GPU in the surface book

[girinath]

Which version of nvidia GPU is in the surface book?
There is no mention of it anywhere..

Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

 

[MetalxAssassinx]

I have heard somewhere it is 960/970m. But couldn't find it again
I also heard it was tuned for surface to work better for graphics?

 

[girinath]

I don't think that will be enough for a 4k display...
It is not for gaming for sure...

Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

 

[enixon]

Uh... A 960m/970m is 100000% more powerful to run a 4K display, even at 60Hz.

A 960m/970m is EXTREMELY capable of gaming at 1080p resolutions, and maybe slightly higher.

If a SP4 with Intel HD 520 (or whatever it is now, can't keep up with constant naming schemes) can run CS:GO at 60FPS at 1080P...I think a custom silicon from Nvidia will be able to the very least double the performance, and most likely triple it in many instances.

 

[StevoPhilo]

I don't think that will be enough for a 4k display...
It is not for gaming for sure...

Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

You do know that 970m's are inside the gaming laptops right? Now it's not going to do 4k gaming if that's what you mean. I think by next year we will have that capability for Desktops, but laptops aren't going to be doing that with the mobile graphics chip.

 

[enixon]

The GPU is labeled as "NVIDIA GPU" in device manager. I was able to load up Counter-Strike Global Offensive on a demo unit and at 1080P I was getting 130-180 FPS. At 3000x2000 I was getting 50-70 FPS. At 1024x768 I was getting 180-200 FPS.

Remember, that title is more CPU bound though.

For comparison, at 1080P the Surface Pro 4 gets around 70-100 FPS. At the native resolution of the Surface Pro 4 I was getting 20-30 FPS. So the Surface Book has much more GPU power obviously, and it is definitely capable of playing casually with great performance.,

 

[StevoPhilo]

The GPU is labeled as "NVIDIA GPU" in device manager. I was able to load up Counter-Strike Global Offensive on a demo unit and at 1080P I was getting 130-180 FPS. At 3000x2000 I was getting 50-70 FPS. At 1024x768 I was getting 180-200 FPS.

Remember, that title is more CPU bound though.

For comparison, at 1080P the Surface Pro 4 gets around 70-100 FPS. At the native resolution of the Surface Pro 4 I was getting 20-30 FPS. So the Surface Book has much more GPU power obviously, and it is definitely capable of playing casually with great performance.,

That's actually pretty impressive for it's native resolution. Not a very demanding game, but I think it's strong enough for most people.

 

[Alandros]

The GPU is labeled as "NVIDIA GPU" in device manager. I was able to load up Counter-Strike Global Offensive on a demo unit and at 1080P I was getting 130-180 FPS. At 3000x2000 I was getting 50-70 FPS. At 1024x768 I was getting 180-200 FPS.

Remember, that title is more CPU bound though.

For comparison, at 1080P the Surface Pro 4 gets around 70-100 FPS. At the native resolution of the Surface Pro 4 I was getting 20-30 FPS. So the Surface Book has much more GPU power obviously, and it is definitely capable of playing casually with great performance.,

The GPU is labeled as "NVIDIA GPU" in device manager. I was able to load up Counter-Strike Global Offensive on a demo unit and at 1080P I was getting 130-180 FPS. At 3000x2000 I was getting 50-70 FPS. At 1024x768 I was getting 180-200 FPS.

Remember, that title is more CPU bound though.

For comparison, at 1080P the Surface Pro 4 gets around 70-100 FPS. At the native resolution of the Surface Pro 4 I was getting 20-30 FPS. So the Surface Book has much more GPU power obviously, and it is definitely capable of playing casually with great performance.,

What detail settings did you have it at? It'd be interesting to compare it to the benchmarks of the 940m here base don detail settings + resolution.

via notebookcheck

low 1024x768 168.1 fps
med. 1366x768 141.1 fps
high 1366x768 112.6 fps
ultra 1920x1080 68.1 fps

 

[gamer_stew]

Apparently it's just a modified 940

 

[pj737]

940? Are you kidding me?? I paid $2,700 for a laptop with a 940?

I thought Apple was the undisputed champion at overpricing under-powered garbage. MS has just proved that they are just as bad - if not worse.

What a joke.

 

[Skulls138]

940? Are you kidding me?? I paid $2,700 for a laptop with a 940?

I thought Apple was the undisputed champion at overpricing under-powered garbage. MS has just proved that they are just as bad - if not worse.

What a joke.

Why didn't you read the specs beforehand?

 

[pj737]

Why didn't you read the specs beforehand?

Read the specs? LOL.

Of course I read the specs before dropping $2,700 on a laptop. Microsoft chose to not specify which Nvidia GeForce GPU they would be using in the Surface Book.

Now we know why Microsoft didn't provide that spec. It's universally disappointing. Especially at that price point.

 

[enixon]

What detail settings did you have it at? It'd be interesting to compare it to the benchmarks of the 940m here base don detail settings + resolution.

via notebookcheck

low 1024x768 168.1 fps
med. 1366x768 141.1 fps
high 1366x768 112.6 fps
ultra 1920x1080 68.1 fps

All were done on low, and was played from a USB drive. I've played CS competitively for a long time, so everything was set to low for more performance. The only settings that really affect performance are filtering and antialiasing.

 

[girinath]

No way. No one would consider buying it if it was 940. Who told you?
It maybe gtx 970 or 980m

Posted via moto x play

 

[goldcougar]

http://siliconangle.com/blog/2015/1...vidia-gpu-is-decent-but-its-no-gaming-laptop/

 

[enixon]

No way. No one would consider buying it if it was 940. Who told you?
It maybe gtx 970 or 980m

Posted via moto x play

It's 100% neither of those...lol at the most it is a 950m.

 

[Alandros]

No way. No one would consider buying it if it was 940. Who told you?
It maybe gtx 970 or 980m

Posted via moto x play

It can't be a 970 or 980, the Surface Book is an ultrabook style computer based on side (the actual size of the base) and weight... and nearly no other 13" ultrabook even has a dedicated GPU so obviously it wasn't going to be a powerful one... and no chance ever it was going to be 970+ even purely on power consumption aspects. Remember this isn't a gaming laptop, but it certainly will do better than the comparable rMBP 13

 

[bgjackso]

well looking from this..... it's a custom gpu between the 950m and 960m.... still decent though... the 960m gets about 65% the performance of a regular 960. Soo Fallout 4 and Battlefront will be able to be ran on this, but at med/low settings at 1080p.... maybeeeee... Battlefield 4 and newer games should be med, or high if you are lucky. league of legends should be able to play at med/high settings 1080p... these specs are all around 45-60fps.... I don't have benchmarks, but im speculating based on the specs. No idea about gaming on the native res though. I would not buy this as a gaming laptop as you can get a better gpu for the money.

 

[Alandros]

well looking from this..... it's a custom gpu between the 950m and 960m.... still decent though... the 960m gets about 65% the performance of a regular 960. Soo Fallout 4 and Battlefront will be able to be ran on this, but at med/low settings at 1080p.... maybeeeee... Battlefield 4 and newer games should be med, or high if you are lucky. league of legends should be able to play at med/high settings 1080p... these specs are all around 45-60fps.... I don't have benchmarks, but im speculating based on the specs. No idea about gaming on the native res though. I would not buy this as a gaming laptop as you can get a better gpu for the money.

It very likely to be comparable to the 940m

 

[Yonic Boom]

940? Are you kidding me?? I paid $2,700 for a laptop with a 940?

I thought Apple was the undisputed champion at overpricing under-powered garbage. MS has just proved that they are just as bad - if not worse.

What a joke.

Cancel your order and move on with your life.