CPU Throttling on 15 inch Surface Book 2 after 1709?

[Seneleron]

The only way Microsoft can back off of the power supply issue is to provide a different power supply. And I'm guessing there has to be some reason for why they're limiting things this way -- the Surface Connect port can't handle more power, the machine would overheat, or something. For whatever reason, Microsoft apparently just doesn't want the thing cranking at full throttle for extended periods of time.

There is a reason: It's called "Defective by design". I can understand the surface dock not being able to charge it under load at high performance, but if the proprietary charger can't take enough wattage it should have been redesigned. This isn't all about gaming, what about compiling, transcoding. . and all those other wonderful things A/V professionals do that stresses their hardware?

I hate to use car analogies, but you don't buy a Ferarri expecting it to only do 35 MPH because the fuel lines were undersized. Unfortunately, if people just accept the situation, MS will get away with this, and they SHOULDN'T. There should be a class action suit that forces them to address this OR AT THE VERY LEAST cover the battery under warranty due to increased charge/discharge for an extended period of time.

Don't get me wrong here: everything I do runs JUST FINE (more or less) on the balanced power profile. I don't necessarily NEED full throttle on this machine. What bothers me is that it wasn't announced pre-launch, which constitutes false advertising IMO, since it is unheard of to purchase a notebook computer with the understanding that it is unable to support itself under AC power under load. ESPECIALLY since batteries will degrade/die over time. What happens then. . does the machine just shut off under load? Do I have to pay an obscene amount of money to replace the battery in the next 1-2 years due to premature failure if I choose to get the maximum ADVERTISED PERFORMANCE out of my machine? What about resale value? What about generating more E-waste in the event of premature failure?


I realize I'm laying it on thick here, and that the odds of a lot of my arguments above aren't massive.... but the point, and the principle, remain. We were sold a machine that was advertised to a certain specification, and it cannot maintain that specification without degrading itself in the process. If this were ANY OTHER MANUFACTURER it would be called a defect in the charger [And it has been, especially on Razer notebooks when the 17" Blade Pros were suffering from defective 250w adapters].

 

[IamBaytor]

Thank you all for this conversation. I've learned how important it is to inspect what you buy and to not just assume that everything is as it should be because it's new.

This is more evidence that I should wait a while to pull the trigger on snagging one of these to give time for the QA issues to hopefully shake out. The power supply thing is also giving me pause because the upgraded gamingability was a huge selling point for me. It would be hard for me to accept that my $2500 machine compromised on such a basic design element.

I'm still rocking my 1st Gen SB and I've been on the fence about upgrading. I think I'll sit on my wallet to see if they decide to upgrade the charger.

 

[wynand32]

I'm still rocking my 1st Gen SB and I've been on the fence about upgrading. I think I'll sit on my wallet to see if they decide to upgrade the charger.

Waiting does make some sense, sure, and I would but I'm actually without a good enough notebook at the moment and so I have to buy something.

That said, I'm more than certain that if Microsoft does start shipping a different power supply, they'll make it available to early buyers. They'll either do it voluntarily or by way of a class action lawsuit that forces them to do it.

 

[Seneleron]

because the upgraded gaming ability was a huge selling point for me

Absolutely nothing wrong with the gaming, even when you're not on max performance. I've now added a few more games to my library thanks to a USB-C SSD, and not only does the back only get "medium warm" as opposed to "inferno", there's no noticable issue with performance [I mean, we're talking Destiny 2 here, not Witcher 2, but I wouldn't play titles that demanding on a laptop ANYWAY -- just me]

 

[Theartiszan]

Just chiming back in here after a while with the new one. After having the new one for a while now, I must say I am extremely happy with it. The system performs very good and I don't have really much to worry about in the terms of thermals anymore. It is working very reliably and even under heavy load, there is no thermal throttle that is present and it is not seeing much in the way of power limit throttling either. I am getting solid 615 or higher scores in Cinebench which is great for a lower power and size machine. I have a Dell Precision with a i7-7820 in it that is only a little faster even given the higher capacity for thermal solution.
As far as gaming, even with Destiny 2 on high performance, using the included charger I don't see any issue with the battery draining while plugged in. I did find an interesting video that covers that in more detail below. But overall, I am very happy with it. As a matter of fact, the only time I even seen any drain on the battery is when I am gaming on high performance with only a few settings and using the Surface Dock instead of the included charger and a USB-C to Display Port adapter.

 

[Seneleron]

I saw that video. I'm gonna leave this here as well: But yes, it was I who also left it on the video

1) If it happens at all, it's contributing to battery wear.
2) If it was a "feature", it should have been clearly advertised and marketed PRIOR TO AVAILABILITY FOR PURCHASE so that early adopters could make an informed decision.
3) Show me ANY manufacturer that lists battery drain while under load on AC power to be a feature. Better yet, show me ANY consumer that goes out to buy a laptop that EXPECTS the battery to drain while operating on AC power.
4) If the proprietary dock can't handle more than 102w, it should have been redesigned. This IS a big deal. I can get the battery to drain on max performance in HEROES THE THE STORM! For those that don't know, Heroes Of The Storm is Blizzard's MoBA, only utilizes a single core, and is more CPU bound than GPU bound. At these settings it pushes 110+ FPS The issue is, if you drop from max performance to higher performance, Windows lowers max turbo boost, costing you about 20-30 FPS average, and up to 45 FPS max--Causing it to dip under 60 FPS [lowest I ever saw was 47] That is a HUGE loss of performance to safeguard my $2500 investment from premature battery wear.

Now let's take that relatively "first world" problem and apply it to the professional photo editor, video editor, rendering artist using this as a professional tool for their career.... And remember, the whole issue, the WHOLE BLOODY ISSUE hangs on a the charger's capacity being approx 10-15w short of required. If THAT isn't a design defect on a premium flagship product, I don't know what is.

 

[wynand32]

Now let's take that relatively "first world" problem and apply it to the professional photo editor, video editor, rendering artist using this as a professional tool for their career.... And remember, the whole issue, the WHOLE BLOODY ISSUE hangs on a the charger's capacity being approx 10-15w short of required. If THAT isn't a design defect on a premium flagship product, I don't know what is.

I tend to agree with you that Microsoft made a mistake in stressing the SB2's ability to act as a gaming system. They should have downplayed that idea from the very beginning. Now, beyond that, I think the question is: does this issue affect the SB2's ability to perform other tasks like video editing, AutoCAD rendering, and the like? I'm not saying it does or does not, I've not yet seen any analysis. And, I have an SB2 15" 1TB on backorder, or I'd try it myself.

I suspect that we won't see this issue show up in these kinds of tasks, but if they do then I agree, Microsoft has an issue. I still wonder why they didn't max out the Surface Connect port's 120 watts, and I wouldn't be surprised if they put out a new power supply. The extra 25 watts could make all the difference.

 

[starstreak]

They always stressed the SP/SB wasn't a gaming laptop, but always showed that it COULD play some games. And this time around, using an actual Nvidia chipset in the SB, they made it more compatible with the xbox/live games. But even with that, they didn't gear it for the gamer, I thought they said, you could game with it.
Anyways, IF I ever update to a SB from my SP4, I hope the "fix" for the throttling/draining of battery while plugged in, isn't lowering the clock speed. Why put in a faster video card if you end up slowing it down.

I tend to agree with you that Microsoft made a mistake in stressing the SB2's ability to act as a gaming system. They should have downplayed that idea from the very beginning.

 

[wynand32]

Anyways, IF I ever update to a SB from my SP4, I hope the "fix" for the throttling/draining of battery while plugged in, isn't lowering the clock speed. Why put in a faster video card if you end up slowing it down.

It depends on exactly how much they slow it down. The GTX 1060 with Max-Q version is specifically underclocked to save heat in tighter chassis, and so it's around 10-15% slower than a non-Max-Q version. Max-Q also drops the TDP to 60-70 watts from 80 watts. So if Microsoft slows things down roughly the same amount, then it would be no different than any of the Max-Q systems out there. Now, I don't know if the 10-20 watt decrease would be sufficient, but it could be in many situations. And it would still be significantly faster than a GTX 1050 or 1050 Ti.

 

[wynand32]

So, I got my SB2 15" 1TB the other day. I've been checking for all of the various issues people have mentioned, and I read through this thread but came away a bit confused.

My biggest question is: what's considered to be the high-end of normal voltage (VID)? I see that 1.396v is considered high. Mine hit 1.351 at one point, but I'm not sure what the range is here. I've run the various tests and mine passed, and I don't see any thermal throttling, but I'm not sure what's considered a problem.

Any clarification would be greatly appreciated.

 

[theveterans]

^ Do voltages stay at that point for a while. I'd worry if that is sustained voltage though since it's still high. Normally, @ 1.351 V, a good overclocking i7 desktop chip would've hit at least 5 GHz. No reason for a 3.8 - 4 GHz overclock to reach 1.351 volts

 

[wynand32]

^ Do voltages stay at that point for a while. I'd worry if that is sustained voltage though since it's still high. Normally, @ 1.351 V, a good overclocking i7 desktop chip would've hit at least 5 GHz. No reason for a 3.8 - 4 GHz overclock to reach 1.351 volts

No, it's not sustained, as far as I can tell. I'll have to check again, though. I don't actually remember seeing it hit that voltage, that's just the maximum that it hit as some point, maybe when first starting out?