A big screen tablet with dGPU but unfortunately only two core CPU (3rd generation U-series 17W)
And this may go a bit over the top (and not a tablet anymore, more like a table)
A big screen tablet with dGPU but unfortunately only two core CPU (3rd generation U-series 17W)
And this may go a bit over the top (and not a tablet anymore, more like a table)
Okay, now more seriously.
I think that the technology just isn’t here yet for a powerful tablet.
Problem 1 - Processors with four physical cores consume too much energy. The next Intel processors are going to be released with 10nm process. But Y-series Cannonlake TDP is going to go from 4,5 watts to 5,2 watts (not the actual power draw!) possibly due to higher frequencies.
The following Coffeelake processors are also 10nm process, but according to rumour, there is going to be a 15 watt TDP U-series processor with four cores. That might be something useable in a powerful tablet.
It remains to be seen, what the actual unlimited power draw of such processor is. My questimate is in the region of 30 - 45 watts.
Or AMD manages to have a power efficient APU with powerful integrated graphics that makes discrete GPUs in tablets obsolete. And takes away problem number 3 - GPU.
Certainly a possibility, but little is known about AMD’s APU (possibly Ryzen + Vega) plans.
Problem 2 - Battery technology isn’t there yet. It is difficult to estimate how much power one needs from the battery, but let’s assume a 100 - 150Wh battery. This is two - three times larger than the V battery with the current technology.
But there is some light on the horizon.
So a 150Wh battery would be the same size approximately as V’s battery. That would make it possible to make a powerful tablet in 13 - 15 inch size. But the battery is definitely going to be heavy.
Problem 3 - Graphical processors use even more power than CPUs. But maybe the next nVidia GPU generation (current is Pascal) Volta will make it possible to have a powerful GPU in a tablet. Estimates say that Volta will double the efficiency from Pascal. So something like a GTX 2050 would be powerful enough and consume up to 50 watts.
Problem 4 - There needs to be advancements also in the field of cooling. Otherwise a powerful tablet is going to be on the heavy side. All those heat pipes are copper and heavy.
Maybe the solution is to use an advanced two phase cooling with fans.
So, summa summary: The technology isn’t here yet, but we may not have to wait that long, fingers crossed .
hence the reason I would more be looking at convertibles than tablets. A quad core tablet isn’t impossible, as the Vaio Z Canvas shows. But I think that a convertible would be easier to make a small powerhouse from. certainly since they can already put a 950m in a 15" convertible as asus has shown with its UX560UX. If the thickness would be calculated as less of a factor, without being as bulky as a gaming laptop, than there should be place for a quad core processor. For a quad core tablet I won’t get my hopes high for the coming years, since there would be too much added bulk. But if we look at convertibles, I don’t see why it won’t work. Unless of course you want to chase thinness like many brands. If we look at the dell XPS 15 it has more than what I need (certainly with its GTX 1050), it only lacks the convertible part, and Dell does achieve it with 17mm, so I would think it is possible to get those specs in a convertible of 25mm thick. Certainly if it would have a hinging system like acer instead of the classic convertible system. Unless there is something I don’t know yet that would make it impossible, if so please point that out.
Actually, it can’t because it’s throttled down by its TDP
But there are some pretty damn good laptops with that. With good battery life and not too thick. What we could do is just add a touchscreen and a 360 degree hinge to that
Same argument applies to these If other laptop makers can do this, why do you think Eve can’t? Sure, they don’t get 12h battery life but I think 4-5h (real world usage) is enough for this kind of device.
We should wait for the laptop cpus from amd tbr.
I don’t know why? AMD does make high promises, but they still have to be proven. As seen in a video of linus tech tips, in some situations it lacks and does worse than the intel CPU that they tell us to see as the opposition. Ofcourse, not every software and game is made to run as good on AMD as on intel, but that also forms an argument why the waiting should be longer than just the reveal. They have to prove that they are better, and it should be clear that it doesn’t lack support by game and program developers, which now seems to also be the case. And than we will probably have the intel, 10nm based processors, which will perform better and that way maybe outperform AMD again. Maybe it is worth waiting, but maybe it is not. In that last case, it would be kind of wasted time. I think the option to use AMD should be open, but we shouldn’t wait until they are there and forget about intel since they didn’t make such huge promises.
There is no need to wait. If Eve decides to develop such a product, it won’t start today, nor tomorrow, nor next month. We can discuss on what features or hardware we’d like to have there, but if it’ll actually be developed, we’ll vote on the best according to what’s available at the time of vote. Right now, let’s discuss including the things that are currently available. Because there is ALWAYS something to wait for, so waiting for new components is kind of a waste of time. If something good comes out, then we can discuss it and adapt.
Yes, a touchscreen convertible is within reaches of possibility with current components i.e. 4 core CPU and midrange or better discrete graphics. However, such a PC won’t be very compact (size and weight) and battery runtime is most likely poor.
That’s why I think it’s better to wait for future advances in CPU, GPU and battery technology. And of course there is always something better in the pipeline.
But anything is possible, laptop/convertible/tablet market is currently full of compromises and maybe there is a market for a powerful convertible/tablet. Also the price is going to be high.
Here’s review of that 20" Panasonic tablet. Panasonic do make some interesting devices and they may update this “monster” tablet in the future. Price of this is not compact either.
That of course is a better way to think about it. I did forget to mention that the development takes years. I think my case is clear, a 2 in 1 with a CPU that can handle video editing and a dGPU of at least the 940mx performance.
Today I did test if I could video edit on the surface pro 3 with the i7 4650U. First of all, don’t do it… I did use DaVinci Resolve, which at installation stated my computer wouldn’t work for color correcting, but should be fine to edit FHD. Well, the thing stutterd all the time. The sound did play normally but the video sample was just hacked in fragments of some frames that get played and other that just freeze… I do now that the i7 7500U should be 30-40% better than the i7 4650U. But what I noticed was thermal throttling. And not a bit, sometimes the core speed went below 1GHz. I did run cinebench just after video editing and got a average result of 220 in 2 tests. Normally the surface pro 3 could get 258 in ideal situation and the cinebench database says the i7 4650U should be able to get 291. Based on the 258 that does mean around 15% of performance drop. In comparison to the 291 capability it did reach 76% of its capability. For me it is clear that the tablet formfactor isn’t sufficient for regular i7 U dual cores (probably they are better of with the m7 such as the Eve V uses). If I look at the convertibles, the HP spectre x360 with i7 7500U did get 314 of the 376 potential of the processor, partially due to poorer turbo boost performance. that is 50 more than the unheated surface pro, and 100 more than what the surface pro gets after video editing. So it could perform much better, but it could also have the same thermal issues and also lose 15% due to heating up, that would leave a score of 267. If I look how well the surface pro did work at the beginning of video editing, so without being really heated up, that sounds like it wouldn’t also be capable.
So short said: the i7 7500U could have potential, but it could also fall short. Probably a quad core would be a huge improvement, but only if it can be cooled. I should try out a convertible with the i7 7500U and see if it is capable.
I did also test video rendering, the surface pro did rendered a 2min32 FHD video in 26min44, while my quad core laptop with GTX950m did that in 4min41. That would mean a 5min36 video could be rendered in an hour. For me that would be okey for on the move, but than there is still the hassle of the video editing itself. So if there would be a dual core capable of editing FHD video’s without the huge problems I have had with the surface pro 3, than I wouldn’t really need a quad core for my on the move editing. But if the strongest dual core would face the same, problem, than I would need a quad core.
If the dual cores prove to be able to handle video editing, I would not need a quad core. My experience is now based on the surface pro 3 with i7 4650U and that is one hell of a miserie to video edit. I did manage it though. But for decent video editing, and video’s longer than just 2min33, nobody could survive with that dual core… Maybe this gen could do it, but I would have to test it to know for sure. Intel did say it would be possible, but as I have seen the convertibles don’t allow the full potential of the i7 7500U processor, so I am not sure if I could expect them to be like what intel promised.
And I know pricing is high, my problem now is that the todays 2 in 1 with an i7 and a 14" or more screen are out of my budget that I can spend on a 2 in 1. The only way I could bring my budget higher is by having it with decent performance, so that I don’t need to have another laptop for my video editing (I know desktops are also an option instead of laptop, but a desktop can’t be used on the move, a gaming laptop at least can). But those don’t seem to exist. So that is what made me start this topic, if Eve could manage to make a 14-17" 2 in 1 with some performance in the upcoming 3-4 years, than it would be great for me. If they didn’t, I would have to wait for mainstream brands to do it. With Eve V I could at least have me say about it, with mainstream brands I can only wait and see what they think would sell. And not to say how much they can ask for some options…
Well, what did you expect from a 4th gen ULV Core? That is old and inefficient. Anyway, I think it’s important to discuss not only your need but the appeal to mass market, or at least this community. And I really think there is a special place for a quad core convertible. Unlike “yet another” dual core, there are already plenty of these.
Video editing does benefit from more (physical) CPU cores.
How about this as a demonstrator what can be done with current technology - Tom’s Hardware review is for almost the latest model. Current model has 7700HQ instead of 6700HQ.
The full HD (1920 x 1080) model doesn’t have a touchscreen, but the UHD (3840 x 2160) model does.
The battery runtime is going to be lower with the touchscreen (even if it was only full HD).
What is the specification for your ideal convertible?
Possibilities are endless, but what makes sense is limited.
I didn’t expect much, and I did expect thermal throttling because of the tablet formfactor. And I know it is not about my needs, that it should be what the mass market should want. So if others would say their needs, we could see if there is a common ground for a more performance-oriented 2 in 1.
Let’s start from somewhere: What are your needs?
CPU: quad core, or a dual core that can achieve a geekbench of 9000 or more (I think that would be needed for video editing).
RAM: 16GB is enough for me, 8GB could be enough. Of my 16GB I do max achieve 66% usage
GPU: a dGPU like 940MX or 950m, more than that isn’t needed for me, but could always be useful for others.
Storage: 512GB SSD is more than enough, even 256GB could be enough, although I would prefer the extra space. I don’t need PCle, although that can be useful.
Screen: At least 14", maximum 17". I found a 15" ideal. I would prefer a 2K resolution. FHD is sufficient, but I found that the higher resolution on the surface pro made the smaller screensize as useful as my 15" laptop.
Weight: not really a problem, but for comfort not more than 3 kg
Bulkiness: no problem for me, I am used to a regular 15" laptop and not those ultra thin laptops.
So what are the need of others?
I would also like something very similar
But if we’re going the bulky way, I think it’s best to stick with quad core CPUs. If ULV units advance enough to get sufficient benchmark scores, then what’s the point in making it bulkier and heavier if all those thin&light laptops/tablets can do the same? On the other hand, if you make it thick anyway, then why not put the best we have? A recent quad core will always be better than a recent dual core, let’s agree on that.
About the other specs - I think 17" would be way too much for a convertible, and 15" is already borderline too big. I think 13" is the perfect size for it, 14" is good, 15" is becoming a bit too big. It has to be usable not only as a laptop but also as a tablet, and it’s difficult to use such a bit tablet.
Weight could be a bit lower, I think we should aim for 2kg.
The GPU is a tricky question. I think it should have Thunderbolt 3 for external graphics (because desktop graphics cards will always be more powerful than mobile ones), but also at least half-decent internal graphics. Maybe Intel Iris? But that is only possible with i7 processors AFAIK, so no i3 or i5. GeForce GT940M is the best option after that, IMO.
And then we come to battery life… For my needs it should hold through 2 consecutive lectures, which is almost 4h, at least with the GPU disabled, and still have some juice left after that. Lenovo Y700 seems to be able to do this when browsing the web and taking notes (light usage), I think it could be improved by adding a bigger battery (which is quite small btw) in favor of a weaker GPU, and also choosing a more efficient screen like AMOLED or whatever is the most efficient nowadays
Oh, I would also prefer fast charging, maybe 100W. All-day battery life isn’t possible, so let’s at least have the possibility to quickly recharge when it runs out without wasting any time.
Now we come to the price point. I think $1500 is the absolute maximum that could be charged for a laptop/tablet with these specs (I mean the top model, with i7, 16GB of RAM and 512GB SSD).
I also think we could use an HDD alongside an SSD. Not an SSHD, but a separate 2.5" HDD and M.2 or 2.5" (because that’s cheaper) SSD. But that would waste quite a lot of space, so we would need to check if the savings are worth it.
I did mention the option for a high performance dual core just for if the slimmer style would be the way it goes. For me 14" is kind of the minimum, the 12" of the surface pro is to small for me, I can’t decently put a pdf and a word document next to each other (for when I make a summary of the textbooks). on a 15" it does work for me. but I know that is just some personal taste. I did forget to mention that it should have thunderbolt for me, for extra GPU juice but also because thunderbolt allows fast charging and fast file transfer. An extra HDD could be useful, but 512GB SSD is plenty of space for me. Maybe HDD would be an option to combine with a 256GB SSD. But combining it with 512GB would make it for everyone more than enough, for those who would survive on just 512GB SSD can use it for making a backup, and those who would need more than 512GB storage have the HDD for file storage and 512GB is plenty of space for programs. But I think that would become more expensive than 1500$, certainly if paired with 2K or higher resolution.
I also didn’t mention battery. For battery I prefer to get 4,5-5 hours of taking notes, that would be long enough to survive a morning full of courses and I know I will definitely have to buy a powerbank, even for this surface pro 3 it would be useful, since I sometimes have courses from 8:30 to 18:00 without a decent break and I have never seen a 2 in 1 achieving such long battery life unless you disable internet and bluetooth and such… Surviving that long without internet is kind of disabling. So a powerbank for those days would almost in every case be needed for me.
Thunderbolt does not allow faster charging than USB 3.1 They’re both 100W.
I can personally work fine with a 11" screen, as long as it’s FullHD or better. I have good eye sight so I don’t need it to be any bigger to be able to place windows side by side and read from them. To me, it’s almost the same as my 20" dekstop except I’m looking at it from closer distance. But of course, that causes stress on the eyes so I try not to work too long on my tablet. What I meant to say is that 15" would make the whole body very big and unwieldy, so we have to choose the best balance between compact body and big screen. I think 13" would be the best, but I’m fine with 14", and since we’re both fine with that, I suggest going with that at least for now
I think it should have 1TB HDD and 128 or 256GB SSD. It would still be cheaper than 512GB SSD but give you much more storage
The screen can be 1080p, that’s fine with me, I won’t see individual pixels in this size. I think everything more than 1440p is total overkill even for 17".
I think with battery life we’re on the same page I suggested enduring 4 hours and still having some juice left for emergencies, which is pretty much the same as 4.5 or 5h in total.
I too have all day lectures sometimes, but for example in math I won’t be using a comouter because there are too many equations and schemes to draw. Paper is more practical in that case. And there are always at least some breaks… At least 15min. That’s why I suggested having fast charging - with a 100W charger, that 15min would fill 25Wh of the battery. So if we take an average laptop battery, which is 50Wh, that means half of the whole battery. But of course, such fast charging isn’t possible with this capacity. So either the battery needs to be larger or the charger slower. Either case, fast charging would help here and I think it’s possible to get the next 1.5h out of 15mins of charging.
First, let’s agree on resolutions:
(Digital Cinema Initiatives or DCI 2K and True 4K are non-existent resolutions in laptops/tablets).
OK? Obviously there are lots of other resolutions, but let’s start with these i.e.
What screen ratio is good for video editing? 16:9?
Or is it advantageous to have more height on the screen? Or more width?
You are absolutely right about 2k and 4k…
Most people would probably understand 2k synonymous to 2560x1440, WQHD or 1440p.
Most people would probably understand 4k synonymous to 3840x2160, UHD (technically inaccurate), UHD-1 or 4K UHD…
Thank marketing guys to make things simple by complicating them
I personally believe wider screens are better for working…
16:9 is probably only good for movies, otherwise 16:10 is better in most other ways.
No insight about video editing though.