eGPUs still aren't worth it, right?

[_MT_]

Main draw of an eGPU is to be  able to have a single portable laptop, and be able to dock when extra graphics power is needed.

The problem is that portable laptops suck altogether. It's the price you pay for portability. eGPU can solve one aspect, just as an external monitor, keyboard, mouse or speakers can. But you still have a relatively slow processor with crappy cooling to boot. Even if there was a readily available solution for that, it would practically amount to a complete desktop. Just messier.

I do get the synchronization argument. Another approach is to simply store your work on a small external drive. Reality is that backups are in the same bag. If you do backups, you might just as well tackle synchronization. It's not going to solve all the pitfalls. Imagine failing to commit your latest work before leaving. Being able to remotely power the computer on and log-in goes a long way in such scenarios. But it can make it a pretty smooth experience.

[phila_delphia]

The problem is that portable laptops suck altogether.

Guess I am somewhat feeding the troll here (you should`nt even be reading arcitles on a dedicated notebook page should`nt you?!), but:

For my personal demands notebooks have become incredibly lightweight, fast and durable (battery wise) over tha last few years. If you need all (like absolutely all) the performance you will, of course, stick to a desktop system.

If you - like me - look for a machine that allows mult purpose use (light video editing, some gaming, drwaing while wirelessly connected to a digital Whiteboar/beamer & some gaming) there is nothing that will com close to a powerful convertible.

Best regards

phil

P.S.: I find it absolutely fascinating that my actual convertible sports all the GPU and GPU power (yet even more) as the 9 pound gaming laptop I owned 5 years ago...

[_MT_]

The problem is that portable laptops suck altogether.

Guess I am somewhat feeding the troll here (you should`nt even be reading arcitles on a dedicated notebook page should`nt you?!), but:

For my personal demands notebooks have become incredibly lightweight, fast and durable (battery wise) over tha last few years. If you need all (like absolutely all) the performance you will, of course, stick to a desktop system.

If you - like me - look for a machine that allows mult purpose use (light video editing, some gaming, drwaing while wirelessly connected to a digital Whiteboar/beamer & some gaming) there is nothing that will com close to a powerful convertible.

Best regards

phil

P.S.: I find it absolutely fascinating that my actual convertible sports all the GPU and GPU power (yet even more) as the 9 pound gaming laptop I owned 5 years ago...

Just because I think they objectively suck compared to a desktop, doesn't mean I don't have a use for a portable laptop and that I'm not willing to compromise when on the go (when the portability pays dividends). And that's the important part. On the go. My critique is aimed at using the laptop at home, where I can have a fixed set-up. Not to mention that mobile workstations are also laptops. Even the Area-51 is a laptop. It's not just about performance, but also about comfort. I actually used to run such set-ups back when proper docking stations were "in" (next to desktops). It was convenient (no messing with cables at all, no need to unpack power supply) and enough for ordinary office work. But even a fairly light game would make the laptop sound like a hoover. Proper docks are an endangered species now.

I'm sure there are people who don't need more performance. Even people who need so little that the laptop stays quiet. Then it's just a question of peripherals and dealing with the cables. Perhaps even people who don't really write much, don't listen to music, etc. who don't mind the compromised integrated devices. It changes nothing about them sucking - there is a huge gap. More like a canyon, really. It might be irrelevant to many, still changes nothing. And I'm writing this on a laptop. There is just nothing a laptop does better except portability and, related, taking up less space. I would always take a desktop keyboard over the laptop crap they give us these days (the tiny cursor keys, the useless function keys, misplaced home and end keys, etc.). Or a mouse. Or a bigger display (especially with the 16:9 nonsense because I need vertical space). Or a cooling system that can keep its cool and stays quiet even when I lean on it. Frankly, in my eyes, laptops have seen deterioration in some ways. Chips are better, but there were too many sacrifices at the altar of thinness and lightness.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not criticizing your choice. Absolutely, use what works for you. Point was that laptops are limited (they're doing an amazing job in the small space, no doubt about it) and eGPU solves just one problem, just like an external keyboard or display. Not all of those problems are relevant to all people. Some people have an external DAC to connect their headphones. Others don't.

Yes, the advances are great. It's really amazing what we can do today with 10 W. I believe even the integrated 620 or 630 is more powerful than the desktop 8800GT was, I don't know, I guess 12 years ago. Unfortunately, it looks like programmers are lazy or getting incompetent. In some cases, the deterioration of software performance outpaces advances in hardware performance. I have a friend who told me she's had smoother computer experience in the 90s than today in her work. And she works with text, seemingly nothing taxing. Nowadays, she has to wait for the computer to catch up to her writing. That's crappy software. And that really annoys me. We just take performance for granted and waste it incredibly. In my "non-office" use, projects are getting bigger and bigger all the time, our tools are getting more capable and complex. And we don't get HW acceleration unlike video decoding (which is why you can easily watch 4K video; it wouldn't be so easy with a software decoder and your laptop would be dead in no time). So, I still need a workstation. When I'm on a laptop with good Internet connection, I offload the heavy lifting to a remote workstation. That way, I can use an ultrabook. As a mobile terminal.

[ProDigit]

While I don't use them, many old laptops and notebooks with dual or quadcore CPUs of ~2,5 to 3Ghz clock speeds, under linux, can easily feed an RTX 2060 Super off of an available m.2 slot (sometimes available, sometimes you'll need to disable a wifi module or emmc module).
Steam works fine even with older core 2 duo CPUs of 1,7Ghz dual cores, and a GT 1550Ti or 1650, for 720P gaming, provided you can upgrade the ram to 4GB.

The interface should be pcie via riser ribbons (kind of more like a permanent solution), and the display out should be on the egpu.
I wouldn't recommend it for thunderbolt cables, unless the egpu has the main (or a secondary) display out.

[nikoi]

"Gpu prices are gonna inevitably drop after Nvidia releases Ampere"
Well this aged like fine milk lol.

[RobertJasiek]

On 2022-02-27, I perceive these eGPU problems:

- dGPUs are too expensive
- eGPU boxes might be too small for large cards
- either a box does not allow a custom ATX PSU (for minimum noise) or the box is open collecting dust
- dust filters are missing
- airflow is restricted or case fans are too small to be silent
- Thunderbolt 4 is still missing in the eGPU boxes. AMD CPUs create extra problems with only providing USB 4 when compatibilty is unclear.
- Even with 32Gb/s of PCIe over Thunderbolt 4, maximum load and babdwidth can create problems for heavy applications.
- While a mobile device can be small, an eGPU box is as large as a small desktop so what problem is actually solved by using an eGPU?

Still eGPUs only make sense for a mobile device if one needs speed between its GPU and a desktop's dGPU running at maximum load.