Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks that’s very interesting. I’d never heard of these. They seem expensive but you get the millennium aspect (not something a spinning magnetic disk can claim).
Everything else set aside, the company lasted 7 years until bankrupcy, and that sort of casts a shadow on the millennium claim. There's at least nobody left as resposible, if it's not true.
I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
611–620 of 693 posts
Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#612Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? There’s a lot of laptops that hit their top clocks with no issues. The main problem is that doing so seriously reduces your battery duration and emits significant noise. Pick anything over the 800$ range that isn’t a macbook and you’re way more likely to hit clocks than not.
The problem isn't hitting the top clocks, but sustaining them. Only the biggest "desktop replacement" class laptops tend to be able to sustain 120W+ CPU dissipation. Note that workstation-class (H) laptop CPUs also make compromises on performance - the Ryzen 9 4900H is 8C16T but only has 4MB L2$, 8MB L3$, and a max TDP of 54W. A desktop Ryzen 9 3950X by comparison is 16C32T and has 8MB L2$, 64MB L3$, and a 105W defau…
It’s obvious that it’s impossible at the moment to get 3950X performance in a laptop format, but you can get laptops able to keep temps reasonable with 35-50W, and that’s what a lot of laptop SoCs target as total power.
Those SoCs hit (and sustain) their top clocks, whatever those are for that specific SKU.
What I understood from OP is a common complaint for macbooks, that fail consistently to sustain their specified to clocks, because Apple deliberately under specifies their cooling solutions for better ergonomics (and design reasons).
Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#613Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't speak for OP, but mine certianly doesn't. I know because I assembled it.
Mine doesn't have a speaker, either. It does have one of those wretched dingers that attach to the SPKR wires.
Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#614A beefy desktop computer - high performance/$ CPU and GPU with several terabytes of storage so I could not worry about how much stuff I download and have several OSes installed without having to shortchange some on storage.
A netbook - one of those 10"-screen dinky little things that had just enough compute to run some basic desktop stuff. I would use this as a remote terminal to the desktop so I could still use the desktop's power from my couch.
As wifi speeds have increased, netbooks have all but disappeared and laptops mostly suck, I'm seriously considering this again, but instead of a netbook I'd jerry-rig a Raspberry Pi into a "laptop".
Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#615Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#616Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that's wrong. A heatsink on an NVMe helps to let it run its top speed longer, or forever. Has nothing to do with issues in your case, those things just get warm, and before it gets too hot the heat has to be transported away or they will throttle.
No. NVME's are rated to run at 0-70 degrees. If your case makes your NVME run at > 80+ degrees you should prob fix the airflow in your case as your prob running your CPU/GPU rather hot.
You seem to assume it's the case that heats up to 80C or more, that's not true and also not necessary for NVMe SSDs to go over their limit. Your CPU/GPU has fans moving the heat away, that's a better position to be in...
Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#617I find it strange how the article puts forwards having to build a desktop computer as some kind of weird, horrific, form of torture. Oh no man! Don't build a desktop computer. Anything but that! The problem can't possibly be so bad that... h-he is considering --building-- a computer... Does the author not know how many computer enthusiasts do just that every day and what a basic task it is? They literally teach you e…
Thought the same when skimming the post. Creators, streamers, AI folks, Kagglers, gamers, some crypto devs, all have a desktop, mainly because of nvidia GPUs. This isn't news for them for probably a decade.
Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#618Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#619Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can totally write code on an iPad. There are plenty of JavaScript environments, not to mention Pythonista. Swift playgrounds will actually run quite large codebases with a little fiddling around. You can trivially get a robust Linux command line with Blink and a free tier Google compute instance. I agree there is no XCode.
I mean, sure, I can technically code on my PS4 too using the web-based Digital Ocean console. I didn’t make the distinction between writing code and writing software but I guess it’s an important one.
I think you’d be surprised how close swift playgrounds has become.
All it really needs is a project navigation UI, and it will be good enough for building pure Swift/SwiftUI apps.
Re: I am seriously considering going back to desktop computers
#620Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem isn't hitting the top clocks, but sustaining them. Only the biggest "desktop replacement" class laptops tend to be able to sustain 120W+ CPU dissipation. Note that workstation-class (H) laptop CPUs also make compromises on performance - the Ryzen 9 4900H is 8C16T but only has 4MB L2$, 8MB L3$, and a max TDP of 54W. A desktop Ryzen 9 3950X by comparison is 16C32T and has 8MB L2$, 64MB L3$, and a 105W defau…
Ignoring the discussion around TDP figures, I’m well aware of the power limits, but that was (IHMO) not the point of OP. It’s obvious that it’s impossible at the moment to get 3950X performance in a laptop format, but you can get laptops able to keep temps reasonable with 35-50W, and that’s what a lot of laptop SoCs target as total power. Those SoCs hit (and sustain) their top clocks, whatever those are for that spec…
This is actually completely wrong. Almost no laptops sustain their top (boost) clock on heavy workloads. Most usually only sustain max performance for minutes (or seconds!) before throttling. Here's an example chart that shows how various premium Athena/Evo U laptops perform: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-Zenbook-S-UX393JA-Laptop-...
On the workstation side, people complain about Macbooks, but recent MBPs actually throttle their Intel H processors less than a comparable XPS 15 for example: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-2019-in-r...
If you are interested in how modern Intel laptop chips throttle and what base and boost clocks mean, you want to do a search for PL1, PL2, and Tau. For AMD chips, you will want to look up STAPM, Fast and Slow PPT.
Note that while a i7-10875H's top "boost" clock is 5.1GHz, the sustained "base" clock is only 2.3GHz. This is so low to be meaningless as a top speed. In practice, unless your laptop's cooling is absolutely terrible, you'll probably end up mostly running in the 3-3.5GHz range under full load. In comparison, on a properly cooled desktop system, a same-gen i9-10900K desktop system should be able to maintain a sustained (all-the-time) clock of about 5GHz (very close to its 5.3GHz boost). AMD chips scale a little bit better due to 7nm having better power efficiency and how PPT works, but the same ratio roughly applies.