Quick search says that many Laptops with a GTX 970m's actually have a HDMI 2.0 interface. So probably Razer deemed it not necessary, since you can just do it over Thunderbolt(Displayport) with a few adapters if you really need to.
Actually, we have been hearing from multiple sources unofficially that the LSPcon in Alpine Ridge can only support HDMI 1.4, and not HDMI 2.0. Trying to get the official word from Intel, but, as of now, it looks like HDMI 2.0 with Alpine Ridge will not be happening.
the only "mobile" device (but mobile is debatable in this case) that can play well any AAA games in 4k is the the 18 inch MSI GT80 Titan, with dual GTX 980 (not M) which has a... 1080p screen... that's how crazy the gaming laptop market has become...
Nothing stops you from gaming at 1080p on the 1800p display. The DPI is sufficient to make the scaling a non-issue; in fact it produces an effect not unlike SMAA.
Meanwhile high-DPI aware applications in Windows look even better. There's not a downside here, bar the lack of a matte display option.
You're right. Why wouldn't I want to pay extra for touch I don't want, a glossy panel I don't want, extra weight I don't want and lower battery life I don't want?
Actually there is a downside; it's in the applications that are still low DPI. Objects will appear blurry in those and contrast the high-res apps. One I've noticed (on my 1080p laptop, which also needs to be upscaled) is the "Device Manager" settings app. If you're on a Windows 10 pc that is upscaling the display, search up that app and see how it looks for you.
yeah 1800p makes no sense for gaming. Also fonts will be tiny and don't come with broken dpi scaling in windows. A good 1080p panel with high refresh/would be preferable.
To be fair, you don't run the 1800p option in 1:1 scaling. You do pixel doubling to make it appear like a very sharp 1600x900 display, which is perfect for a 14" laptop.
You could do doubting similar with the other panel, but it wouldn't be full pixel doubling. It might just be like 25% higher dpi or something.
For what it's worth, on the QHD+ version of the Blade I've never played any game at native. 1080p scaling works relatively well though, 900p looks relatively fuzzy by comparison as it seems most games don't do pixel doubling for simple multiples of the native resolution.
I get that the option is still there via the manner that you described. And that's definitely good.
It's just that it feels "wasteful" to have such a nice display and then not "fully" use it in its primary use case, gaming.
Also, from a personal perspective, I like to game in windowed mode for games that don't alt-tab well. I wonder if it would be challenging to do 1080p windowed gaming on this laptop (I haven't been able to test a similar situation).
In my experience most legacy games will take up the entire screen in windowed mode if you set the scaling correctly. I use 167% scaling to emulate a 1080p display which works well, but is probably a bit too small for most.
what a pity that they removed the 1080p option. This is one of the few quad core 14 inch laptops and could be used for many things more than just gaming. This resolution is almost useless in a 14 inch device, with 1080p being the sweet spot (including for gaming with the 970m). In addition, that's a glossy display.... My asus 14 inch ultrabook is not going to be replaced by this... If the Core amplifier works with any TB3 device, the XPS 15 could be a good alternative....
I'm quite happy with my Gigabyte P34W v4, which I got for $1200 in December, as it reads on sale because the Skylake model was already out. $2k seems to high to me.
The better fit and finish, and improved thermal performance that leads to higher performance costs money. Looking at that Gigabyte, I wouldn't even consider it, but thats because I care quite a bit more about those than overall value.
Yes build quality may be better, but the P34W v4 still has very good build quality. It has better battery life and is noticeably quieter than the Blade (Haswell). Also, mate 1080p display is a plus for me.
re: 1800p I guess you could downscale to 1600 x 900 but yeah losing 1080p a bit of a pain.
Bigger issue is Pascal on the horizon which I guess would be in the next six months. Will undoubtedly make the 970M (great chip that it is) look tired when it hits.
Hmm, interesting. While I'd always wanted a Chroma keyboard, I feel the Blade is still a premium product personally out of my budget. (Maybe the Stealth/its replacement, when I need a new laptop?) Aside from that, it feels like a bit of an incremental upgrade, like the XPS 13 refresh; but still good to see some sort of update given Skylake and TB3 (and Core support). Also interesting to see that they've reduced the weight despite keeping essentially the same chassis.
Also pointing out a minor typo, I believe the 6700HQ is a 45W part, not 47W?
The article comparing 2015 Blade panels mentioned the lack of much dimming capability on the QHD+ (I think the exact quote was something like looking into the sun). Was that ever resolved? If not, could they have fixed this on the 2016 model? I know it seems like an odd concern, but I have super light-sensitive eyes and work in dim light much of the time, so do not want an ultra bright panel I can't turn down to like 20-40% brightness. If that is the case I'll honestly opt for the 2015 FHD matte version (though seems a shame at only a $400 difference right now to take such a huge step backward in performance). My other gripe is they have yet to back-light the special characters on the Chroma keyboards. Again, working in dim light makes this a pain.
" When I say pretty much, the one change is that the short lived 1920x1080p matte offering which lost touch capabilities, but improved battery life, is no longer available. Razer didn’t say whether this would be coming back, but they only told me they would continue listening to customer feedback. It’s possible that this model just didn’t have enough sales to justify the extra SKU."
As far as I heard the 1080p screen sold far better then the 4k screen.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
34 Comments
Back to Article
masimilianzo - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
Why no HDMI 2.0? 970M doesn't support it? What about the integrated Intel GPU?Azune - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
Quick search says that many Laptops with a GTX 970m's actually have a HDMI 2.0 interface. So probably Razer deemed it not necessary, since you can just do it over Thunderbolt(Displayport) with a few adapters if you really need to.Ryan Smith - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
The integrated GPU only supports up to HDMI 1.4, so they are almost certainly using that and putting the dGPU in an Optimus configuration.The funny thing is that Alpine Ridge (Intel's Thunderbolt controller) actually has DP->HDMI 2.0 built in. So I'm a bit surprised they aren't using that.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9485/intel-skylake-z...
Connoisseur - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
Was going to say. Isn't there any way to use the Thunderbolt port to drive a monitor directly or does it not support GPU switching or some-such?ganeshts - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
Actually, we have been hearing from multiple sources unofficially that the LSPcon in Alpine Ridge can only support HDMI 1.4, and not HDMI 2.0. Trying to get the official word from Intel, but, as of now, it looks like HDMI 2.0 with Alpine Ridge will not be happening.ImSpartacus - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
I kinda liked the idea the 1080p option.I'm not gaming at 1800p with a 970m. It's just not happening. But a 970m can game at 1080p just fine.
Also the battery life benefits are nice. And a lower cost is never a bad thing.
mavrck_ - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
Hardcore gamers know 1080p is the sweet spot for all mobile graphics chipsets.1800p is unrealistic.
digiguy - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
the only "mobile" device (but mobile is debatable in this case) that can play well any AAA games in 4k is the the 18 inch MSI GT80 Titan, with dual GTX 980 (not M) which has a... 1080p screen... that's how crazy the gaming laptop market has become...gw74 - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
exactly. way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory Razer. gg.Spunjji - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
Nothing stops you from gaming at 1080p on the 1800p display. The DPI is sufficient to make the scaling a non-issue; in fact it produces an effect not unlike SMAA.Meanwhile high-DPI aware applications in Windows look even better. There's not a downside here, bar the lack of a matte display option.
gw74 - Sunday, March 20, 2016 - link
You're right. Why wouldn't I want to pay extra for touch I don't want, a glossy panel I don't want, extra weight I don't want and lower battery life I don't want?HumanBean - Monday, March 28, 2016 - link
Actually there is a downside; it's in the applications that are still low DPI. Objects will appear blurry in those and contrast the high-res apps. One I've noticed (on my 1080p laptop, which also needs to be upscaled) is the "Device Manager" settings app. If you're on a Windows 10 pc that is upscaling the display, search up that app and see how it looks for you.beginner99 - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
yeah 1800p makes no sense for gaming. Also fonts will be tiny and don't come with broken dpi scaling in windows. A good 1080p panel with high refresh/would be preferable.ImSpartacus - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
To be fair, you don't run the 1800p option in 1:1 scaling. You do pixel doubling to make it appear like a very sharp 1600x900 display, which is perfect for a 14" laptop.You could do doubting similar with the other panel, but it wouldn't be full pixel doubling. It might just be like 25% higher dpi or something.
gw74 - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
no, 1080p is perfect for a 14" laptop.JoshHo - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
For what it's worth, on the QHD+ version of the Blade I've never played any game at native. 1080p scaling works relatively well though, 900p looks relatively fuzzy by comparison as it seems most games don't do pixel doubling for simple multiples of the native resolution.ImSpartacus - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
I get that the option is still there via the manner that you described. And that's definitely good.It's just that it feels "wasteful" to have such a nice display and then not "fully" use it in its primary use case, gaming.
Also, from a personal perspective, I like to game in windowed mode for games that don't alt-tab well. I wonder if it would be challenging to do 1080p windowed gaming on this laptop (I haven't been able to test a similar situation).
JoshHo - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
In my experience most legacy games will take up the entire screen in windowed mode if you set the scaling correctly. I use 167% scaling to emulate a 1080p display which works well, but is probably a bit too small for most.digiguy - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
what a pity that they removed the 1080p option. This is one of the few quad core 14 inch laptops and could be used for many things more than just gaming. This resolution is almost useless in a 14 inch device, with 1080p being the sweet spot (including for gaming with the 970m). In addition, that's a glossy display.... My asus 14 inch ultrabook is not going to be replaced by this... If the Core amplifier works with any TB3 device, the XPS 15 could be a good alternative....devione - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
I'm surprised no one's complained about the Killer wireless yet.Glock24 - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
I'm quite happy with my Gigabyte P34W v4, which I got for $1200 in December, as it reads on sale because the Skylake model was already out. $2k seems to high to me.frostyfiredude - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
The better fit and finish, and improved thermal performance that leads to higher performance costs money. Looking at that Gigabyte, I wouldn't even consider it, but thats because I care quite a bit more about those than overall value.Glock24 - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
Yes build quality may be better, but the P34W v4 still has very good build quality. It has better battery life and is noticeably quieter than the Blade (Haswell). Also, mate 1080p display is a plus for me.mobutu - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
- huge pathethic bezels- no more 1080p
- no more matte
- killer wireless
All big negatives in my book.
Jon Tseng - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
re: 1800p I guess you could downscale to 1600 x 900 but yeah losing 1080p a bit of a pain.Bigger issue is Pascal on the horizon which I guess would be in the next six months. Will undoubtedly make the 970M (great chip that it is) look tired when it hits.
ThreeDee912 - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
I'd actually consider the Killer Wireless to be a downgrade vs the Intel AC, personally.nerd1 - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
HUGE bezel. Glossy touchscreen. Useless high resolution in 14" display.XPS 15 seems to be a better choice for portable gaming.
nerd1 - Tuesday, March 15, 2016 - link
Expensive gaming laptop with cramped 14" display. What's the point?steven4570 - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
As opposed to what?rev3rsor - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
Hmm, interesting. While I'd always wanted a Chroma keyboard, I feel the Blade is still a premium product personally out of my budget. (Maybe the Stealth/its replacement, when I need a new laptop?) Aside from that, it feels like a bit of an incremental upgrade, like the XPS 13 refresh; but still good to see some sort of update given Skylake and TB3 (and Core support). Also interesting to see that they've reduced the weight despite keeping essentially the same chassis.Also pointing out a minor typo, I believe the 6700HQ is a 45W part, not 47W?
gw74 - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
no 1080p matte option, no salesteven4570 - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
Why?Worthymatt - Wednesday, March 16, 2016 - link
The article comparing 2015 Blade panels mentioned the lack of much dimming capability on the QHD+ (I think the exact quote was something like looking into the sun). Was that ever resolved? If not, could they have fixed this on the 2016 model? I know it seems like an odd concern, but I have super light-sensitive eyes and work in dim light much of the time, so do not want an ultra bright panel I can't turn down to like 20-40% brightness. If that is the case I'll honestly opt for the 2015 FHD matte version (though seems a shame at only a $400 difference right now to take such a huge step backward in performance). My other gripe is they have yet to back-light the special characters on the Chroma keyboards. Again, working in dim light makes this a pain.rlkelly - Thursday, March 17, 2016 - link
" When I say pretty much, the one change is that the short lived 1920x1080p matte offering which lost touch capabilities, but improved battery life, is no longer available. Razer didn’t say whether this would be coming back, but they only told me they would continue listening to customer feedback. It’s possible that this model just didn’t have enough sales to justify the extra SKU."As far as I heard the 1080p screen sold far better then the 4k screen.