Quote from: PolCPP on March 01, 2020, 23:07:46
I can undestand gaming at 1080p, but working 1080p on a 17" laptop is so yuck.

Just make sure you have 100 % scaling. 1080 on a 16:9 17.3" has practically the same DPI as 1680x1050 8:5 on a 15.4". Which was perfectly fine. Dell just supplied it from factory with some silly DPI scaling which looked hideous in the Windows XP. Back then, I considered getting the 1920x1200, I was just afraid it's going to be too small (they didn't have one in the showroom). I didn't regret it (I met someone with the 1200 at a conference). Back then, many laptops had 768 or something. That was "yuck." :-)

Yes, text isn't as smooth as on a "4k" screen but on the plus side, there are no scaling issues. To me, the UI is just perfect size. I could take slightly finer, but as years go by, I don't mind. Gone are the days when I used font sizes below 10 px.

Quote from: Sid on March 01, 2020, 16:58:01
Still one of the most useless "gaming" laptop out there. I really want to love it...they are finally using good styling, but the use of unnecessary features like eye tracking, the presence of glossy surfaces, and the biggest sin of all, just 16GB of RAM makes it unsuitable for working + gaming crowd.

I really don't get how they designed the m15/m17 series. They're nice to use but the internal design decisions are... horrible. No windows hello but Tobii eye tracking (which causes more issues than solves). Soldered ram. Reversed motherboard , "staingate" on the white models, (which could probably have been fixed by using the same material as the XPS 13?), stuff like the m15 having one ssd mounted on the touchpad holding/bracket. The lack of a 4k@120hz on the m17 like the blade 17. I can undestand gaming at 1080p, but working 1080p on a 17" laptop is so yuck.

Still one of the most useless "gaming" laptop out there. I really want to love it...they are finally using good styling, but the use of unnecessary features like eye tracking, the presence of glossy surfaces, and the biggest sin of all, just 16GB of RAM makes it unsuitable for working + gaming crowd.

Quote from: xpclient on March 01, 2020, 10:36:01
This is precisely why you should give points to PCs which don't throttle in ultrabooks, or thin and light laptops and take away points if it's performing badly when under load.

I believe it's only called throttling when a CPU goes below its base clock. Which should be 2.4 GHz in this case. Boost is really meant to be temporary and is not necessarily sustainable (if for no other reason, then for inefficiency). Certainly when it's used in a negative way. Theoretically, throttling is colloquial for dynamic frequency scaling which should include scaling up, not just down, although that's the original use AFAIK (mainly prolonging battery life). It's "pick your poison." You can have a higher maximum frequency that's not sustainable, or lower, sustainable maximum frequency and give up the short burst performance. There is no such thing as free lunch.

That XPS behaves really weird. And if it really stabilizes at 66 °C, it must have a pretty restrictive power limit. It would be nice if you could normalize it for some cooling testing. Also, the m15 R2 didn't perform admirably at all (with the 9750H). You really have little idea of what you're getting until you actually test it.

This is precisely why you should give points to PCs which don't throttle in ultrabooks, or thin and light laptops and take away points if it's performing badly when under load.