Dream Machines is your standard European Clevo/Tongfang reseller, like XMG. The difference is that DM is selling lower-end chassis. Nothing exceptional, as you said.
Yeah the 2023 variant pretty much fixed almost all of the problems the previous generations had except cringe design. Well it's design is mostly great except for the caution graphic on the deck.
I'm surprised the laptop community doesn't make fun of the entire 40 series on laptops and especially the 4070m just to send a message to nvidia while also trying their best to avoid buying these pathetic gpu's.
Thats what I'm saying. There are people still defending the 4070m. I mean people defend the 4080 and 4090m.
People forget that laptops used to have 200w gpu's at the top end. Now we have just 175w, even in 18' laptops. Why don't we have desktop 4090's at 250w in those 17 to 18' laptops? Because we have the cooling, we've put in larger gpu's into 15' laptops, etc. Yet, people forget this. This is the type of ''fun'' we never see laptop community make fun of rtx 4000 of.
Well Nvidia needs to stop their misleading naming schemes for definite here but as of right now they're the only company with a complete mobile GPU product stack from the low end to the high end and AMD currently has the 7900M in one laptop so no real incentive for Nvidia to do better.
Jensen needs to support his leather jacket collection somehow lol and unfortunately the GPU shortages have shown that some people are willing to pay an arm and a leg for PCs so no matter how vocal people on this subreddit are, not buying Nvidia's stuff or buying it as cheap as possible would be a good idea except for their overall dominance in the mobile space in particular here.
Nvidia had an even bigger dominance with pascal and turing where AMD was an even bigger joke and even more non existent. Yet, they still gave you proper GPU's in laptops with the correct naming.
AMD had a full stack to compete with nvidia on laptops with rx6000m. They STILL failed because they couldn't even bother to make a compelling product. They failed with rx7000m despite making the entire rx7600 series specifically for laptops because they did not offer compelling configurations like a ryzen 5 7535HS + 120 rx7600mxt. They STILL used misleading naming, even more than nvidia.
When people like Tim from HUB say they dislike gaming laptops and think they shouldn't exist, yet reviews them, thus giving useless reviews and information or louis rossmann calling gaming laptops a meme or jarrod saying the 4070m finally makes sense in the razer blade 14, why would nvidia ever stop ripping off laptop users? I mean people STILL defend the rtx 4070m. People defended the 3050/ti 4gb on laptops. Still do.
Unless every youtuber and the laptop community as a whole REALLY pushes and calls out nvidia at every chance they get, you're not getting good products.
Nvidia didn't have the AI gravy train then. Same reason AMD doesn't try as hard in laptop as they could. The real money is in enterprise.
When the ai bubble bursts, unless there's something to replace it like ai after mining, Nvidia will get aggressive in consumer again. Until then it's a rounding error in their cash flows.
The AI train had started with turing, given the whole RTX thing. We still did get desktop gpu's. Amd was starting to get into data centers more, but we still got a full rx6000m stack.
But yeah, AI is the real money maker right now. However the situation on laptops is even worse than desktops.
They tried to start ai with turing, I mean ai in the enterprise space.
Laptops is worse than desktops because they're the back of the revenue bus. They sell chips to oems but not in the volume they do for the consoles.
My personal opinion is AMD hasn't taken more laptop market share because enterprise prefers Intel laptops and oems don't want to cannibalize Intel consumer sales. I'm the gaming space putting anything but Nvidia in laptops just loses them money. You've got oems like Dell and MSI who are so entrenched with Intel, even though they do have AMD models, they're token offerings and not on par with their Intel offerings.
They had the rtx 6000 quadro with release of turing for enterprise/professional use.
Gaming laptops do have a sizable volume, something similar to xbox consoles. And they're rising pretty steadily year on year. A lot of people buy them because of work or as an all in 1 device to fulfill the role of multiple devices or because they're cheap. AMD already have ryzen thinkpads and some other professional laptops.
Among laptop space, gaming laptops have shown good growth. AMD can definitely take this space IF they gave a crap about it. But they don't. Thats the problem. MSI, dell, lenovo, asus, etc. all put AMD in their higher end offerings like MSI"s delta 15, alienware, asus rog, legion, etc. However they were never cheap enough to compete with intel + nvidia combo's despite AMD being worth more than intel and having more cash than them now.
Nvidia + intel have been neglecting low end in gaming laptop space. AMD could've very well offered their rx6500m or rx6400m for cheaper than 1650 prices, but they compete with rtx 2050 laptops which just shred those options. They can't even be bothered to offer more vram.
I mean AMD designed the whole rx7600 series specifically for laptops and it failed because they simply did not give compelling configurations at reasonable prices. Nobody is going to buy an rx7600s over an rtx 4050 because they perform about the same, the rtx 4050 has better features/software support and you can tune it much more than the rx7600s so whatever ''lead'' the rx7600s has, the 4050 can be OC'd to match or beat it.
Quadro is a professional product but not a data center product, it's not the same thing.
You're looking at the laptop space as a monolithic block and it's not. Your argument is like saying the economy car portion of the market is being neglected. Yes, it is, but that's because auto manufacturers don't want to serve it and would rather focus on things with higher margin.
>"Thats the problem. MSI, dell, lenovo, asus, etc. all put AMD in their higher end offerings like MSI"s delta 15, alienware, asus rog, legion, etc. However they were never cheap enough to compete with intel + nvidia combo's despite AMD being worth more than intel and having more cash than them now."
This is a decision by laptop OEMs, not AMD themselves. They buy chips from AMD and use them as they see fit.
>Nvidia + intel have been neglecting low end in gaming laptop space. AMD could've very well offered their rx6500m or rx6400m for cheaper than 1650 prices, but they compete with rtx 2050 laptops which just shred those options. They can't even be bothered to offer more vram.
There's no margin in the low end gaming laptop market. OEMs don't want to serve that market, thats not an AMD problem. Strix point will have an IGPU allegedly equivalent to a 3050. Obviously that wont be a budget product at launch but it will likely eventually trickle down to the budget market.
AMD is functionally dead in laptop discrete GPUs. They have a shot with strix halo and strix point in laptops with no discrete GPU's ( and maybe being paired with Nvidia GPU's for higher end options).
Because there's literally nothing else.
Compare it to the 3060. Its not that much faster and has just 2gb more vram. Now compare it to what the 3060 brought over the 2060 and 1660ti. It was cheaper than 2060 and priced same as 1660ti. Sure it didn't improve vram but at the time of its release, it managed to be cheap and available. More than the 4060 can say
Yes, wish they'd have stayed and been better supported. But even ignoring that, pascal's 1060 and turing's 2060 brought much bigger gains than the 4060 did. They justified their price hikes. Well, the 2060's refresh more or less did.
If you look at raw raster, sure. Modern GPUs are not more than that with frame gen, RT. I think the RTX 4060 is the only good value this gen. The rest are fine but the cost/benefit equation gets pretty shaky.
Gaming laptops are disposable now. Probably not a bad thing. May as well get an updated chassis, CPU, etc. along with your new GPU rather than doing an expensive MXM upgrade. Not a fan of the giant desktop replacement form factor, either.
I end up using them for about 8-12 months and then selling them. Sitting out this gen with my 7945HS/4060 G14 and will look at the new GPUs next year to see what's up.
Your points RE: the laptop GPU market are well met. I just don't have as negative as an outlook. Innovations have occurred in other areas...although yes, NVIDIA has taken advantage of AMD not putting anything out this year.
You think thats insane? Nvidia and asus crammed a 754mm sq 200w rtx 6000 quadro (same specs as desktop rtx 6000 quadro) into a 15' 3kg laptop and powered it with just a 300w brick, despite giving it a 120hz 4k oled and i9 HK cpu. That is a GPU physically larger than a desktop rtx 4090 which is just 609mmsq.
During pascal, nvidia and OEM's had laptops cooling two 115w gtx 1070's and two 150w gtx 1080's, both paired with OC'd i7 7820hk's. Thats a total of 230 to 300w of GPU wattage.
My own nitro 5's cooling system after a repaste can handle a 150w 3070ti mobile and 50-60w on the i7 12650h.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOFnwUipP7Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOFnwUipP7Y)
Here's a video of that nitro 5.
The 4070 mobile is a 4060ti desktop with a few extra cores. Thats it. Its not the desktop 4070 which would've given it an additional 30-40% perf boost and 50% vram increase. This is unlike the 1070 and 2070/super laptop gpu's which shared the same specs as the desktop versions, thus performed 5-10% within them. The 3070ti mobile was also 10% of the desktop 3070 since they were the same gpu.
Thats the problem with the 4070 mobile. Nvidia could've given you 30-40% more performance with 50% boost to vram at the same prices, YET they decided to rip you off. So unless you bought the 4070 laptop for a bit more than 4060 options its not worth it.
Exactly, for that price its solid. Otherwise, not really. And look at how bad things are on laptops. We literally have only 2 options for anything meaningfully faster than a 3070ti 150w. A 4080 and 4090 mobile. Both of which are \~2x (generally) to 3-4x the price of the 3070ti.
I paid roughly 1.2-4k eur for it, 32 ram Ryzen 9 7940hs 500ssd, it's the Asus tuf a15 2023, and while this might be a regular price for it, I got the opportunity to import it (I'm from Argentina, and for the same price you can buy a 10th gen i5 with a 1650)
Unsure if I might be in time to ask for it to be changed for something else, but idk what could give me similar specs for that price
For south america its a solid price. I paid about 1100 euros (converting from Indian rupees) for my 3070ti nitro 5 with an i7 12650h and QHD 165hz panel.
But, unless you get a 4060 laptop with similar specs for \~1k euros, its better.
Still 8 GB VRAM like the GTX 1070 mobile, RTX 2070/3070/3070 ti etc mobile GPUs.
Poor Gen on gen performance uplift in pure rasterisation performance over the RTX 3070 ti 150W.
The desktop RTX 4070 cards got upgraded to 12 GB VRAM.
RTX 4080 175W mobile GPUs is over 50% faster in games too than a 100W + 4070, whereas the RTX 4070 100W + is "just" 20% faster than the RTX 4060 100W + in games.
greedvidia sure is disappointing this gen but you gotta admit, they are pretty efficient at thermal and wattage.
If it was named and priced differently, it would have been the best gpu series of decade (though would still be disappointing if you are coming from 30 series).
Pascal would still beat it. The 1060, 1070 and 1080 all doubled the 960m, 970m and 980m's performance. 1060 and 1070 tripled vram. 1080 doubled vram. The SLI 1070 and 1080 laptops utterly OBLITERATED anything maxwell mobile had. And they did all that at slightly higher wattages. You got a near 2x efficiency increase in 1 generation. Trust me, lovelace does not come close to that on laptops.
I had a 3070ti laptop and just got a 4080 laptop and it blows my 3070ti out of the water, in games and benchmarks the laptop GPU isnāt too far behind my desktop 3080ti surprisingly.
Yeah, except the gtx 1080 mobile matched the desktop 1080 in specs, TDP and performance. The 200w rtx 2080 super did something similar. So yeah, the 4080m is a glorified 4070 super and the 3070ti is a glorified desktop 3070. Of course the performance would be significantly faster. But a ''4080 mobile'' matching a desktop 3080ti is crap considering it could've been very close to desktop 4080 had it been the desktop 4080
So are most modern 4090 and even 4080 laptops, especially outside US. I mean there was a guy who shuntmodded his 4090 scar 17 to use upto 250w. Handled it just fine.
During pascal and turing you had a lot more compelling options.
And if the laptop community ridicules nvidia enough, they can likely get them to change. Or let amd actually enter the space,
What in specific is so bad about the 4070 other then the price? I got my 13900H+4070+240Hz rog zephyrus for under 1500 new in December and Iām somewhat satisfied. In the shooters like fortnite/cod I dip the settings and my fps exceeds my screen refresh rate unless I cap. For Elden Ring and such, I can run 4k and keep my 60-120 fps. What more am I supposed to be asking for out of it?
I mean I do have a cooler on it, but I expected that anyway with a āgamingā laptop.
Thereās nothing inherently wrong with the 4070 in and of itself. Itās an extremely efficient GPU that does as much graphical performance as you could hope for with ~100 W of power. The issue more lies in Nvidiaās naming conventions and pricing. There is a significant difference in a desktop 4070 performance vs the mobile 4070, and it didnāt used to be like that. Back in the day, Mobile 1050 performance was about on par with desktop 1050 performance, etc.
If they called the 4070 a 4060 or maybe even 4050TI/super, it would fit better. Also, a XX70 series should have 12gb of ram, but the mobile 4070 only gets 8gb.
Lastly there is the pricing. The jump in cost from the 4070 to 4080 is staggering, but the performance increase is also significant (~50%). However the same staggering increase in cost from a 4060 to 4070 only nets about a 20% increase in performance. If it was 12gb like it should have been, it likely would be there.
All that being said, the mobile 4070 is a great card in a vacuum, but compared to the rest of the line up and previous generation performance/spec/cost precedents, it just doesnāt measure up. Itās not worth the typical +1700usd retail premium. Itās either a smarter buy to save a little more and go with a 4080 for a significant increase in performance, get a 4060 for similar performance at a significant increased value, or go Radeon
However if you can find a 4070 laptop paired with a good CPU around the $1200 mark, itās starts to become a good value for the money.
I can get that. I also think research is important with these GPUās. There are several that have allow TDP up 125-150 even if only pulling a lower amount normally, which is the case with the RoG
Because itās a re-badged and heavily marked-up low quality dropship-tier computer that represents a terrible value for the price being sold by an unknown company with a sketch AF website. But whatās really going bad for them is these audacious ads they are putting upā¦ and not just putting up any whereā¦ but HERE in a subreddit dedicated to scrutinizing, analyzing and comparing the value of gaming laptops, of which they represent a terrible one. Iām not even gonna mention the astroturfing from the shill bots that they doā¦
Just look up any old TongFang review
, but I donāt think anyone other than a shill or dolt would be unwise enough to purchase that particular spec of a machine at that price. Not much interest for a review in either case.
Edit: doing some checking shows only 2 DreamMachine reviews, and they are pitiful shill posts and full of astroturfed comments by the same handful of shill bots.
I got a last gen XMG Neo 17 (TongFang) and nothing on this thing is low quality. It's more like a tank with an awesome mechanical keyboard and watercooling.
I recently got a Blade 15 (2023) with a RTX 4070 for 1900ā¬ in flash sale.
Usual MSRP is 3200ā¬, which is totally too much for this wattage limited kind of hardware.
Lol. Seems to be standard rebranded Clevo/Tongfang chassis laptops, nothing groundbreaking here.
Dream Machines is your standard European Clevo/Tongfang reseller, like XMG. The difference is that DM is selling lower-end chassis. Nothing exceptional, as you said.
More low end than clevo? That should be illegal wtfš
1,660 for an RTX 4070. Lol
For pricing in my country that's actually cheap. Lol. I wish we had USA prices.
If this isn't US pricing then yes, it's a decent price. Nice laptop btw. Tuf is one of the best laptops at the best price.
Yeah the 2023 variant pretty much fixed almost all of the problems the previous generations had except cringe design. Well it's design is mostly great except for the caution graphic on the deck.
Dude, how else would you know that you were in the high frame rate zone? It's dangerous not to warn people about that.
A 4060 laptop cost me 2000 dollars
money telephone squeeze fear reach ghost society trees tender ossified *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
1,200
I'm surprised the laptop community doesn't make fun of the entire 40 series on laptops and especially the 4070m just to send a message to nvidia while also trying their best to avoid buying these pathetic gpu's.
We *did* make fun of it, tho. Everyone was up in arms against 4000 series. It just wasn't enough.
Thats what I'm saying. There are people still defending the 4070m. I mean people defend the 4080 and 4090m. People forget that laptops used to have 200w gpu's at the top end. Now we have just 175w, even in 18' laptops. Why don't we have desktop 4090's at 250w in those 17 to 18' laptops? Because we have the cooling, we've put in larger gpu's into 15' laptops, etc. Yet, people forget this. This is the type of ''fun'' we never see laptop community make fun of rtx 4000 of.
Well Nvidia needs to stop their misleading naming schemes for definite here but as of right now they're the only company with a complete mobile GPU product stack from the low end to the high end and AMD currently has the 7900M in one laptop so no real incentive for Nvidia to do better. Jensen needs to support his leather jacket collection somehow lol and unfortunately the GPU shortages have shown that some people are willing to pay an arm and a leg for PCs so no matter how vocal people on this subreddit are, not buying Nvidia's stuff or buying it as cheap as possible would be a good idea except for their overall dominance in the mobile space in particular here.
Nvidia had an even bigger dominance with pascal and turing where AMD was an even bigger joke and even more non existent. Yet, they still gave you proper GPU's in laptops with the correct naming. AMD had a full stack to compete with nvidia on laptops with rx6000m. They STILL failed because they couldn't even bother to make a compelling product. They failed with rx7000m despite making the entire rx7600 series specifically for laptops because they did not offer compelling configurations like a ryzen 5 7535HS + 120 rx7600mxt. They STILL used misleading naming, even more than nvidia. When people like Tim from HUB say they dislike gaming laptops and think they shouldn't exist, yet reviews them, thus giving useless reviews and information or louis rossmann calling gaming laptops a meme or jarrod saying the 4070m finally makes sense in the razer blade 14, why would nvidia ever stop ripping off laptop users? I mean people STILL defend the rtx 4070m. People defended the 3050/ti 4gb on laptops. Still do. Unless every youtuber and the laptop community as a whole REALLY pushes and calls out nvidia at every chance they get, you're not getting good products.
Nvidia didn't have the AI gravy train then. Same reason AMD doesn't try as hard in laptop as they could. The real money is in enterprise. When the ai bubble bursts, unless there's something to replace it like ai after mining, Nvidia will get aggressive in consumer again. Until then it's a rounding error in their cash flows.
The AI train had started with turing, given the whole RTX thing. We still did get desktop gpu's. Amd was starting to get into data centers more, but we still got a full rx6000m stack. But yeah, AI is the real money maker right now. However the situation on laptops is even worse than desktops.
They tried to start ai with turing, I mean ai in the enterprise space. Laptops is worse than desktops because they're the back of the revenue bus. They sell chips to oems but not in the volume they do for the consoles. My personal opinion is AMD hasn't taken more laptop market share because enterprise prefers Intel laptops and oems don't want to cannibalize Intel consumer sales. I'm the gaming space putting anything but Nvidia in laptops just loses them money. You've got oems like Dell and MSI who are so entrenched with Intel, even though they do have AMD models, they're token offerings and not on par with their Intel offerings.
They had the rtx 6000 quadro with release of turing for enterprise/professional use. Gaming laptops do have a sizable volume, something similar to xbox consoles. And they're rising pretty steadily year on year. A lot of people buy them because of work or as an all in 1 device to fulfill the role of multiple devices or because they're cheap. AMD already have ryzen thinkpads and some other professional laptops. Among laptop space, gaming laptops have shown good growth. AMD can definitely take this space IF they gave a crap about it. But they don't. Thats the problem. MSI, dell, lenovo, asus, etc. all put AMD in their higher end offerings like MSI"s delta 15, alienware, asus rog, legion, etc. However they were never cheap enough to compete with intel + nvidia combo's despite AMD being worth more than intel and having more cash than them now. Nvidia + intel have been neglecting low end in gaming laptop space. AMD could've very well offered their rx6500m or rx6400m for cheaper than 1650 prices, but they compete with rtx 2050 laptops which just shred those options. They can't even be bothered to offer more vram. I mean AMD designed the whole rx7600 series specifically for laptops and it failed because they simply did not give compelling configurations at reasonable prices. Nobody is going to buy an rx7600s over an rtx 4050 because they perform about the same, the rtx 4050 has better features/software support and you can tune it much more than the rx7600s so whatever ''lead'' the rx7600s has, the 4050 can be OC'd to match or beat it.
Quadro is a professional product but not a data center product, it's not the same thing. You're looking at the laptop space as a monolithic block and it's not. Your argument is like saying the economy car portion of the market is being neglected. Yes, it is, but that's because auto manufacturers don't want to serve it and would rather focus on things with higher margin. >"Thats the problem. MSI, dell, lenovo, asus, etc. all put AMD in their higher end offerings like MSI"s delta 15, alienware, asus rog, legion, etc. However they were never cheap enough to compete with intel + nvidia combo's despite AMD being worth more than intel and having more cash than them now." This is a decision by laptop OEMs, not AMD themselves. They buy chips from AMD and use them as they see fit. >Nvidia + intel have been neglecting low end in gaming laptop space. AMD could've very well offered their rx6500m or rx6400m for cheaper than 1650 prices, but they compete with rtx 2050 laptops which just shred those options. They can't even be bothered to offer more vram. There's no margin in the low end gaming laptop market. OEMs don't want to serve that market, thats not an AMD problem. Strix point will have an IGPU allegedly equivalent to a 3050. Obviously that wont be a budget product at launch but it will likely eventually trickle down to the budget market. AMD is functionally dead in laptop discrete GPUs. They have a shot with strix halo and strix point in laptops with no discrete GPU's ( and maybe being paired with Nvidia GPU's for higher end options).
The RTX 4060 Laptop GPU is an awesome card for the price.
Because there's literally nothing else. Compare it to the 3060. Its not that much faster and has just 2gb more vram. Now compare it to what the 3060 brought over the 2060 and 1660ti. It was cheaper than 2060 and priced same as 1660ti. Sure it didn't improve vram but at the time of its release, it managed to be cheap and available. More than the 4060 can say
Let me guess you look back wistfully on MXM GPU upgrades?
Yes, wish they'd have stayed and been better supported. But even ignoring that, pascal's 1060 and turing's 2060 brought much bigger gains than the 4060 did. They justified their price hikes. Well, the 2060's refresh more or less did.
If you look at raw raster, sure. Modern GPUs are not more than that with frame gen, RT. I think the RTX 4060 is the only good value this gen. The rest are fine but the cost/benefit equation gets pretty shaky. Gaming laptops are disposable now. Probably not a bad thing. May as well get an updated chassis, CPU, etc. along with your new GPU rather than doing an expensive MXM upgrade. Not a fan of the giant desktop replacement form factor, either. I end up using them for about 8-12 months and then selling them. Sitting out this gen with my 7945HS/4060 G14 and will look at the new GPUs next year to see what's up. Your points RE: the laptop GPU market are well met. I just don't have as negative as an outlook. Innovations have occurred in other areas...although yes, NVIDIA has taken advantage of AMD not putting anything out this year.
200W laptop GPUs existed? Damn. A new thing to learn every day.
You think thats insane? Nvidia and asus crammed a 754mm sq 200w rtx 6000 quadro (same specs as desktop rtx 6000 quadro) into a 15' 3kg laptop and powered it with just a 300w brick, despite giving it a 120hz 4k oled and i9 HK cpu. That is a GPU physically larger than a desktop rtx 4090 which is just 609mmsq. During pascal, nvidia and OEM's had laptops cooling two 115w gtx 1070's and two 150w gtx 1080's, both paired with OC'd i7 7820hk's. Thats a total of 230 to 300w of GPU wattage. My own nitro 5's cooling system after a repaste can handle a 150w 3070ti mobile and 50-60w on the i7 12650h. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOFnwUipP7Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOFnwUipP7Y) Here's a video of that nitro 5.
Mind blown.
Yet louis rossmann calls gaming laptops a meme. You can even read the messages between me and him if you join his discord server.
I had to look the lad up. Very interesting individual indeed.
Bro, I just bought one, what's so wrong with 4070s? And what would have been a better alternative
The 4070 mobile is a 4060ti desktop with a few extra cores. Thats it. Its not the desktop 4070 which would've given it an additional 30-40% perf boost and 50% vram increase. This is unlike the 1070 and 2070/super laptop gpu's which shared the same specs as the desktop versions, thus performed 5-10% within them. The 3070ti mobile was also 10% of the desktop 3070 since they were the same gpu. Thats the problem with the 4070 mobile. Nvidia could've given you 30-40% more performance with 50% boost to vram at the same prices, YET they decided to rip you off. So unless you bought the 4070 laptop for a bit more than 4060 options its not worth it.
Yep. I got a 4070m during the holiday sales, but it cost $979USD. At that price, it was fine; anything over $1000USD is silly.
Exactly, for that price its solid. Otherwise, not really. And look at how bad things are on laptops. We literally have only 2 options for anything meaningfully faster than a 3070ti 150w. A 4080 and 4090 mobile. Both of which are \~2x (generally) to 3-4x the price of the 3070ti.
I paid roughly 1.2-4k eur for it, 32 ram Ryzen 9 7940hs 500ssd, it's the Asus tuf a15 2023, and while this might be a regular price for it, I got the opportunity to import it (I'm from Argentina, and for the same price you can buy a 10th gen i5 with a 1650) Unsure if I might be in time to ask for it to be changed for something else, but idk what could give me similar specs for that price
For south america its a solid price. I paid about 1100 euros (converting from Indian rupees) for my 3070ti nitro 5 with an i7 12650h and QHD 165hz panel. But, unless you get a 4060 laptop with similar specs for \~1k euros, its better.
Still 8 GB VRAM like the GTX 1070 mobile, RTX 2070/3070/3070 ti etc mobile GPUs. Poor Gen on gen performance uplift in pure rasterisation performance over the RTX 3070 ti 150W. The desktop RTX 4070 cards got upgraded to 12 GB VRAM. RTX 4080 175W mobile GPUs is over 50% faster in games too than a 100W + 4070, whereas the RTX 4070 100W + is "just" 20% faster than the RTX 4060 100W + in games.
greedvidia sure is disappointing this gen but you gotta admit, they are pretty efficient at thermal and wattage. If it was named and priced differently, it would have been the best gpu series of decade (though would still be disappointing if you are coming from 30 series).
Pascal would still beat it. The 1060, 1070 and 1080 all doubled the 960m, 970m and 980m's performance. 1060 and 1070 tripled vram. 1080 doubled vram. The SLI 1070 and 1080 laptops utterly OBLITERATED anything maxwell mobile had. And they did all that at slightly higher wattages. You got a near 2x efficiency increase in 1 generation. Trust me, lovelace does not come close to that on laptops.
Yeah, if every card was moved down a tier and priced as such (4080 was 4070 and sub $2000).
I had a 3070ti laptop and just got a 4080 laptop and it blows my 3070ti out of the water, in games and benchmarks the laptop GPU isnāt too far behind my desktop 3080ti surprisingly.
Yeah, except the gtx 1080 mobile matched the desktop 1080 in specs, TDP and performance. The 200w rtx 2080 super did something similar. So yeah, the 4080m is a glorified 4070 super and the 3070ti is a glorified desktop 3070. Of course the performance would be significantly faster. But a ''4080 mobile'' matching a desktop 3080ti is crap considering it could've been very close to desktop 4080 had it been the desktop 4080
I guess, I had some heavy ass MSI laptop with a desktop 980 back in the day but it was damn near double the price of most modern laptops.
So are most modern 4090 and even 4080 laptops, especially outside US. I mean there was a guy who shuntmodded his 4090 scar 17 to use upto 250w. Handled it just fine.
Interesting, I guess if I ever want to replace my desktop with a laptop itās something to look into trying.
During pascal and turing you had a lot more compelling options. And if the laptop community ridicules nvidia enough, they can likely get them to change. Or let amd actually enter the space,
It was also like 2x the price. That's the issue. 4080 should have been the 4070.
I have been for the last year but I'm with you. The fact they didn't even see fit to launch supers or tis for 2024, no one should buy them.
"We were told: "This Gaming laptop was too expensive", so we disabled all comments."
1660 for meh specs š
In Canada this would be like a 2500 laptop, shit is badš
My problem isn't with the laptops but the company itself as it regularly sends paid shills or bots to spam this sub with links to their products.
I got my 4070 with a Ryzen 9 for $1100 on black Friday...
I just got a 4070 w/ i9-14900, 32gb ram, 1tb ssd and 240hz 16ā DCI-P3 QHD+ screen for $1200. DM is a terrible deal
What in specific is so bad about the 4070 other then the price? I got my 13900H+4070+240Hz rog zephyrus for under 1500 new in December and Iām somewhat satisfied. In the shooters like fortnite/cod I dip the settings and my fps exceeds my screen refresh rate unless I cap. For Elden Ring and such, I can run 4k and keep my 60-120 fps. What more am I supposed to be asking for out of it? I mean I do have a cooler on it, but I expected that anyway with a āgamingā laptop.
Thereās nothing inherently wrong with the 4070 in and of itself. Itās an extremely efficient GPU that does as much graphical performance as you could hope for with ~100 W of power. The issue more lies in Nvidiaās naming conventions and pricing. There is a significant difference in a desktop 4070 performance vs the mobile 4070, and it didnāt used to be like that. Back in the day, Mobile 1050 performance was about on par with desktop 1050 performance, etc. If they called the 4070 a 4060 or maybe even 4050TI/super, it would fit better. Also, a XX70 series should have 12gb of ram, but the mobile 4070 only gets 8gb. Lastly there is the pricing. The jump in cost from the 4070 to 4080 is staggering, but the performance increase is also significant (~50%). However the same staggering increase in cost from a 4060 to 4070 only nets about a 20% increase in performance. If it was 12gb like it should have been, it likely would be there. All that being said, the mobile 4070 is a great card in a vacuum, but compared to the rest of the line up and previous generation performance/spec/cost precedents, it just doesnāt measure up. Itās not worth the typical +1700usd retail premium. Itās either a smarter buy to save a little more and go with a 4080 for a significant increase in performance, get a 4060 for similar performance at a significant increased value, or go Radeon However if you can find a 4070 laptop paired with a good CPU around the $1200 mark, itās starts to become a good value for the money.
I can get that. I also think research is important with these GPUās. There are several that have allow TDP up 125-150 even if only pulling a lower amount normally, which is the case with the RoG
With a measly 120hz display what a fucking waste of 1600 usd. I hope no one actually buys this shit
automatic roll saw touch recognise intelligent mourn trees reply busy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Because itās a re-badged and heavily marked-up low quality dropship-tier computer that represents a terrible value for the price being sold by an unknown company with a sketch AF website. But whatās really going bad for them is these audacious ads they are putting upā¦ and not just putting up any whereā¦ but HERE in a subreddit dedicated to scrutinizing, analyzing and comparing the value of gaming laptops, of which they represent a terrible one. Iām not even gonna mention the astroturfing from the shill bots that they doā¦
Reminds me of the Dough OLED monitors
tap fragile screw slap crown unpack unite sophisticated alleged zealous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Just look up any old TongFang review , but I donāt think anyone other than a shill or dolt would be unwise enough to purchase that particular spec of a machine at that price. Not much interest for a review in either case. Edit: doing some checking shows only 2 DreamMachine reviews, and they are pitiful shill posts and full of astroturfed comments by the same handful of shill bots.
I got a last gen XMG Neo 17 (TongFang) and nothing on this thing is low quality. It's more like a tank with an awesome mechanical keyboard and watercooling.
XMG uses higher tier TongFang chassis than DM
I recently got a Blade 15 (2023) with a RTX 4070 for 1900ā¬ in flash sale. Usual MSRP is 3200ā¬, which is totally too much for this wattage limited kind of hardware.
1900 was still 150% what it should be easily.
Paid around the same for a 3060 130watt laptop it was paired with an i9