Microsoft Surface

detroit20 wrote:

I had a look at the Z4, and it just doesn't have enough 'oomph' for my purposes. However, the HP Pavilion has now caught my eye. It's basically a laptop with a touchscreen where the keyboard can be folded away to leave a tablet-like interface.

It seems quite powerful - Intel® Core™ i7-7500U, 8GB RAM and 256GB SSD storage. But it comes with no software bar Windows 10, and is pretty hefty at 1.6kg.

I think I'm talking myself either into an old Surface Pro 4 or a new Surface Pro.

There are lots of 2in1 models out now - have you looked to see if any others are lighter? I know both Dell and Asus make decent ones. Also, my daughter just bought an HP Spectre x360 and it was very light. I'm not sure how it compares to the Pavilion though.

Sadly, the HP Spectre is almost twice the price of the Pavilion and still weighs 1.32 kg (the Surface Pro is only 800g). Weight is a big deal for me, as I'll be using the device primarily in tablet mode.

But my big dilemma is over whether to go for an Surface Pro 4 or the newer Surface Pro model. Based on my desired spec, then the price difference is £250. I can almost pick up a PSVR for that!

I'm almost talking myself into going for the Surface Pro 4. I'm not sure I'll feel the benefit of the allegedly 50% longer battery life and 50% faster processor when I'm watching NFL Gamepass.

EDIT: And then I came across this article. I may not buy anything at all now!

From that article:

...an excellent computer plagued by heat and battery life issues

Umm, huh? Sure it heats up when running full power but so does EVERY computer. As for battery life - he is being unrealistic. He expects a decently-powered computer in a tablet size that can run all day without needing to be plugged in? Maybe an i3 can do that, but not an i7 with a better-than-average graphics card.

What about that article makes you not want to get anything now, though?

I'm ashamed to say that this caught my eye first.

"The Iris Plus 640 graphics will also be able to handle a little light gaming, but only with relatively low resolution and detail settings – there’s simply no substitute for a discrete GPU for gaming."

I don't need my new laptop/tablet to be Crysis 3-at-max-setting-capable, but I am put off by the fact the top spec version of the Surface Pro doesn't appear to be powerful enough to make the best use of a "brilliant" screen. It's a shame that the reviewer didn't define what constitute's light gaming. Perhaps unrealistically, I was hoping for something comparable to a current gen home console (PS4, rather than PS4 pro).

"It has no HDMI, no ethernet and no USB-C ports, which really hampers the Surface Pro’s futureproofing."

I think I'd miss the HDMI out... though my elderly current laptop (2008!!) doesn't have it, and I happily output NFL Gamepass games to my tv using it.

EDIT: Just found some more reviews.

Tech Radar mentions: "As for gaming, again, anything beyond Hearthstone is going to result in a poor experience."

And I've just noticed that most of the reviews I can find are for the Surface Pro with the i-7 processor. I can only stretch to the i-5.

I found this based on the old version of the i7 Surface Pro 4:

Goat Simulator / Low 720p, Undervolting: Playable! FPS 45-63.
Skyrim / 1680×1050, Medium: Playable! FPS 30-60.
Minecraft 1.8.x / 2251×1037 ‘Fast’: Playable! FPS 40-70.
Fallout 4 / Low 720p: Playable! FPS 25-45. (but buggy and has startup issues. NOT RECOMMENDED.)
Bioshock: Infinite / Low 1080P: Playable! 35-25fps.
GTA V: Unplayable. 11-20 fps falling to 10 fps in many areas.

Some more details here. So, the new i7 with the Iris 560 should be even better than that.

As for the HDMI out, I haven't missed not having it. It can use DLNA to stream to my TV, but I can also use Chrome and stream to a Chromecast. But, if you really need it, you can get a mini-DisplayPort-to-HDMI adapter.

EDIT: Whoops - I just saw that you aren't aiming for an i7. I might suggest going with the older i7 rather than the newer i5. But it depends on your priority: better battery life or better gaming performance. You can't have both!

I love my SP4. I've got all my work tools on it and have it joined to the domain so I can do anything I can do at my desk from anywhere. I put in full days of work when I went to Minnesota for the MMS conference, and there was nothing I felt hinderdd in doing. I have Steam loaded up on it so I can play some Stellaris or some other games if I like. The Kindle reader works great for me, the type keyboard functions perfectly for my needs, if I need a desktop app I can run it, and it's light as a feather compared to any other laptop I've used. Any time I try other tablets or laptops I just feel they're missing something. The only problem I've had is battery life. if I crank the powersave settings I can get 7ish hours out of it, but then I'm killing my eyes looking at a super dark screen all day.

If the new refresh delivers on battery life, I'll be incredibly satisfied.

I was mainly thinking of using HDMI to connect to in-room TVs in hotels and on cruise ships. It would be nice to watch my own content when the regular channels are offering little and Pay-Per-View is the only alternative.

The list of games you put up, dewalist, is a real eye opener. Clearly, if I want to play something other than 4X games (which I've never played, so perhaps buying a Surface Pro presents an opportunity to sample Sean Sands' drug of choice, Europa Universalis 4), then I'm looking at travelling back in time to at least 2012/13. I guess I can finally finish Dead Space...

Actually, expanding my gaming horizons is no bad thing. But I would feel a touch disappointed if I signed up to Steam, and then had to lock myself out of so many genres of game.

It may be unfair, but at the moment the Surface Pro feels likes a compromise machine that's been priced as a Jack-of-all-Trades.

detroit20 wrote:

I don't need my new laptop/tablet to be Crysis 3-at-max-setting-capable, but I am put off by the fact the top spec version of the Surface Pro doesn't appear to be powerful enough to make the best use of a "brilliant" screen. It's a shame that the reviewer didn't define what constitute's light gaming. Perhaps unrealistically, I was hoping for something comparable to a current gen home console (PS4, rather than PS4 pro).

Photoshop, Lightroom, Illustrator etc. are all top notch uses of that brilliant screen. Not every device needs to be defined by its gaming capabilities.

That's not unfair at all - it is definitely a compromise machine, but isn't that what a Jack-Of-All-Trades machine is by definition? I don't expect any one machine to do something as well as individual, specialized single-focus machines - no matter what the price is. Even if you get some superpowered Alienware laptop, the compromise would be tiny battery life and heavy weight.

detroit20 wrote:

I'm ashamed to say that this caught my eye first.

"The Iris Plus 640 graphics will also be able to handle a little light gaming, but only with relatively low resolution and detail settings – there’s simply no substitute for a discrete GPU for gaming."

I don't need my new laptop/tablet to be Crysis 3-at-max-setting-capable, but I am put off by the fact the top spec version of the Surface Pro doesn't appear to be powerful enough to make the best use of a "brilliant" screen. It's a shame that the reviewer didn't define what constitute's light gaming. Perhaps unrealistically, I was hoping for something comparable to a current gen home console (PS4, rather than PS4 pro).

"It has no HDMI, no ethernet and no USB-C ports, which really hampers the Surface Pro’s futureproofing."

I think I'd miss the HDMI out... though my elderly current laptop (2008!!) doesn't have it, and I happily output NFL Gamepass games to my tv using it.

EDIT: Just found some more reviews.

Tech Radar mentions: "As for gaming, again, anything beyond Hearthstone is going to result in a poor experience."

And I've just noticed that most of the reviews I can find are for the Surface Pro with the i-7 processor. I can only stretch to the i-5.

Until the time that onboard CPU GPU's can actually match even the cheapest discrete GPU I'm not sure what you were expecting from the Surface Pro line.. Honestly this isnt a Surface issue but rather a reality of what can realistically fit on a CPU die. There is a reason discrete GPU's are the size they are.. Die Size, Memory, Heat all are factors into what make a discrete GPU run circles around anything stuck on a CPU die.

Thankfully there are plenty of cheap gaming laptops with Nvidia 1050 GPU's that will perform reasonably well at 1080P with many games.. Naturally they will have sub 4 hour battery life.. weigh 4+ Lbs and generally be nothing like a Surface Pro.

As for the lack of HDMI theres zero reason to go with HDMI on a laptop today.. The Thunderbolt Connector is far more versatile than just HDMI. You can get either a MiniDisplay Port to HDMI dongle.. or just carry a MiniDisplay Port to HDMI cable and you will have no issues connected to the HDMI port on a TV.

As for Ethernet.. again in that form factor you couldn't even physically fit an Ethernet Port on a Surface Pro so that omission is completely understandable. Most Ultrabooks don't even come with Ethernet let alone a two in one like the Surface Pro.

A second USB C port would have been nice in addition to the regular USB port.. I give them that criticism.

dewalist wrote:

That's not unfair at all - it is definitely a compromise machine, but isn't that what a Jack-Of-All-Trades machine is by definition? I don't expect any one machine to do something as well as individual, specialized single-focus machines - no matter what the price is. Even if you get some superpowered Alienware laptop, the compromise would be tiny battery life and heavy weight.

That's a perfect way to put it. That's why whenever someone says, "I'm thinking about getting a tablet" or, "I'm thinking about getting a laptop" and are considering a Surface I'm sure to tell them all of the pros and cons of the device.

In my opinion, Microsoft had a win with the Surface Book form factor. If they could get the price down and better battery life for the tablet they could truly have an all-in-one device.

dewalist wrote:

That's not unfair at all - it is definitely a compromise machine, but isn't that what a Jack-Of-All-Trades machine is by definition? I don't expect any one machine to do something as well as individual, specialized single-focus machines - no matter what the price is. Even if you get some superpowered Alienware laptop, the compromise would be tiny battery life and heavy weight.

Yes, I suppose the two are synonyms.

But for £1,000 it appears I can buy a touch-enabled pivoting laptop from HP with a graphics card.

EDIT: No, I can't for £1000.

dewalist wrote:

That's not unfair at all - it is definitely a compromise machine, but isn't that what a Jack-Of-All-Trades machine is by definition? I don't expect any one machine to do something as well as individual, specialized single-focus machines - no matter what the price is. Even if you get some superpowered Alienware laptop, the compromise would be tiny battery life and heavy weight.

But I think that's the issue here... the implication is that there's nothing that the surface does particularly well, but there are plenty of reviews from the creative/design side of the user base that praise the surface line.

There is a space out there where the Surface's capabilities and price point make it a 1st choice device for some. That's not gamers though.

Agreed! So far it has been near-perfect for me - a light (enough) tablet with a keyboard that runs Windows and plays the occasional indie game that isn't available on the PS4. Of course, I wish it had been cheaper and have a bigger battery, but that's the case with almost every tech purchase I've ever made.

I have the old Surface Pro 4 - an i7 version - and it manages Borderlands 2 full screen with no problem. Paired with a plug in xbox controller, it makes a great travel machine.

Between gaming (it manages Civ 6 nicely as well), reading, watching downloaded movies, and browsing when I have connectivity (and I hotspot my phone a lot) it covers almost all my needs.

Actually, expanding my gaming horizons is no bad thing. But I would feel a touch disappointed if I signed up to Steam, and then had to lock myself out of so many genres of game.

I think you'd be stunned at just how many Steam games manage just fine on an i7 Surface Pro 4. I play a bunch of my backlog...

O.k. I'm back on the Surface Pro train; you guys are very persuasive. The price is still a 'ouch!' though.

I do think that Microsoft might want to rethink how they pitch the Surface Pro. From their website:

The most versatile laptop
Better than ever, the new Surface Pro gives you a best-in-class laptop, plus the versatility of a studio and tablet. The stunning PixelSense Display supports Surface Pen1 and touch, while up to 13.5 hours of battery life2 gives you plenty of juice to work all day and play all night.

What's wrong with that description. It's a very powerful laptop with all the ability to run desktop programs for content creation and video production. Artists seem to love it because the pen is pretty good and the new pen seems so far even better.

They don't claim anywhere that it's a gaming laptop so I don't think anyone is getting duped by that description.

All laptop manufacturers seem to overestimate their battery life, but I expect the i3 version might get close to 13 hours with wireless off, the screen turned down low, and doing simple tasks like reading a book.

I don't disagree with much of what you say. However, I do wonder whether what Microsoft means by "play all night" is what many buyers would understand by "play all night".

Me? I'd understand that play to mean games. Particularly, I'd bought the top of the range i7 processor.

"The Surface Pro. Brilliant for everything... except playing video games."

I understand the limiting factors of the tablet form. But it does seem odd given that Microsoft is a developer, publisher, platform provider and hardware seller.

General rule of thumb: NEVER consider a laptop of any kind a gaming laptop unless it is explicitly stated as such.

detroit20 wrote:

I don't disagree with much of what you say. However, I do wonder whether what Microsoft means by "play all night" is what many buyers would understand by "play all night".

Me? I'd understand that play to mean games. Particularly, I'd bought the top of the range i7 processor.

"The Surface Pro. Brilliant for everything... except playing video games."

I understand the limiting factors of the tablet form. But it does seem odd given that Microsoft is a developer, publisher, platform provider and hardware seller.

You seem to be hung up on Intels lack of a quality onboard GPU. Did you expect Microsoft to warp time and space and fit a discrete GPU into a Surface Pro?

It's not odd it's just the reality of what is possible given today's technology. You might as well be upset that the Surface Pro doesn't also predict the correct outcome of every sporting event.

"Play" is a generic word and it's not automatic to assume that Play means play all of today's graphically intense games at 60fps with Ultra details.

You are looking at making Microsoft at fault for some sort of false advertising but you are the first person I've ever encountered that took one look at a Surface Pro and assumed it was going to be a gaming laptop.

Also, I don't know of ANY laptop of any size that has an i7 processor and can play games for more than a couple of hours at best... It just takes too much horsepower to run relatively modern games, and battery tech just can't keep up.

That is a fine rule! But I think it's a rule that highlights a grey area: laptops that are capable of playing games, but that aren't explicitly gaming laptops.

Take Dell, for example. Their Alienware 15 is explicitly advertised as a gaming laptop, and boasts a NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1070 with 8GB GDDR5. Their XPS 15 isn't advertised as a gaming laptop, but has a NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1050 with 4GB GDDR5, and so - presumably - is a machine that is capable of playing games well.

Many moons ago, when Detroit20 had long flowing locks rather than a balding pate, this wasn't an issue. There were just desktop PCs and laptops. The only limiting factor when it came to games was RAM and processing power. A game would run on a 386 machine, but not on a 286.

I like to think that I'm reasonably savvy, but I feel very much out of my depth with PC specs now. I've got to check not only RAM and the processor, but also the storage (games are so darned big now) and whether there's a graphics card... and then maybe what graphics card it is. I just can't keep up any more.

I understand your pain. It's very confusing to buy much of anything as a consumer. Years ago Microsoft tried to "resolve" this by having PC's get a "score" that measured amongst other things gaming performance. The publishers then were supposed to put the min and recommended numbers on the box but that all fell apart naturally.

So now you basically have to look at the min CPU and most importantly the min GPU. But even then as GPU's mature it's not obvious how older GPU's stack up against newer GPU's. For example is an Nvidia 1050Ti more powerful than an Nvidia 980Ti I mean 1050 is more than 980 so you would think right? But nope.

But as a rule you should know that the onboard GPU's for Intel CPU's are only for light indie 2D gaming.

I was absentmindedly browsing Amazon Prime Day earlier, and came across a Surface Pro 4 begins sold at 40% off (£450 odd vs £800)... and I didn't buy it.

A bit of a brain fart, I think. I was thinking about it being a Surface Pro 4 rather than brand new Surface Pro. And I was thinking about them being discounted even further in the future. And I was thinking about the wisdom of impulse purchases.

When I abruptly came to my sense 10 minutes later, they had all gone...

No more than I deserved.

I bought my Surface Pro last week (Intel Core i5 / 128GB SSD / 4GB RAM, plus a 128GB Micro SD card), and I'm really pleased with it. Much smaller and more portable than my old (2008!!) HP laptop, with the additional flexibility of being able to use it in tablet mode.

The biggest surprise for me has been the type-cover keyboard: it's actually pretty good for touch typing, so I'm hoping it will also be usable for gaming too. The track pad will be useless as a mouse substitute though.

I've already downloaded Steam, and gone large by buying £100 worth of credits. I'm not sure with what game(s) to mark my return to PC gaming. Any suggestions?

My Surface Pro's specs mean that I'll likely to be confined to pre-2013 or so.

Focus on indie 2d games over anything with lots of polygons. It can probably run older 3D titles but nothing modern. The onboard graphics on the i5 are pretty woeful.

Stellaris works well on my older Surface Pro 4, but it is an i7 so YMMV.

I was able to run HotS (low settings), Guild Wars 2 (low settings), Endless Legend with my i5 Pro 3.

Otherwise I agree, stick to 2d games. It was great for binding of isasc and dungeon of the endless.

My SurfacePro 3 died. I was deep in the middle of an XCOM mission when all of a sudden it powered down. No matter what I did, even following all the Microsoft recovery steps, I could not power it up again. And of course, my warranty expired in November of last year.

Microsoft was very nice to me, though. I took it into the local store, they confirmed it was dead, and they offered me a deal on a SurfacePro 4 as a replacement. $600 for the i5/8GB/256GB model, the same configuration I had on my SP3. So, not exactly the latest and greatest, but not bad as far as deals go to get back up and running.