As “The Ultimate Play” continues, various results of the upcoming GeForce RTX “Laptop GPUs” have been discovered on 3DMark Time Spy.
And of course the leaked results come from the glorious communistic shithole that is China. Regardless of that back at NVIDIA’s CES 2021 presentation they announced just three graphics cards for their upcoming mobile graphics cards for the RTX 3000 series.
The RTX “3080”, RTX 3070 and RTX 3060.
All three of which don’t even share the proper SM configurations as their desktop counterparts. However today we’ll only be going through the actual results of the RTX 3070 and the RTX 3060 as well.
Starting us off we have the RTX 3070 Mobile graphics card paired with an Intel Core i7-10870H CPU.
With a graphics score of 9,814 on Time Spy it gives us a pretty good showing. Comparing the RTX 2070 Super graphics card in its mobile “Notebook” package this new RTX 3070 is just 4.98% faster comparing the score of 9,348 while the standard RTX 2070 Mobile scores ~8,680 which is 13% slower than the RTX 3070 shown here.
However when it comes to a desktop equivalent of performance a standard RTX 2070 Super will more than suffice as majority of results breach the 10,000 barrier and are often off into the 11,000 mark which would make the desktop graphics card 16.34% faster than this here mobile RTX 3070.
And of course we don’t know proper power targets and the total TGP that this mobile RTX 3070 is guzzling.
However we can actually determine the vast performance differences the RTX 3070 can actually face whether or not it’s been gimped as Max-Q trash. Because a now made private video review of the MSI GE66 Raider and GS66 Stealth laptops were made by GenTechPC.
From what you can easily gather, both MSI laptops offer the same RTX 3070 Laptop GPU however it’s fairly obvious to sell the vast differences in core and memory frequencies.
The MSI GE66 Raider features a proper Laptop RTX 3070 with its boost frequency of 1620MHz on the right while the GS66 Stealth only offers 1290MHz of boost with a base frequency of 780MHz on the left.
Because if we also compare the graphical performance between what otherwise would be a Max-Q and Max-P RTX 3070, on 3DMark Fire Strike we’re given a graphical score of just 21,337 on the GS66 Stealth while the GE66 Raider provides a graphics score of 27,940.
Meaning that there’s a whopping 31% performance difference between the Max-Q and Max-P variants of the RTX 3070.
With no proper indicator between the Raider and Stealth when it comes to the TGP of the GPUs inside it’s disheartening to see the kind of bullshit NVIDIA has allowed by scrapping the naming scheme as there’s such a vast range for both Max-Q and Max-P graphics cards when it comes to their TGPs.
Moving on here we have the RTX 3060 “Laptop GPU”, I honestly will never get over NVIDIA’s barbaric decision to cull Max-Q and Max-P naming scheme. Anyways, the RTX 3060 mobile on this system is paired with a previous generation AMD Ryzen 7 4800H and provides a graphics score of 7,852.
Comparatively speaking a desktop RTX 2060 Super scores anywhere from the high 8,000’s and well into the 9,000’s while its mobile variant scores roughly around 8,400 as a sort of average.
However in comparison against its predecessor, the RTX 2060 in an mobile environment, the Turing based card scores are a little lower at around the 7400-7700 range, and pretty obviously the desktop variant eclipses that as well.
Compared against standard 3DMark results against a mobile RTX 2060, this score of an RTX 3060 shows to be just 4.4% faster when comparing the score of 7,521.
NVIDIA laid the claim that the RTX 3060 Mobile GPU was 1.3 times faster than the Soyny Playstation 5, with performance ranging around the 2060 Super mark I highly doubt that such a claim is actually true so I suppose it’s probably a good thing that we happen to have a secondary result for the RTX 3060.
Because in this case this mobile device happens to be paired with a new Ryzen 7 5800H and the CPU scores certainly reflect that over the one up above, however in this instance the RTX 3060 inside obviously has a little more juice allocated towards it and provides a graphics score of 8,843. Which is quite an okay score, being just 4.96% faster than a typical RTX 2060 Super mobile GPU.
However the main important thing here is how there’s a 12.62% variance in performance between two “identical” graphics cards with no notion on whether one is a gimped trash Max-Q or not.
This is because as you may recall that NVIDIA at least intends to drop the Max-Q and Max-P naming scheme for this generation around, a staple that’s been around for generations to let consumers know exactly what they’re buying… or at the very least a bit more informed regarding the vast difference in power draw, clockspeeds and in the case of Ampere memory frequency and bandwidth are now an important factor between the two different SKU’s.
Once more we reflect upon this graph to mention just how important the Max-Q and Max-P branding actually is. Because if we take the RTX 3080 Mobile for example in a Max-P configuration it can and will come with a TGP of 115W all the way up to 165W. This is entirely dependant on the OEM’s system and cooling limitations.
The RTX 3080 Max-Q however can range from 80W to 135W.
RTX 3070 “Max-P”: 115-140W, “Max-Q”: 80-140W
RTX 3060 “Max-P”: 80-130W , “Max-Q”: 60-130W
With custom TGP ranges from this it’ll be almost impossible to find two different laptops across any manufacturer that offers the same spec’d GPU. Removing the Max-Q and Max-P branding by NVIDIA is yet another detrimental anti-consumer move from the big green giant. As those low wattage cards in laptops perform like absolute dog shit, and it’s the reasoning why mobile devices are frowned upon by actual gaming enthusiasts.
An NVIDIA spokesperson had this to say in response about the company dropping the Max-Q and Max-P branding to HotHardware:
Max-Q branding is not going away.
When we originally introduced Max-Q back in 2017, the brand was initially used in GPU naming since Max-Q referred to the GPU TGP only.
Today, 3rd Generation Max-Q is broader, and is a holistic set of platform technologies and design approach to building powerful and thin laptops.
In addition, to be more transparent about a laptop’s exact capabilities, RTX 30 Series laptops now show more information than ever, listing exact TGP, clocks and features supported. You will find this in the control panel which now reports maximum power (TGP+Boost), and support for key features including Dynamic Boost 2, WhisperMode 2, Advanced Optimus, and others, all of which fall under the Max-Q umbrella.
We strongly encourage OEMs to list clocks and other technologies a laptop supports, including Advanced Optimus, Dynamic Boost 2, and more. Ultimately, like all laptop features and specs, it is up to the OEM to market what their particular laptop configuration supports.
— NVIDIA Spokesman to HotHardware
What a lying piece of shit, so NVIDIA actually do intend to drop the Max-Q and Max-P brandings as the Max-Q branding was merely a reference to the GPU’s TGP limitation only. With the branding gone NVIDIA has a vast amount more features for its TGP power ranges with the RTX 30 series mobile devices.
NVIDIA has “strongly encouraged” OEM partners to list specified clockspeeds, TGP limits and Dynamic Boost options and more. However just like how NVIDIA’s own MSRP is merely just a “suggestion” and hasn’t stopped their AIB partners from gouging the living fuck out of gamers and miners milking Ampere for every shekel possible, the suggestion from NVIDIA to be honest and “transparent” regarding whether or not your RTX 30-series laptop contains a lemon has gone completely unnoticed.
At least OEM partners were “transparent” in regards to labelling the graphics cards as “Laptop GPUs”.