NVIDIA Sneaks Less Powerful GeForce MX150 Variant Into Ultrabooks

[ikeke]

N17S-G1-A1 // 1468 - 1531 MHz // 25 Watt TDP
N17S-LG-A1 // 936 - 1037 MHz // 10 Watt TDP

If it was me on the naming board at Nvidia it'd be MX150 and MX150LV

edit: or perhaps MX150 Max-Q, just to follow the current schema.

 

[Vya Domus]

As we debated with 580 vs 480, different clocks does not a new gpu make.

No one said it's a new GPU , we are saying it's a different GPU. Clock speed is enough to differentiate two products.

 

[jabbadap]

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

Not really, intel cpus has configurable TDP too. For the matter though, how many of them are used for gaming anyway. MX150 is not marketed as gaming gpu(At least not by nvidia, and btw that 4x times better is for photo and video editing. So probably faster because of nvenc, which does not depend on gpu clock). Granted they should be more transparent about this, like making clear that tdp is configurable and performance will be affected. And yeah best way is to make it clear by naming. But at least they are both gp108, not like they used to be wholly different generation chips with same name on low end.

Edit. Ahh there's 4x for gaming on specs page. Overall very vague specs for the card.

 

[Vayra86]

N17S-G1-A1 // 1468 - 1531 MHz // 25 Watt TDP
N17S-LG-A1 // 936 - 1037 MHz // 10 Watt TDP

If it was me on the naming board at Nvidia it'd be MX150 and MX150LV

edit: or perhaps MX150 Max-Q, just to follow the current schema.

See, there IS a differentiation, its not like one MX150 clocks down 'only due to thermals'. This really does stink.

 

[ikeke]

Anandtech has a writeup on this, so GP108 and GP108M are differentiated by Nvidia. Looks like OEMs f*ckup, perhaps, or atleast engineers and marketing not being on the same page, again.

Im now leaning towards Nvidia forcing them to add Max-Q to GPU description.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12565/nvidia-silently-rolls-out-slower-mx150-for-ultrabooks

Further investigation on our part does reveal that there is a documented understanding that they are different parts, at least from an OEM perspective. By way of the official Ubuntu Certified hardware database, PCI ID ‘1D10’ is documented as the ‘GP108’ MX150 variant of the ThinkPad T480, while ‘1D12’ is recorded as the ‘GP108M’ variant of the ThinkPad T480s. In this case, although ‘GP108’ and ‘GP108M’ may not be NVIDIA’s own terminology, the Ubuntu Certified process involves OEMs directly working with Canonical to test their hardware. Canonical’s differentiation strongly implies that the OEMs are aware of MX150 variant.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Anandtech has a writeup on this, so GP108 and GP108M are differentiated by Nvidia. Looks like OEMs f*ckup, perhaps, or atleast engineers and marketing not being on the same page, again.

Im now leaning towards Nvidia forcing them to add Max-Q to GPU description.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12565/nvidia-silently-rolls-out-slower-mx150-for-ultrabooks

Further investigation on our part does reveal that there is a documented understanding that they are different parts, at least from an OEM perspective. By way of the official Ubuntu Certified hardware database, PCI ID ‘1D10’ is documented as the ‘GP108’ MX150 variant of the ThinkPad T480, while ‘1D12’ is recorded as the ‘GP108M’ variant of the ThinkPad T480s. In this case, although ‘GP108’ and ‘GP108M’ may not be NVIDIA’s own terminology, the Ubuntu Certified process involves OEMs directly working with Canonical to test their hardware. Canonical’s differentiation strongly implies that the OEMs are aware of MX150 variant.

A lot of that sounds dubious, so they know they are using a desktop variant gpu in a laptop in one case yet the actual mobile version in another and just add an s.
I like annandtech but that stinks , why would you use the desktop variant gpu, why would it then not be marketed different ,it would game different.
Sounds like someone made a laptop for reviews and one to actually sell or something , no clarity, no good.

 

[moproblems99]

No one said it's a new GPU , we are saying it's a different GPU. Clock speed is enough to differentiate two products.

In reference to my post, new == different. My point is, if you remove the laptop from the equation and ran the same cooling on each one, you are going to get the same performance. nVidia is not responsible for the cooling.

 

[Vya Domus]

if you remove the laptop from the equation and ran the same cooling on each one, you are going to get the same performance.

You are not going to get the same performance. They are clocked differently and have a different TDP, these are 2 different chips tuned differently from factory. Nvidia ships them this way , it has nothing to do with cooling , the OEM chooses which one to get.

 

[HTC]

This whole thing would not exist if nVidia clearly differentiated the two chips to avoid any and all confusion, but nooooo ...

EDIT

N17S-G1-A1 // 1468 - 1531 MHz // 25 Watt TDP
N17S-LG-A1 // 936 - 1037 MHz // 10 Watt TDP

If it was me on the naming board at Nvidia it'd be MX150 and MX150LV

edit: or perhaps MX150 Max-Q, just to follow the current schema.

To the un-informed buyer, those two use the "same" GPU so the cheaper one is better ... right?

 

[newtekie1]

You are not going to get the same performance. They are clocked differently and have a different TDP, these are 2 different chips tuned differently from factory. Nvidia ships them this way , it has nothing to do with cooling , the OEM chooses which one to get.

They are going to be pretty damn close. The Weaker chip boost to over 1600MHz when not overheating, according to Notebookcheck's own reviews, and the "faster" MX150 boosts to about 1700MHz. So the 30% performance decrease everyone keeps throwing around is not because of the chip itself.

This whole thing would not exist if nVidia clearly differentiated the two chips to avoid any and all confusion, but nooooo ...

Agreed, and this is the issue. They could also have just listed the minimum specs and let OEMs use the faster one if they want.

To the un-informed buyer, those two use the "same" GPU so the cheaper one is better ... right?

I know what you're going at, but ironical chances are the cheaper one would actually be better. These 13" ultrathins that the weaker chip is going in aren't cheap compared to the lower end 15" laptops the more powerful one goes into. The cheapest 13" laptop with an MX150 in it is $1,000, you can pick up a 15" with the more powerful MX150 for under $600.

 

[BiggieShady]

if you remove the laptop from the equation and ran the same cooling on each one, you are going to get the same performance.

That's a blatant lie, however it may not be intentional so let's call it a disninformation

 

[rruff]

Here we are, with you defending a company that runs a SINGLE PRODUCT NAME for products with wildly varying performance.

Nvidia has had up to 3 completely GPUs with the exact same frickin name. From different generations even, with wildly different performance and specs.

I mean, look at this sh!t: https://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gt-630/specifications
https://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gt-730/specifications

 

[T4C Fantasy]

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

Intel weakens more than everyone else, there is 3 or more variants to every igp all different speeds

 

[lewis007]

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?

AMD has done it and there was very real outrage about it, so I don't think Nvidia is being singled out on this issue.

 

[newtekie1]

That's a blatant lie, however it may not be intentional so let's call it a disninformation

It will be a heck of a lot closer than the numbers in the original post seem to suggest. When both versions are boosting to their max, there is only about a 100MHz difference between the two.

To me, a little outrage needs to be directed towards nVidia for not properly listing the minimum specs on their website. However, the majority of the outrage should be directed at these laptop manufacturers that are putting these dedicated GPUs in machines with cooling so bad they can't even maintain the base clock for any amount of reasonable time.

 

[wolf]

I wonder why it has suddenly become trendy to criticize whatever NVIDIA does.

You're kidding right? Many people, especially on this forum, have been bagging them out for years.

NVIDIA, the company that people love to hate.

 

[lewis007]

There is a lot of Nvidia hate mostly brought on by their anti competitive practices but they still have a long relationship with devoted Nvidia supporters like yourself, good on you for being their staunchest fan.

 

[moproblems99]

Many people, especially on this forum, have been bagging them out for years.

They have certainly done some things to draw people's ire but this is not one of them.

 

[wolf]

There is a lot of Nvidia hate mostly brought on by their anti competitive practices but they still have a long relationship with devoted Nvidia supporters like yourself, good on you for being their staunchest fan.

Case in point, this guy. Thanks for helping me make my point

the majority of the outrage should be directed at these laptop manufacturers that are putting these dedicated GPUs in machines with cooling so bad they can't even maintain the base clock for any amount of reasonable time.

This.

 

[deu]

I think his point was that there is no specs and therefore no promised speed.

Except that there is a rough promised speed.
Supposed to be 4x UHD 620 , and the 930mx was 3x ... now with the clock changes the 930mx might actually be faster.

I agree that NVIDIA does not promise one, but this decision will utter destroy that chip. The people who are the market for the MX150 laptops likely not going to go through 10+ reviews of different laptops with MX150 and say; hmm, this one. And even if they do, choosing a lower performing MX150 laptop will bring negative association towards the chip. IMO this is a PR nightmare for the chip

 

[Choice777]

Quick price comparison. So top scoring MX150 is in the Acer Swift SF315 priced at £850 and the lowest scoring MX150 is in the Ideapad 320S priced at £475.

Gosh - didn't see that coming. They're very different speced systems. C'mon people - open your eyes.

Cmon people open your eyes ? The nerve. Where is this imaginary Ideapas S320 at 475 pounds when it's actually 570 pounds and that's only 50 pounds less than the proper mx150 Acer Swift 3 sf315 at 620 pounds on amazon not 850 !!! Not to mention the Swift3's better i5-7200u cpu vs shit pentium 4415u.

Now at 750 pounds reduced from 850 that's the Acer swift 3 with i7-8250u cpu which is like twice as fast as the pos pentium 4415u in the ideapad 320s around 450 pounds. 7651 passmark points vs 3190 points...that's 2.39 times faster and with a non handicapped mx 150 !!!
Lenovo don't even offer a sorting option based on gpu on their website that's how little they care about the consumer and gpu preferences.

So where is this ideapad 320s with mx150 at 475 pounds ????????

Look
https://www3.lenovo.com/gb/en/laptops/ideapad/300-series/Ideapad-320S-13/p/88IP30S0902

The only Ideapad 320s on the lenovo site shows up with ''upto mx150'' and a whole other bunch of ''up to'' like ''up to 8th gen i7'' but when you click on it and then click view models it only has one model with i3-7100u which is slightly better than pentium 4415u as it has 3800 passmark points vs 3190 in 4415u, but not even close to i5-7200u 4646 points in Acer swift 3 at 620 pounds and 4600 passmark and proper mx150. AND this Ideapad 320s has a intel HD 620 gpu.


SO AGAIN ...where's this ideapad 320s with mx150 at 475 pounds ?????