Exactly. Kaby Lake R is optimised for burst, 45W quad cores are optimised for both burst and sustained performance. If all you need is burst (Office, everyday computing, Internet etc.), Kaby Lake R is incredible. Once you need sustain, its a significant downgrade from a 45W CPU. Of course, most reviews focus on burst performance (e.g. Geekbench). In other words, the Kaby Lake R is an ideal 'casual' CPU. And there is nothing wrong with that. I found it very strange though that so many people would consider it an upgrade over even a 7700HQ. Is it just because there is "Gen 8" written on the spec sheet?.
As long as the cooling solution is robust the new 8th Gen U series quad cores will be a significant improvement on the previous U series CPU. For many users being more than powerful enough, who will never notice the difference versus the 7700HQ. I don't perceive that there will be a massive delta in performance even with heavy sustained computational tasks. The 7700HQ will definitely pull ahead, equally outside of benchmarks or time critical applications not a deal breaker for the majority.
I agree there is a level of confusion, and the 7700HQ and upwards remain the choice for heavy lifting until the 8th Gen revisions are released. Personally thinking the U series are far better suited to thin & light notebooks allowing for less substantial cooling systems, while the H series is better suited to the more traditional larger notebooks that offer larger more robust cooling systems.
In short the 8th Gen U series is a significant upgrade, equally not in comparison to the top tier 7700HQ which is a different class of mobile CPU. Getting back to Surface Book 2 Microsoft have the advantage and additional complexity of two thermal zones, I'm pretty confident that SB-2 will be capable of adequate cooling and prevent thermal throttling...
Q-6
[doublepost=1508430768][/doublepost]
Would you? Personally, I'd very disappointed about Apple abandoning the professional user. 30-50% slower CPU on sustained performance-demanding workflows in order to fit in a gaming GPU? Sure, your application might be niche enough to benefit from it. No pro-level connectivity? A gimmick where you can turn your screen into an oversized tablet with barely any battery life?
[doublepost=1508405094][/doublepost]
What this tells is people falling for marketing BS, which Microsoft is great at. Remember when they released a ridiculously priced AOI computer with a laptop CPU and no pro-level connectivity whatsoever, which was immediately praised as the "iMac killer for pro market"?
Well for many Apple that's exactly has done, and we are
very disappointed. Nor are the U series quad cores going to be so ""
dramatically" slower as you purport. They will in fact be perfectly fine for the vast majority of users and run cooler. dGPU come on if Apple did this you would be all over it, more and more SW is levering GPU computation, so all power to MS for pulling it off. There's no hardship here at all, maybe just sour grapes, and why shouldn't even professional's enjoy a better gaming experience, let alone AR..
Connectivity is perfectly fine, as a professional who works globally with major multinationals I've yet to see one facility set up and wired for TB-3. As for the gimmicks Apple's got some of that going on with thin for the sake of thinner, flaky keyboards and the Touch Bar.
Marketing BS, Apple is the king, anyone not overly invested knows this, like many others thing's sometimes it just don't always work. I own and use both multiple Mac portables and a Surface Book, I can categorically state that the Surface Book is an excellent notebook, although I'm confident that your going to spend as much energy as possible to put it down
MS is not perfect by any means, however at least they are trying to break the mould, while Apple has become locked into a single paradigm and spot of competition is exactly what Apple needs...
Q-6
