![]() Anyone happen to know the whole story about encode speeds with 2018 rMBP's with the T2 chip? I don't quite understand the articles I am reading, making it sound like T2 is like a super Quicksync encoder chip. I believe you're thinking about CPUs in a way they simply don't operate. ![]() CPU usage means absolutely nothing when exporting (transcoding) video files. ![]() Thus, depending on the intensity of the process, it may slow itself down, nothing wrong with it trying to not set fire to your house, IMHO. Especially Long GOP codecs, which jump around a lot and are very intense encoding nightmares, mathematically.Īnd a laptop has to manage its heat, so it doesn't burn itself up. A video is encoded frame by frame, not all frames at once. Some parts need to be processed before others, in which case they have to wait before they can start. And some of this exporting is being done by the GPU, and on some Mac's, the built-in H.264 encoder (semi-part of CPU, no clue how it shows up on Power Gadget).īut if your export times are OK, what's the issue? Not every process can use 100% of your CPU, nor should it. The Dell Dynamic power mode seems to have its advantages in real-world use, but the Dell claim of 10% better performance than the Skylake XPS 13 seems to be difficult to pinpoint.A process will only use as much CPU resource as it is able, or needs. This leaves us with a situation where the benchmarks do not necessarily match up with that user experience. The "bursty" nature of many workloads is more difficult to test and show case, as the result is end-user experience rather than any hard coded performance metric. It's nice to look at this data, what does it ultimately mean? Well, I have to say that day to day usage of the XPS 13 2-in-1 has not presented many performance discrepancies over any other "ultrabook" machine. The restrictions are on the length of time of that burst, in order to maintain sustained power consumption at a lower level to extend battery life and keep the surface temperatures low. This keeps the Dell system in its lower power state more often, while still being able to "burst" up to the 3.5 GHz range for workloads that demand it. The XPS 13 spends more time at the in the 900MHz clock speed range than the MateBook. Here we can see that the XPS 13 is more aggressive on dynamically changing the clock speed. In order to monitor the clock speed, we used the Intel Power Gadget software to the processors over a 10-minute portion of PCMark 8.įirst, we'll take a look at the Huawei MateBook. Essentially this amounts to greater control over dynamically adjusting the clock speed of the i7-7Y57 processor in order to stay within the thermal constraints of the chassis as well as improve battery life. In PCMark 8, we once again see the XPS 13 2-in-1 beating the MateBook, but it's still behind the higher power mobile processors in the ThinkPad X1 and MacBook Pro.Īs we mentioned earlier in this review, the XPS 13 2-in-1 features a technology that Dell is calling Dynamic Power Mode. While the "conventional" tests are running applications as you'd expect, the "accelerated" versions add OpenCL acceleration and use the available GPU devices for some operations. PCMark 8 is a benchmarking suite that aims to emulate several different usage scenarios ranging from basic productivity to mixed workloads with light gaming and to applications for creative professionals like photo and video editing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |