clockspeeds of the GPU in their particular implementation - a user might buy, say, an MSI laptop and an ASUS one with the exact same apparent configuration, but GPUs operating at very different clockspeeds, with very different levels of performance. Users should do their due research when it comes to the point of choosing what mobile solution sporting one of these NVIDIA GPUs they should choose.
Sources: TechSpot, Tweakers.net
Add your own comment

100 Comments on Mobile NVIDIA GeForce RTX GPUs Will Vary Wildly in Performance, Clocks Lowered Substantially

#1
bajs11
well im glad we have review sites like TPU to test the new laptops before we buy them :D
Posted on Reply
#3
GlacierNine
Not surprising at all, given the COLOSSAL coolers we're seeing on AIB cards and the fact even the legendarily poorly-cooled Founders cards finally moved to twin axial.

Lotta heat in these cards.
Posted on Reply
#4
Vya Domus
No matter how power efficient the architecture and node is, you simply can't get these monstrously large chips inside a laptop without major compromises. I see Nvidia is still at it trying to use the same name and imply the same level of performance when in reality that is far from the truth. The 2080 Max-Q can be slower than even a desktop 1080 and sometimes barley any faster than a 1080 Max-Q despite the major spec bump. This is deception on a whole new level.
Posted on Reply
#6
bug
bajs11, post: 3985111, member: 171095"
well im glad we have review sites like TPU to test the new laptops before we buy them :D
You don't need reviews, you just have to look at the configured TDP on each model. And stay away from models that don't publish it ;)
Posted on Reply
#7
R0H1T
Gaming on a laptop is a major compromise anyway, there's no way a high end laptop matches even mid range desktop rigs unless of course the latter is severely under-specced.
Posted on Reply
#8
bug
Vya Domus, post: 3985120, member: 169281"
No matter how power efficient the architecture and node is, you simply can't get these monstrously large chips inside a laptop without major compromises. I see Nvidia is still at it trying to use the same name and imply the same level of performance when in reality that is far from the truth. The 2080 Max-Q can be slower than even a desktop 1080 and sometimes barley any faster than 1080 Max-Q. This is deception on a whole new level.
This isn't really different from desktops. Better cooling solution allow for higher TDPs which in turn allow for higher frequencies. The only thing different is manufacturers get more leeway to play with the TDP.
Posted on Reply
#9
jabbadap
P4-630, post: 3985112, member: 22154"


https://tweakers.net/reviews/6826/msi-gl63-en-asus-gl704-mobiel-raytracen-met-rtx-2060-en-2070.html
Well yeah, I think it was notebookcheck, which got correction answer from nvidia how to read that table:

RTX 2080 MaxQ: base 735, boost 1095, tdp 80W
RTX 2080(Mobile): base 1380, boost 1590, tdp 150W
RTX 2070 MaxQ: base 885, boost 1185, tdp 80W
RTX 2070(Mobile) : base 1215, boost 1440, tdp 114W
RTX 2060(Mobile): base 960, boost 1200, tdp 80-90W
Posted on Reply
#11
trog100
looking at the massive size of a desktop 2080 card it aint exactly surprising laptop cooling solutions will be a problem.. hefty down clocking will be a must..

the bottom line being that RTX may sound good in a laptop in reality its gonna be a waste of space.. currently the desktop RTX 2060 is a waste of space.. down clocked laptop versions whatever the number will be the same..

trog
Posted on Reply
#12
bug
trog100, post: 3985133, member: 21545"
looking at the massive size of a desktop 2080 card it aint exactly surprising laptop cooling solutions will be a problem.. hefty down clocking will be a must..

the bottom line being that RTX may sound good in a laptop in reality its gonna be a waste of space.. currently the desktop RTX 2060 is a waste of space.. down clocked laptop versions whatever the number will be the same..

trog
Keep in mind we don't have many benchmarks comparing TDP with DXR on and off. Without DXR, it's possible these will offer decent performance (definitely not desktop levels, though).
Posted on Reply
#13
londiste
bug, post: 3985136, member: 157434"
Keep in mind we don't have many benchmarks comparing TDP with DXR on and off. Without DXR, it's possible these will offer decent performance (definitely not desktop levels, though).
Power consumption is limited by the set TDP/Power Limit and has little to do with DXR.
Posted on Reply
#14
ShurikN
Dear god the mobile 2060 looks horrible. Wouldn't be surprised it gets beaten by a 1070
Posted on Reply
#15
trog100
londiste, post: 3985137, member: 169790"
Power consumption is limited by the set TDP/Power Limit and has little to do with DXR.
which is all governed by the ability to keep it all cool..

trog
Posted on Reply
#16
Recus
Vya Domus, post: 3985120, member: 169281"
No matter how power efficient the architecture and node is, you simply can't get these monstrously large chips inside a laptop without major compromises. I see Nvidia is still at it trying to use the same name and imply the same level of performance when in reality that is far from the truth. The 2080 Max-Q can be slower than even a desktop 1080 and sometimes barley any faster than a 1080 Max-Q despite the major spec bump. This is deception on a whole new level.




2080 is noticeable faster at 1440p. Now you can ditch your lies that Nvidia cards are faster because higher clock speed.
Posted on Reply
#17
medi01
NVIDIA GeForce RTX GPUs Will Vary Wildly in Performance
Or, in non-marketing words, will carry names that will confuse even tech savvy customers.


Recus, post: 3985145, member: 96809"
2080 Max-Q is noticeable faster at 1440p. Now you can ditch your lies that Nvidia cards are faster because higher clock speed.
Yeah, it's magical!
Hell, I know even more magical example, Vega 56 can beat Vega 64!
Oh, and 64 even has more CUs, WTFBBQ!

Now, EAT THIS, NVIDIA HATERS!!!


Disclaimer: I would have thought user to be sarcastic, but I know this totally unbiased person is not.
Posted on Reply
#18
ShurikN
Recus, post: 3985145, member: 96809"


2080 is noticeable faster at 1440p. Now you can ditch your lies that Nvidia cards are faster because higher clock speed.
He said 2080 max-q, your video shows regular 2080
Posted on Reply
#19
bug
londiste, post: 3985137, member: 169790"
Power consumption is limited by the set TDP/Power Limit and has little to do with DXR.
Yes, but if DXR doesn't eat into that TDP, the rest of the card could run faster.
Posted on Reply
#20
londiste
bug, post: 3985153, member: 157434"
Yes, but if DXR doesn't eat into that TDP, the rest of the card could run faster.
DXR does not eat into TDP unless it is used.
Posted on Reply
#21
EarthDog
This is new? Dont both camps do this (lower clocks etc for latop).


bug, post: 3985153, member: 157434"
Yes, but if DXR doesn't eat into that TDP, the rest of the card could run faster.
????

It eats into if it is used... otherwise....
Posted on Reply
#22
jabbadap
ShurikN, post: 3985142, member: 140585"
Dear god the mobile 2060 looks horrible. Wouldn't be surprised it gets beaten by a 1070
It's quite equal to that in performance(Though used schenker is not very typical use for these, so probably it's a little bet slower overall).

Do mind though RTX 2060(Laptop) is drop in placement for gtx1070 MaxQ(They have same tdp, gtx1070 has 115W tdp). So intended form factor is a bit different.
Posted on Reply
#23
ShurikN
EarthDog, post: 3985157, member: 79836"
This is new? Dont both camps do this (lower clocks etc for latop).
Yeah of course they do, but the problem here is the Max-q versions are so horribly handicapped to a point that you have to wonder if they-ll outperform their Pascal counterparts.
Posted on Reply
#24
EarthDog
Heres a benchmark I just ran into with 2080 maxQ... https://www.notebookcheck.net/We-benchmark-the-mobile-RTX-2060-2070-and-2080-Max-Q-and-compare-them-to-the-desktop-RTX-2080-and-GTX-1080.402036.0.html

"In short, the mobile RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 Max-Q are about 15 percent and 30 percent slower than the desktop RTX 2080 according to 3DMark benchmarks. The deltas are somewhat similar to - if not just slightly wider than - the deltas between mobile GTX 1080 and GTX 1080 Max-Q to the desktop GTX 1080 by about 5 percentage points each".

So, the gap is bigger, by a small amount according to this little write up... certainly not the end of the world as some would like to convey... ;)

It is quite typical for these to drop a card level down which tends to put it in bed with last gen same tier.

Edit: "Meanwhile, users can expect the mobile RTX 2080 to perform about the same as a desktop GTX 1080 or anywhere between 15 to 35 percent over the mobile GTX 1080 depending on the resolution."
Posted on Reply
#25
bug
londiste, post: 3985156, member: 169790"
DXR does not eat into TDP unless it is used.
Yes, but that's what I meant. We don't know how much DXR eats into the TDP. Without DXR those cards could boost significantly higher than with it turned on. I hope I worded it better now.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment