NVIDIA Sneaks Less Powerful GeForce MX150 Variant Into Ultrabooks

[Vayra86]

Yes, in a few synthetics it looks like there isn't much performance difference. But did you look at the actual game tests? In any of the tests that actually have a MX130 score, the MX150's minimums beat the MX130.

FF XV low 720p: MX130 = 22.5FPS MX150 Minimum = 25.2FPS
Assisin's Creed Origins Low 720p: MX130 = 29FPS MX150 Minimum = 42FPS
Middle Earth: SoW Low 720p: MX130 = 43FPS MX150 Minimum = 47FPS
Rocket League Low 720p: MX130 = 94FPS MX150 Minimum = 127FPS

So, obviously, even the weaker version of the MX150 is still outperforming the MX130 in real world tests.

But, again, the biggest part of this is likely going to come down to the thermals of the laptop. Which is why the more efficient, and less heat outputting, MX150 is performing better than the MX130 in the real world tests. Because, even notebookcheck's own reviews on laptops with the weaker MX150 note that it will boost to over 1600MHz when the laptop is cool. The problem is these 13" ultrathins don't keep things cool for very long, again the same reviews note that even the processor begins to lower the boost under load too due to heat.

And the MX130's TPD is 30W for the configuration that is coming close to matching the weaker MX150. While the weaker MX150 only has a TDP of 10W. So that is why the weaker MX150 exists. If they would put a top MX130 in one of these 13" laptops, it would throttle so hard it wouldn't even come close to scoring as well as it did in those synthetics, forget about the real world tests. I doubt it would even be able to maintain its base clock.

You're right, I'm not contesting a word of what you're saying. But now I'm pretending to be Mr Average Joe - with a small, even average knowledge of tech and having learned to always check benchmarks. Gonna go shopping for a laptop with a 'bit more' than just a weak IGP, and I find Nvidia's MX150 on the net. It takes an awful lot of knowledge and even reading between the lines and into a laptop's cooling capabilities to really learn anything at all. The MX150 by itself tells me nothing - worst case, it'll do less than my old slightly bulkier laptop with an MX130 in it.

Thát is what's leaving a really sour taste in my mouth. And you mentioned Intel's confusing forest of mobile CPUs, and yes, I agree on that as well. Was it intended? Of course this was intended... and that is why I feel these articles are very much right to exist and pop up once in a while or in fact, EVERY TIME a new low has been reached. The gaps are widening as the form factors get more extreme, and this is a really bad trend.

Apart from this, taking a longer look at the four game benches you linked, I see some striking links: AC Origins is CPU heavy and Rocket League is running at a very high FPS = also high on CPU load. FFXV and Middle Earth are most certainly not, and here we see the MX130 and MX150 scores get frighteningly close. It underlines what you're saying about heat and Maxwell versus Pascal, at the same time, it shows that the graphics performance of the MX150 is extremely inconsistent whereas the MX130 is not. On the desktop, this is touted as Pascal's greatest feature and praised for its headroom; on mobile, its abused to the limit to feign a greater performance than we're actually getting. This is a change from the norm, with regards to what Nvidia is/was offering. What's next, reversed GPU Boost? 'It may boost to the specsheet's clock once in a while, if you're lucky'? Because essentially that is what this is.


Its exactly like you're telling it: Nvidia doesn't need to do this for ANY reason whatsoever, except to mislead and support OEM's in doing that trick with them. Even if they had just specified a TDP and clock speed range, not even all the possible configurations but just min/max, the performance gap would be excusable and explainable. Even Intel doesn't play the game so badly, they at least specify the core counts somewhere.

 

[newtekie1]

You're right, I'm not contesting a word of what you're saying. But now I'm pretending to be Mr Average Joe - with a small, even average knowledge of tech and having learned to always check benchmarks. Gonna go shopping for a laptop with a 'bit more' than just a weak IGP, and I find Nvidia's MX150 on the net. It takes an awful lot of knowledge and even reading between the lines and into a laptop's cooling capabilities to really learn anything at all. The MX150 by itself tells me nothing - worst case, it'll do less than my old slightly bulkier laptop with an MX130 in it.

We aren't talking "slightly" less bulky here. The difference between the laptops we see the MX130 in and the weaker MX150 in are miles apart. To the point that anyone shopping for one isn't shopping for the other. The MX130 comes in full thickness 15" laptops, I don't think I've seen it in anything else due to the high thermals, and the weaker MX150 only comes in 13" ultrathins. They are in different categories completely.

And at the end of the day, that 13" ultrathin is still outperforming the 15" thick bastard, so I would like to meet the person that wouldn't be happy with that.

Apart from this, taking a longer look at the four game benches you linked, I see some striking links: AC Origins is CPU heavy and Rocket League is running at a very high FPS = also high on CPU load. FFXV and Middle Earth are most certainly not, and here we see the MX130 and MX150 scores get frighteningly close. It underlines what you're saying about heat and Maxwell versus Pascal, at the same time, it shows that the graphics performance of the MX150 is extremely inconsistent whereas the MX130 is not. On the desktop, this is touted as Pascal's greatest feature and praised for its headroom; on mobile, its abused to the limit to feign a greater performance than we're actually getting. This is a change from the norm, with regards to what Nvidia is/was offering. What's next, reversed GPU Boost? 'It may boost to the specsheet's clock once in a while, if you're lucky'? Because essentially that is what this is.

Again, the inconsistencies comes down to thermals more than anything else. The fact of the matter is that the MX150 is being put in computers that struggle to keep it cool, and that is why the performance varies. The laptops that the MX130 go in don't have the same issues with cooling. And the MX130 would struggle way more if it was put in 13" Ultrathins. And that is what people need to realize, when you start pushing thermal envelopes to the point that a 10w GPU starts to overheat, it really doesn't matter if you started with the faster MX150, because it ain't going to perform any better.

 

[londiste]

That's Nvidia's entry-level lineup.
MX110/130 are old Maxwell cards, only MX150 is Pascal.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

We aren't talking "slightly" less bulky here. The difference between the laptops we see the MX130 in and the weaker MX150 in are miles apart. To the point that anyone shopping for one isn't shopping for the other. The MX130 comes in full thickness 15" laptops, I don't think I've seen it in anything else due to the high thermals, and the weaker MX150 only comes in 13" ultrathins. They are in different categories completely.

And at the end of the day, that 13" ultrathin is still outperforming the 15" thick bastard, so I would like to meet the person that wouldn't be happy with that.

Apart from this, taking a longer look at the four game benches you linked, I see some striking links: AC Origins is CPU heavy and Rocket League is running at a very high FPS = also high on CPU load. FFXV and Middle Earth are most certainly not, and here we see the MX130 and MX150 scores get frighteningly close. It underlines what you're saying about heat and Maxwell versus Pascal, at the same time, it shows that the graphics performance of the MX150 is extremely inconsistent whereas the MX130 is not. On the desktop, this is touted as Pascal's greatest feature and praised for its headroom; on mobile, its abused to the limit to feign a greater performance than we're actually getting. This is a change from the norm, with regards to what Nvidia is/was offering. What's next, reversed GPU Boost? 'It may boost to the specsheet's clock once in a while, if you're lucky'? Because essentially that is what this is.

Again, the inconsistencies comes down to thermals more than anything else. The fact of the matter is that the MX150 is being put in computers that struggle to keep it cool, and that is why the performance varies. The laptops that the MX130 go in don't have the same issues with cooling. And the MX130 would struggle way more if it was put in 13" Ultrathins. And that is what people need to realize, when you start pushing thermal envelopes to the point that a 10w GPU starts to overheat, it really doesn't matter if you started with the faster MX150, because it ain't going to perform any better.

Except you can oc a low mx150 over 30% since some laptops have these stock by oem at high mx150 speeds, you can oc them...

1d10 and 1d12 can go head to head...

Talking a 950 to 1330mhz oc get a laptop cooler it will be fine

stock clock 1d12 for this OEM (1d12) is the low model
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/details/69rwr

 

[newtekie1]

Except you can oc a low mx150 over 30% since some laptops have these stock by oem at high mx150 speeds, you can oc them...

1d10 and 1d12 can go head to head...

Talking a 950 to 1330mhz oc get a laptop cooler it will be fine

stock clock 1d12 for this OEM (1d12) is the low model
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/details/69rwr

How is that possible when the weaker MX150 is already hitting a thermal wall and lowering the boost because of it? I mean, sure I guess you can raise the clocks in Afterburner and feel good about it, but it won't run at those speeds and won't make any difference, but at least you'll feel good about it.

I mean, the Lenovo Ideapad 320S-13IKB that everyone is point to to show how bad the performance gap is between the High MX150 and the Low MX150? Yeah, in the review that Notebookcheck got those performance number from, the CPU throttled to 1.5GHz during testing and the GPU throttled to 520MHz! So set the clocks to whatever you want, it ain't going to do a darn thing.

That laptop also isn't not representitive of the actual performance of the Lower MX150. The laptop just throttles so bad because of heat, and that is on Lenovo for their absolute shit cooling design, not nVidia's fault.

The same thing is true with the HP Envy 13-ad006ng, the GPU doesn't actually thermal throttle, but the CPU does. The CPU throttles to 1.4GHz, but the GPU doesn't mange to stay at its boost clock and runs at 975MHz.

The Zenbook UX3311UA? Same, GPU throttles to 800MHz.

All these bad scores are on laptops that are already hitting their thermal limit. And that is why the sores are so bad, the fact that they have a weaker version of the MX150 actually doesn't matter, and overclocking it won't help either since they are already automatically lowering the clocks because of heat.

 

[syrup]

They are obviously not part of the GPProgram.

Such a fitting contrast between this behaviour, and their declared (though obviosly disingenuous) motivations for the GPP.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

How is that possible when the weaker MX150 is already hitting a thermal wall and lowering the boost because of it? I mean, sure I guess you can raise the clocks in Afterburner and feel good about it, but it won't run at those speeds and won't make any difference, but at least you'll feel good about it.

I mean, the Lenovo Ideapad 320S-13IKB that everyone is point to to show how bad the performance gap is between the High MX150 and the Low MX150? Yeah, in the review that Notebookcheck got those performance number from, the CPU throttled to 1.5GHz during testing and the GPU throttled to 520MHz! So set the clocks to whatever you want, it ain't going to do a darn thing.

That laptop also isn't not representitive of the actual performance of the Lower MX150. The laptop just throttles so bad because of heat, and that is on Lenovo for their absolute shit cooling design, not nVidia's fault.

Thats not the gpu limit but the notebook, the chip is in no way throttling from its own capabilities just a bad notebook

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

When comparing products in the same product architecture, in the same generation, an i5 should never be more powerful than an i7. The low power chips should never be named higher than i3, there is no reason to be naming dual-core processors as i7 today. Intel's naming scheme for mobile processor is the total bullcrap.

Also, I know that with research it is easy to tell the difference. That is why I said "it kind of is". The whole idea of the i3,i5,i7 naming was to split the processors into performance tiers. But they have completely ignored that in the mobile market. There is no reason to call the i7-7500U an i7, it should be in the i3 product line. Naming the 2c/4t processors i7 back in the early days was fine when all the mobile processors were dual-cores, but we've evolved past that, and Intel needs to get with the times with their naming, because there is no getting around that it is confusing to the consumer that walks into BestBuy looking for a laptop, I'm not saying it is deliberate, but it is confusing.. And I'd almost be willing to bet the people selling them at BestBuy don't even realize that the i5 is more powerful than the i7...

performance tier in their set category....can you be anymore dishonest? How are you advocating for idiots?

Intel nomenclature is clear and i7-7500U is called that because they also have more in that product line and its one of the highest one in that product line. Anyways, I already called you out on being dishonest and irrefutably proved it so I will stop that.

https://ark.intel.com/products/codename/82879/Kaby-Lake

I seriously expected better from you newtekkie. Others on this forum I get being that dishonest but you?

 

[looniam]

That's Nvidia's entry-level lineup.
MX110/130 are old Maxwell cards, only MX150 is Pascal.

i don't know how it's different since i don't own lappys, but in the discrete segment nvidia uses previous gen chips regularly in most all their entry line up. for a hot second there were maxwell on the mid/high end and kepler on entry but also a fermi chip was also floating around "down there."

it took comparing the specs on the nvidia site to the OEM/AIBs to know what you were getting; a really PITA.

 

[newtekie1]

Thats not the gpu limit but the notebook, the chip is in no way throttling from its own capabilities just a bad notebook

That's my point. All the laptops that have this weaker version of the MX150 are the ones that are hitting their thermal limits. So you can't overclock the lower MX150, because the laptops it is designed to go in, and rightly the ones that are using it, are thermal limited.

Sure, if they put it in a laptop that could handle it, it could be overclocked to match the higher one.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

That's my point. All the laptops that have this weaker version of the MX150 are the ones that are hitting their thermal limits. So you can't overclock the lower MX150, because the laptops it is designed to go in, and rightly the ones that are using it, are thermal limited.

Just get a laptop cooler then you wont notice, i use one that covers the bottom

 

[newtekie1]

Just get a laptop cooler then you wont notice, i use one that covers the bottom

A laptop cooler is not going to make up for the absolutely tiny heatsinks they put in these 13" laptops. It also kind of defeats the purpose of a ultra-portable laptop a little, don't you think?

 

[T4C Fantasy]

A laptop cooler is not going to make up for the absolutely tiny heatsinks they put in these 13" laptops. It also kind of defeats the purpose of a ultra-portable laptop a little, don't you think?

Its not that bad at all the coolers they will fit in a case with the notebook, and i use mine the sameway those people would use theirs, people blow things out of proportion.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Its not that bad at all the coolers they will fit in a case with the notebook, and i use mine the sameway those people would use theirs, people blow things out of proportion.

but then you might as well get a fuller sized latop with better cooling, anyway ,I think its not so simple as to blame just nvidia or the OEMs they all colude and still stuff like this happens ,its not good but apparently its the way just like single chanel memory using AMd laptops seam to be quite popular ,not.

 

[moproblems99]

As we debated with 580 vs 480, different clocks does not a new gpu make. If they did something like the 1060 3GB and 1060 6GB (which I do have a problem with), then there would be an issue.

Just look at the full size discrete cards that are used in mITX builds. They are set on a small board with a single fan. How do they handle the reduced thermal capacity? They reduce clocks. However, the card still has the ability to use the full resources of said card.

 

[sneekypeet]

Thread cleansed. Please stay away from arguments and throwing stones at glass houses.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

Thread cleansed. Please stay away from arguments and throwing stones at glass houses.

What about houses that throw glass at stones?

 

[Crap Daddy]

It doesn't matter, the notebook manufacturers need to specify what they have inside their machines which most often they don't. It's a jungle out there and the Dells and the Lenovos and the others are doing their best to confuse the customers and get their money, more for less, the better.

On the other hand I just bought an Asus ultrabook, UX430UN, it's 14" screen in a 13" dimension, 1.6 cm thin and weighs 1.25 kg with an i5-8250U which by the way has 4 cores 8 threads. Inside there's an MX150, the "genuine" one. Problem is it throttles at 73 C which is set in stone by Asus, I don't really blame them, the laptop has no cooling grills underneath, they are tiny and placed under the hinge of the screen plus only one fan cooling both the CPU and the GPU. That's their design choices, the notebook looks and feels great otherwise. In any way, shape or form this ultrabook is not marketed or intended for gaming. Sure you can have more fun than with the integrated Intel graphics but the real benefit from the MX150 is if you are doing some video editing and similar stuff. In such a small ultraportable form factor I would have preferred a factory underclocked GPU which can sustain lower FPS but without stutter than a more powerful one which can't be used to its full potential.

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

A laptop cooler is not going to make up for the absolutely tiny heatsinks they put in these 13" laptops. It also kind of defeats the purpose of a ultra-portable laptop a little, don't you think?

to be honest it all depends. I know when i was in chungju and trying to play warthunder and ns2 my Acer nitro spin 5 would throttle isntantly but i put two powerade caps underneath it and it went from throttling from 10W TDP to sustaining 25w TDP on CPU plus GPU maxed. It really all depends. The laptop has pretty damn tiny heatsink too.

granted this is a 15in laptop but incredible thin and a huge amount of power in such a tiny body. 25W TDP CPU plus 50 watt GPU?

 

[newtekie1]

but then you might as well get a fuller sized latop with better cooling, anyway ,I think its not so simple as to blame just nvidia or the OEMs they all colude and still stuff like this happens ,its not good but apparently its the way just like single chanel memory using AMd laptops seam to be quite popular ,not.

Exactly, people are buying ultrathins because they want ultrathins. If they have to carry a bulky laptop cooler around everywhere they go they'd just get a bigger laptop.

to be honest it all depends. I know when i was in chungju and trying to play warthunder and ns2 my Acer nitro spin 5 would throttle isntantly but i put two powerade caps underneath it and it went from throttling from 10W TDP to sustaining 25w TDP on CPU plus GPU maxed. It really all depends. The laptop has pretty damn tiny heatsink too.

granted this is a 15in laptop but incredible thin and a huge amount of power in such a tiny body. 25W TDP CPU plus 50 watt GPU?

That heatsink is about twice the size of the ones in the 13" laptops.

This is the cooling on the ASUS UX331UA:

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

Exactly, people are buying ultrathins because they want ultrathins. If they have to carry a bulky laptop cooler around everywhere they go they'd just get a bigger laptop.



That heatsink is about twice the size of the ones in the 13" laptops.

This is the cooling on the ASUS UX331UA:

yea but my laptop is also using 75W TDP vs what? 20-30?

 

[newtekie1]

yea but my laptop is also using 75W TDP vs what? 20-30?

The TDP difference between the MX150 and the weaker MX150 is a 10W. So 20-30W is not a reasonable guess. It's probably closer to 65W.

 

[GoldenX]

This is why Intel and Via GPUs are the best, they don't rename/weaken anything.
#notmydedicatedgpu

 

[pkrol]

I wonder why it has suddenly become trendy to criticise whatever NVIDIA does. Unlike Intel, they offer very real, tangible performance increases for each generation of its GPUs.

You are free not to buy their GPUs, since we've got AMD. AMD is not competitive at the very top but again, no one forces you to buy NVIDIA GPUs. Wait a year or two and you'll get the performance of Titan V from AMD.

Speaking of this particular news piece. Let's check some facts, e.g. visit the GeForce MX-150 web page. OMG, there are no specs there. Nothing at all. NVIDIA doesn't promise anything at all. It's not like AMD who recently completely silently downgraded some of its GPUs (RX-550?).

So, what's going on and what's all the fuss about? Or NVIDIA slandering news titles work as a click bait?

Bad practices are bad practices period. Shame not all of us are NVIDIA knights. Fanboys/fangirls of any company annoy me. Remember none of these companies give a flip about you. I for one am glad AMD got called out for its attempted shady move and now that NVIDIA is getting the same treatment.

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

The TDP difference between the MX150 and the weaker MX150 is a 10W. So 20-30W is not a reasonable guess. It's probably closer to 65W.

I was saying a 25W TDP CPU (8550U) + 1050 (50 W TDP) is ~75 W TDP for my laptop vs that ultrabook that has a 15W CPU+ 25 W TDP GPU tops so the weaker is 15W? Thats 30-40W TDP. My laptop has mayeb twice the size of cool but it works perfectly fine as long as its propped up. If its not 1 inch off the table it instantly melts/

I bet these are only overheating because some retard never gave it 1 inch of space to breath. My CPU over heats at 10-15 watts without being propped up. If it gets 1-2cm of space it runs 25W TDP perfectly fine. The GPU rusn even cooler since its a larger die.