Soldato
Of course it's relevant. 4k on a 15 inch screen is virtually pointless unless you're face is a few inches from the screen.
On a much bigger display, the difference between 1080p and 4k is much more visible.
Can a gaming laptop compete with a gaming pc?
- Thread starter Matt Risley
- Start date
On a much bigger display, the difference between 1080p and 4k is much more visible.
I asked why you would require a difference in horsepower to push the same amount of pixels at the same refresh rate just because the display is larger, as per your claim.
Soldato
Textbook pedant.
Actually, to be fair to MISJAH the way you wrote the sentence could be interpreted like you were saying that a bigger screen means more horsepower is required, because you didn't mention any difference in resolution.
Man of Honour
Anyone but someone looking for an argument would (dare I say it, really should) recognise that he meant a higher res screen. I don't know of many (any?) 15" laptop screens that have the same amount of pixels as a 39" ultrawide, outside of optional, pointless upgrades.
:edit: I've thought about it again and I suppose really there are 2560x1080 ultrawides and definitely 4k 15" laptops, but it's pretty obvious the point was that - on average - gaming laptops will likely run a lower res than a desktop.
The answer to the OP is: short answer, no. Long answer, it depends.
:edit: I've thought about it again and I suppose really there are 2560x1080 ultrawides and definitely 4k 15" laptops, but it's pretty obvious the point was that - on average - gaming laptops will likely run a lower res than a desktop.
The answer to the OP is: short answer, no. Long answer, it depends.
If only people could say what they mean.
My I7-9700K & RTX 2080 laptop will happily pump frames to an external 2560 x 1080 monitor, as happily as it does to its 144Hz 1080p display.
Not at the rate a desktop with 9700K and 2080 will but close enough for it to nearly be insignificant.
Soldato
Yes, my machine is in a similar region, not as powerful as Misjah's, but as I have a full Max-P 2080, with a little overclocking, and unlocking the TDP on my 9880H, I get damn close, to the point I am rivalling or beating a large number of desktop systems.
As stated above, for the same cost, the answer is no, it will not match, however if money is no object, they can get surprisingly close, but that comes at a cost.
There are a great many desktops that cannot reach the same scores as my or Misjah's machines.
As stated above, for the same cost, the answer is no, it will not match, however if money is no object, they can get surprisingly close, but that comes at a cost.
There are a great many desktops that cannot reach the same scores as my or Misjah's machines.
It's a forum full of many different types of people and not everyone is capable of seeing through badly worded posts to interpret the context within and will instead take them more literally at face value. You should know that full well with how long you've been on the forums!
Plus, from what I hae seen, MISJAH doesn't look for arguments.
Soldato
Is your point that a mobile RTX 2080 and a desktop RTX 2080 are 'close enough to be nearly insignificant'?
Not sure why you're banging on about 1080p then, as I'm pretty sure I said a 39in ultra wide. Ignoring the fact that there aren't any 39in ultra-wides (forgive me for not fully researching before posting) - for an ultra-wide we're talking about resolutions of 3440x1440 - not 2560 x 1080. That would be 4,953,600 vs 2,764,800 pixels. So - are you saying that there won't be any difference of performance on the two screens?
Comparing a 1080p 15 in laptop screen and a larger 1080p monitor was your insight, not mine. If only people would read a post.
Why are you mentioning the size of displays still?
Are you are trying to state that higher resolutions require greater performing hardware?
If you are, isn't that just stating the obvious?
Ok guys please both give it a rest. Bug One, you are writing confusing and unclear things and MSIJAH you now know full well that he is referring to increased resolutions and not only increased screen size (despite his first post not bring well worded) so stop picking him apart as you will just end up looking unnecessarily petty and pedantic. Be the bigger man and drop it. 
Ok guys please both give it a rest. Bug One, you are writing confusing and unclear things and MSIJAH you now know full well that he is referring to increased resolutions and not only increased screen size (despite his first post not bring well worded) so stop picking him apart as you will just end up looking unnecessarily petty and pedantic. Be the bigger man and drop it.
Yes dad, sorry.
NOW GO TO YOUR ROOM. Oh wait, you're already there.
Rather than create a new thread. Can I ask a few questions please. 144hz vs 240hz or 300hz is it very noticeable?
The 280 Super Max Q Vs 280 Super full fat seems a huge gap in performance looking across the web is that right?
lastly I currently have a MSI Titan laptop with a 1080 card 4 years old. Is there a massive jump vs the 2080 super Max Q
The 280 Super Max Q Vs 280 Super full fat seems a huge gap in performance looking across the web is that right?
lastly I currently have a MSI Titan laptop with a 1080 card 4 years old. Is there a massive jump vs the 2080 super Max Q
Last edited:
Type "GPU1 vs GPU2 notebookcheck" into google, replacing GPU1 and GPU2 with the name of the GPU's you want to compare. It's that simple.
Thanks for the reply but looking for opinions rather than numbers from Google. Numbers are good but that doesn’t relate to the end user experience.
Soldato
144hz vs 240hz or 300hz is it very noticeable? - YMMV, once you are at 120+Hz, it comes down to how competitive you are, it's nice but once you've reached 120/144Hz, it's all icing IMO, and the panel quality (colours, response time etc) are more important.
The 2080 Super Max Q Vs 2080 Super full fat seems a huge gap in performance looking across the web is that right? - Yes correct, the MaxQ has about half the power allowed the Super MaxP does, which heavily restricts the clocks. The Super and non Super 2080 Max Ps are 150W+, vs 70-90W on MaxQ.
lastly I currently have a MSI Titan laptop with a 1080 card 4 years old. Is there a massive jump vs the 2080 super Max Q - I would say not enough for the outlay. There's a jump and extra features, but Pascal 1080 Max P was pretty decent, you'd notice a substantial difference with Max P 2080, but not convinced by MaxQ which is designed more for power saving/thinner and lighter than performance, and performance sometimes really tumbles because of that. I am assuming the Titan had a MaxP variant though, if the thing had a Max Q then it may be a more substantial uplift.
As it is the 2080 Super Max P for laptops is essentially the same as the original 2080 Max P for laptops, but with a boosted TDP, to my knowledge, the lower SKUs (2060/2070) got more tweaking.
The 2080 Super Max Q Vs 2080 Super full fat seems a huge gap in performance looking across the web is that right? - Yes correct, the MaxQ has about half the power allowed the Super MaxP does, which heavily restricts the clocks. The Super and non Super 2080 Max Ps are 150W+, vs 70-90W on MaxQ.
lastly I currently have a MSI Titan laptop with a 1080 card 4 years old. Is there a massive jump vs the 2080 super Max Q - I would say not enough for the outlay. There's a jump and extra features, but Pascal 1080 Max P was pretty decent, you'd notice a substantial difference with Max P 2080, but not convinced by MaxQ which is designed more for power saving/thinner and lighter than performance, and performance sometimes really tumbles because of that. I am assuming the Titan had a MaxP variant though, if the thing had a Max Q then it may be a more substantial uplift.
As it is the 2080 Super Max P for laptops is essentially the same as the original 2080 Max P for laptops, but with a boosted TDP, to my knowledge, the lower SKUs (2060/2070) got more tweaking.
Last edited:
Soldato
No worries. There is a reason the Max P 2080 is not featured in the marketing of the Supers. The 2080 Super was changed less than the other cards AFAIK and so it is still better due to more TDP, but no where near the uplift the other cards with boosted configs got.
Anyone affording brand overprices of Intel and Nvidia should be able to afford UPS for getting over typical few second cut and allowing controlled shut down if blackout is longer.
And UPS would be needed anyway for proper size monitor for any gaming immersion.
And if someone goes around pulling cables randomly, that's problem which cannot be solved by any hardware.
Except maybe old fashioned.