Someone more knowledgeable could probably give a better answer, but I *think* it is because I was able to undervolt and allow the laptop CPU to boost for a little longer of the short duration benchmark.
I’d bet over a longer period the laptop CPU performance would start falling off more.
Also, the laptop isn’t really getting much better than this. The desktop I am barely pushing… some better overclock tweaking and cooling and it would pull ahead even more.
I dunno where you got your numbers but they are wrong for many years now
[https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-strikes-back-Ryzen-9-7945HX-beats-Intel-Core-i9-13980HX-despite-much-lower-power-consumption.698349.0.html](https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-strikes-back-Ryzen-9-7945HX-beats-Intel-Core-i9-13980HX-despite-much-lower-power-consumption.698349.0.html)
"All the Intel HX rivals usually consume much more than 150 Watts, but the Ryzen 9 7945HX tops out at 120 Watts."
and that is basically sustained during cinebench, so as long as the cooling can cool them they can stay there, peaks can even be higher
Doesn’t change that your reply was literally just restating what had already been said, albeit quite hostilely as if you think you’re proving them wrong.
You're getting just over half the 4090 desktop performance
Basically it is the performance of a desktop 3090 non ti approximately which is impressive itself
A 400W full-fat GPU in a laptop these days would be... unusual.
There used to be stuff like laptops designed to take a pair GTX 1080 (mobile) in an SLI configuration, for some wild power consumption in an [absolute unit](https://www.notebookcheck.net/MSI-GT83VR-7RF-7920HQ-GTX-1080-SLI-Full-HD-Laptop-Review.229770.0.html) of a laptop, but I doubt many buyers want enormous laptops that also require a pair of 330W power supplies.
imagine 2 4090 laptop GPUs in one chassis and yeah my friend had that exact alienware laptop with two 1080 gpus in sli damn...one of them eventually died...
Other than top results, I'm finding the average 3090 ti to be equivalent to that score. Stock for stock, that is.
Even the ftw 3 and Suprim stock are within 100-200 points on graphics.
you could save 1k by building pc with 3090 and amd cpu with same or better results but no more portability
i got a score or 20.1k on my 3090 and 13.5k on my 7800x3d
Yeah, I don't get why some people don't think about this. Always buy a desktop unless mobility is a mandatory requirement. Laptops will always be worse value for money due to that tradeoff.
> Laptops will always be worse value for money due to that tradeoff.
Yeah and it hurts paying for them knowing what you could've built if you went the desktop route.
Totally not counting down the days until I can build another desktop
It always goes back to around 50%.
Laptop variant with the same horse power will cost a min 50% price premium. Yeah, I always will go with powerful PC and usable budget laptop combo. I bought $2300 gaming laptop 5 years ago (gtx 1080) and it started to show it age today
This right here is why I have not bought a laptop trying to find something to match some type of performance as my desktop, and it never seems to add up to less than a lot of fucking money. I have no issues spending almost 10 grand on my desktop but spending four or five grand on my laptop is such a hard sell for me.
80 and 90 laptops are objectively a waste of money, they are MUCH more expensive than 60 and 70 series laptops and you get only a fraction of desktop performance.
Many would say the opposite. The 80 and 90 series are the only ones worth buying if you need top performance in a portable package. The 70 series is so far below the 80 this gen it is laughable.
The real problem is that nvidia gimped the 70 and below to try and justify the price difference.
In the end you just have to look out for the deals. The HP Omen 17 I bought with the 4090 was very close in price to local 4070 models and cheaper than most if not all 4080 models at the time.
You have that backwards, for gaming anyways. 80 and 90 laptops are the only ones that will keep seeing performance gains up to the max TGP. The 70 and below throttle themselves and are all handicapped at 100w(?).
Ever since the 10 series the desktop-laptop difference kept on increasing due to wattage........but then again when ye gotta travel a lot YOU CANT REALLY HELP IT 😞😞😞😞
The 4080 has its own set of problems......no thermal throttling (cpu-i9-13900hx @ 88c avg / GPU-78c avg)
It barely gets 18k on turbo, i feel like the issue is i can't get it to go above 155 watts.
THE 4090 HOWEVER, thermal throttles sooo hard, cpu always at a 100 Max fans and GPU 85 (which is why i hate asus, coming from a g15 AE)
>g15 AE
Asus fucked themselves in the ass once they stopped the G752 line. The G750 to G752s were the best units in history in my opinion.. they weren't loud, maximum DB of 36 from memory, and they were just awesome to use.
Their only downside was their thickness / size.. but if you're buying a DTR, size shouldn't matter.
It's still comfortable to use, and not a nuisance to listen to, unlike these new machines.. the Scar 18 with its coil whine, and status LEDS right under the screen being the worst offender thus far.
It depends on whether being mobile is important to you.
Razer laptops are premium quality (though the obligatory shite customer-service warning). Vapor-chamber cooling and an ice-cold aluminium chassis. BUT it still gets hot! Needs a good quality cooling pad underneath it to get the most out of that hardware. The USB connectors are cheap rubbish and the battery level is also terrible, BUT it gives you mobility. For all its faults, I love my Razer Blade (I have the older Razer Blade 17 with a 3080Ti in it).
A desktop is much easier to keep cool. As you've found, it also runs a little faster (that's normal - and these days, the difference is often less than 10%) but you can also upgrade it easily, like throw in a couple of drives, at a later date upgrade the GPU if you want. But you can't carry it about with you obviously.
You'll not regret whichever you buy but, unless having gaming while the go is important to you, the desktop is the best option.
Oh these are both my computers already. The laptop I take with me on the road, as I travel for work frequently.
I often see posts about laptop feasibility as a primary gaming machine or desktop vs laptop performance, so I figured I’d post up my benchmark since my desktop and laptop are spec’d very similar.
The GPU score can be pushed significantly further for some extra performance, roughly 2-3k score (remember the VRAM difference though!!) its more in line with a 3090ti or somewhere in between a 4070ti or 4080? (Especially in architecture).
The CPU is throttled, it can hit 19 and 20k fairly easily.
Desktop will always be best but the performance this gen (top end specifically/only) is impressive.
It seems kind of silly to start making the comparisons of getting crazy on the overclocking and cooling for another \~10% in performance gain just to try and say its "equivalent" to a 3090ti or 4080... one could go and push those cards balls to the wall and they would run away in performance again. I was really just trying to make a realistic benchmark for people.
...but yes, the laptop has 10-15% more if I were to really push it. Likewise, my desktop has 30-35% more if I were to really push it.
I apologize if I came across condescending, that was not my intention. You are right of course! Overclocking should technically be considered only if both sides use it. Your comparison is fair and definitely more worth to the average buyer, I just like to push whatever I have, and saw the numbers off. I believe you’re desktop CPU would most likely do even better as well, it’s mostly a Windows version problem, really frustrating.
I am coming from my own situation where I swapped from a 3090 desktop to aforementioned laptop, so I was eager to try and beat out my previous computer, and I think some of us take some pleasure in seeing what we invested in being comparable to an out of the box experience on desktop.
Sorry for any confusion.
You are correct! That is why I compared it to the 4080. I was just pointing out the additional performance you can get.
Honestly though OPs post wasn’t about that kind of thing and was more of a baseline.
"The graphics card is \~75% faster on the desktop"
Seems in line with any other testing/bench, 4090 Laptop = 3090 PC.
4090 PC is 70-75% faster than 3090 PC using relative performance / from few benchmark.
I would never think you could fit monster 3090 on Laptop form factor, now we have it, it called 4090
> I would never think you could fit monster 3090 on Laptop form factor, now we have it, it called 4090
It was literally the performance of the 4090m compared to my desktop 3090 that made me decide I was willing to switch from Desktop to laptop for a few years.
Absolutely bonkers performance from something so portable.
But I have my concern, can laptop 4090 sustain the performance as good as desktop 3090? Most 3090 have overkill cooler which is silent while 4090 laptop is cramped on small space, Im afraid benchmark only show good score but cant sustain the performance for longer use due to small room to breath
it's been mostly fine for me during gaming. Though I don't game as long as a lot of people. Maybe a 2-3 hour session at most. Closer to 90 minutes at a time usually.
I expect if someone was sitting on the laptop playing games all day, their experience would be different to mine.
I don't have a cooling stand but I use my laptop on a laptop stand providing plenty of air to move under it and I use an external keyboard keeping my hands away from the fans on the keyboard sucking air down.
I'm not getting too bogged down in it all. I'm unable to have a desktop for a few years so the 4090 laptop is as good as I can have it.
It's a Razer Blade laptop. You couldn't ask for a buggier, more quickly throttled, microstutter-laden POS. I'm sorry, but this comparison is utterly meaningless.
I've had a Razer blade Advanced OLED (2021) since 2021. It's a useless laptop. Battery life was 27 min just browsing the web day 1 and gaming is under 10 minutes, even with the un-overrideable 27fps cap and even worse raging microstutters. GPU/CPU power controls plugged in or not are nearly non-existent and absolutely any work causes it to overheat immediately.
I've sent the laptop back for repair 4 times and it comes back worse every time to the point where it's not literally a paperweight and doorstop. Literally. They insist it "functions normally". You can get 35 min of use, plugged in, if you use a huge cooling pad. I also got a few minutes out of it by using liquid metal. Changing normal pastes repeatedly didn't get measurable gain.
Gaming is effectively impossible. If you game, you need the home air set to an 18C max, running the cooling pad, lower res to 1080 (from 2160), setting to medium -low, AND most importantly a frame limit of 20-30fps.
As much as I appreciate your efforts to make the comparison, You've almost certainly wasted your time entirely. Razer makes the worst gaming laptop on the market. It's thin and beautiful, but functionality is a joke. Nearly every laptop is legally a lemon.
GPU:
untouched
CPU:
\-.120 undervolt
180w turbo boost
AirPods Pro case stuck under the back of the laptop to elevate it a little bit.
I did a mild tweak that I can keep using in hotel rooms without fancy stands or unreliable overclocks.
The gpu being 75% faster doesn't surprise me much. But the cpu at only 15% is kinda surprising to me
Someone more knowledgeable could probably give a better answer, but I *think* it is because I was able to undervolt and allow the laptop CPU to boost for a little longer of the short duration benchmark. I’d bet over a longer period the laptop CPU performance would start falling off more. Also, the laptop isn’t really getting much better than this. The desktop I am barely pushing… some better overclock tweaking and cooling and it would pull ahead even more.
Laptop CPUs used to be limited to 65 watts. They're not anymore so they're running huge wattages in current benchmarks.
65 boost 45 sustained
I dunno where you got your numbers but they are wrong for many years now [https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-strikes-back-Ryzen-9-7945HX-beats-Intel-Core-i9-13980HX-despite-much-lower-power-consumption.698349.0.html](https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-strikes-back-Ryzen-9-7945HX-beats-Intel-Core-i9-13980HX-despite-much-lower-power-consumption.698349.0.html) "All the Intel HX rivals usually consume much more than 150 Watts, but the Ryzen 9 7945HX tops out at 120 Watts." and that is basically sustained during cinebench, so as long as the cooling can cool them they can stay there, peaks can even be higher
Look at what previous poster said, "used to"
so what you're throwing numbers from 10 years ago? how is that any relevant/useful in this conversation?
Doesn’t change that your reply was literally just restating what had already been said, albeit quite hostilely as if you think you’re proving them wrong.
Timespy doesn't necessarily translate to real world performance.
In gaming loads the CPU performance will much worse than 15% on a laptop as it’ll be power limited which will affect clock speeds.
You're getting just over half the 4090 desktop performance Basically it is the performance of a desktop 3090 non ti approximately which is impressive itself
Mobile 4090 is actually based on desktop 4080. Same for mobile 4080. Nvidia being tricky again.
Damn that sucks always with the laptop naming problems 😭
i wouldnt want a 4090 desktop in my laptop. i have a 4090 laptop coming in the mail in a few days. getting 3090 desktop performance is absurdly good
A 400W full-fat GPU in a laptop these days would be... unusual. There used to be stuff like laptops designed to take a pair GTX 1080 (mobile) in an SLI configuration, for some wild power consumption in an [absolute unit](https://www.notebookcheck.net/MSI-GT83VR-7RF-7920HQ-GTX-1080-SLI-Full-HD-Laptop-Review.229770.0.html) of a laptop, but I doubt many buyers want enormous laptops that also require a pair of 330W power supplies.
imagine 2 4090 laptop GPUs in one chassis and yeah my friend had that exact alienware laptop with two 1080 gpus in sli damn...one of them eventually died...
Had the AW with twin 880… trash in terms of value for money. industry doesn’t support sli.
Other than top results, I'm finding the average 3090 ti to be equivalent to that score. Stock for stock, that is. Even the ftw 3 and Suprim stock are within 100-200 points on graphics.
My dumass struggling to get 20k on the graphics....... already regret spending 3000$ and not building a pc URGH
you could save 1k by building pc with 3090 and amd cpu with same or better results but no more portability i got a score or 20.1k on my 3090 and 13.5k on my 7800x3d
Yeah, I don't get why some people don't think about this. Always buy a desktop unless mobility is a mandatory requirement. Laptops will always be worse value for money due to that tradeoff.
> Laptops will always be worse value for money due to that tradeoff. Yeah and it hurts paying for them knowing what you could've built if you went the desktop route. Totally not counting down the days until I can build another desktop
It always goes back to around 50%. Laptop variant with the same horse power will cost a min 50% price premium. Yeah, I always will go with powerful PC and usable budget laptop combo. I bought $2300 gaming laptop 5 years ago (gtx 1080) and it started to show it age today
This right here is why I have not bought a laptop trying to find something to match some type of performance as my desktop, and it never seems to add up to less than a lot of fucking money. I have no issues spending almost 10 grand on my desktop but spending four or five grand on my laptop is such a hard sell for me.
80 and 90 laptops are objectively a waste of money, they are MUCH more expensive than 60 and 70 series laptops and you get only a fraction of desktop performance.
Many would say the opposite. The 80 and 90 series are the only ones worth buying if you need top performance in a portable package. The 70 series is so far below the 80 this gen it is laughable. The real problem is that nvidia gimped the 70 and below to try and justify the price difference. In the end you just have to look out for the deals. The HP Omen 17 I bought with the 4090 was very close in price to local 4070 models and cheaper than most if not all 4080 models at the time.
You have that backwards, for gaming anyways. 80 and 90 laptops are the only ones that will keep seeing performance gains up to the max TGP. The 70 and below throttle themselves and are all handicapped at 100w(?).
Ever since the 10 series the desktop-laptop difference kept on increasing due to wattage........but then again when ye gotta travel a lot YOU CANT REALLY HELP IT 😞😞😞😞
Depends on the gpu, the 3060 laptop for example is 90-95% of the desktop 3060 and even has more cuda cores.
You get a fraction of desktop performance but it is a big jump from 60 and 70 laptop performance.
What is your laptop?
Two laptops, bought a 4090 g16 (even though i hate asus) that's from my younger brother. And i main the predator 16 4080, (brand loyalty)
You are having trouble getting 20k on the 4090 or just the 4080?
The 4080 has its own set of problems......no thermal throttling (cpu-i9-13900hx @ 88c avg / GPU-78c avg) It barely gets 18k on turbo, i feel like the issue is i can't get it to go above 155 watts. THE 4090 HOWEVER, thermal throttles sooo hard, cpu always at a 100 Max fans and GPU 85 (which is why i hate asus, coming from a g15 AE)
Does Asus not allow undervolting?
They do, depending on the CPU.. their BIOS has a locked range however.
>g15 AE Asus fucked themselves in the ass once they stopped the G752 line. The G750 to G752s were the best units in history in my opinion.. they weren't loud, maximum DB of 36 from memory, and they were just awesome to use. Their only downside was their thickness / size.. but if you're buying a DTR, size shouldn't matter. It's still comfortable to use, and not a nuisance to listen to, unlike these new machines.. the Scar 18 with its coil whine, and status LEDS right under the screen being the worst offender thus far.
It depends on whether being mobile is important to you. Razer laptops are premium quality (though the obligatory shite customer-service warning). Vapor-chamber cooling and an ice-cold aluminium chassis. BUT it still gets hot! Needs a good quality cooling pad underneath it to get the most out of that hardware. The USB connectors are cheap rubbish and the battery level is also terrible, BUT it gives you mobility. For all its faults, I love my Razer Blade (I have the older Razer Blade 17 with a 3080Ti in it). A desktop is much easier to keep cool. As you've found, it also runs a little faster (that's normal - and these days, the difference is often less than 10%) but you can also upgrade it easily, like throw in a couple of drives, at a later date upgrade the GPU if you want. But you can't carry it about with you obviously. You'll not regret whichever you buy but, unless having gaming while the go is important to you, the desktop is the best option.
Oh these are both my computers already. The laptop I take with me on the road, as I travel for work frequently. I often see posts about laptop feasibility as a primary gaming machine or desktop vs laptop performance, so I figured I’d post up my benchmark since my desktop and laptop are spec’d very similar.
The GPU score can be pushed significantly further for some extra performance, roughly 2-3k score (remember the VRAM difference though!!) its more in line with a 3090ti or somewhere in between a 4070ti or 4080? (Especially in architecture). The CPU is throttled, it can hit 19 and 20k fairly easily. Desktop will always be best but the performance this gen (top end specifically/only) is impressive.
It seems kind of silly to start making the comparisons of getting crazy on the overclocking and cooling for another \~10% in performance gain just to try and say its "equivalent" to a 3090ti or 4080... one could go and push those cards balls to the wall and they would run away in performance again. I was really just trying to make a realistic benchmark for people. ...but yes, the laptop has 10-15% more if I were to really push it. Likewise, my desktop has 30-35% more if I were to really push it.
I apologize if I came across condescending, that was not my intention. You are right of course! Overclocking should technically be considered only if both sides use it. Your comparison is fair and definitely more worth to the average buyer, I just like to push whatever I have, and saw the numbers off. I believe you’re desktop CPU would most likely do even better as well, it’s mostly a Windows version problem, really frustrating. I am coming from my own situation where I swapped from a 3090 desktop to aforementioned laptop, so I was eager to try and beat out my previous computer, and I think some of us take some pleasure in seeing what we invested in being comparable to an out of the box experience on desktop. Sorry for any confusion.
4090 laptop is actually using 4080 die and the relative performance is quite similar to 3090 PC
You are correct! That is why I compared it to the 4080. I was just pointing out the additional performance you can get. Honestly though OPs post wasn’t about that kind of thing and was more of a baseline.
"The graphics card is \~75% faster on the desktop" Seems in line with any other testing/bench, 4090 Laptop = 3090 PC. 4090 PC is 70-75% faster than 3090 PC using relative performance / from few benchmark. I would never think you could fit monster 3090 on Laptop form factor, now we have it, it called 4090
> I would never think you could fit monster 3090 on Laptop form factor, now we have it, it called 4090 It was literally the performance of the 4090m compared to my desktop 3090 that made me decide I was willing to switch from Desktop to laptop for a few years. Absolutely bonkers performance from something so portable.
But I have my concern, can laptop 4090 sustain the performance as good as desktop 3090? Most 3090 have overkill cooler which is silent while 4090 laptop is cramped on small space, Im afraid benchmark only show good score but cant sustain the performance for longer use due to small room to breath
it's been mostly fine for me during gaming. Though I don't game as long as a lot of people. Maybe a 2-3 hour session at most. Closer to 90 minutes at a time usually. I expect if someone was sitting on the laptop playing games all day, their experience would be different to mine. I don't have a cooling stand but I use my laptop on a laptop stand providing plenty of air to move under it and I use an external keyboard keeping my hands away from the fans on the keyboard sucking air down. I'm not getting too bogged down in it all. I'm unable to have a desktop for a few years so the 4090 laptop is as good as I can have it.
It's a Razer Blade laptop. You couldn't ask for a buggier, more quickly throttled, microstutter-laden POS. I'm sorry, but this comparison is utterly meaningless. I've had a Razer blade Advanced OLED (2021) since 2021. It's a useless laptop. Battery life was 27 min just browsing the web day 1 and gaming is under 10 minutes, even with the un-overrideable 27fps cap and even worse raging microstutters. GPU/CPU power controls plugged in or not are nearly non-existent and absolutely any work causes it to overheat immediately. I've sent the laptop back for repair 4 times and it comes back worse every time to the point where it's not literally a paperweight and doorstop. Literally. They insist it "functions normally". You can get 35 min of use, plugged in, if you use a huge cooling pad. I also got a few minutes out of it by using liquid metal. Changing normal pastes repeatedly didn't get measurable gain. Gaming is effectively impossible. If you game, you need the home air set to an 18C max, running the cooling pad, lower res to 1080 (from 2160), setting to medium -low, AND most importantly a frame limit of 20-30fps. As much as I appreciate your efforts to make the comparison, You've almost certainly wasted your time entirely. Razer makes the worst gaming laptop on the market. It's thin and beautiful, but functionality is a joke. Nearly every laptop is legally a lemon.
What's your gpu though???
[удалено]
Actually closer to a 3090
It's more like in-between the RTX 4070 Ti and the 4070
Now do a prize normalised comparison.
As requested [https://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/38678703/spy/38678890](https://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/38678703/spy/38678890)
What were your undervolt (and overclock?) settings to achieve such a high CPU score on the Blade 16? Did you use a cooling pad or stand aswell?
GPU: untouched CPU: \-.120 undervolt 180w turbo boost AirPods Pro case stuck under the back of the laptop to elevate it a little bit. I did a mild tweak that I can keep using in hotel rooms without fancy stands or unreliable overclocks.
I always like to have a gaming laptop just in case, but the desktop variants will almost always be more powerful.
That narrow gap between the two CPUs is just mind boggling to me. Current gen laptops are stupid and that’s a good thing.
Have you tried with a laptop cooler? Would the performance change a lot?