Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Confirms Surface Book 2 Can't Stay Charged During Gaming Sessions (engadget.com)
The Verge mentioned in their review that the Surface Book 2's power supply can't charge the battery fast enough to prevent it from draining in some cases. Microsoft has since confirmed that "in some intense, prolonged gaming scenarios with Power Mode Slider set to 'best performance' the battery may discharge while connected to the power supply." Engadget reports: To let you choose between performance and battery life, the Surface Book has a range of power settings. If you're doing video editing or other GPU intensive tasks, you can crank it up to "best performance" to activate the NVIDIA GPU and get more speed. Battery drain is normally not an issue with graphics apps because the chip only kicks in when needed. You'll also need the "best performance" setting for GPU-intensive games, as they'll slow down or drop frames otherwise. The problem is that select titles like Destiny 2 use the NVIDIA chip nearly continuously, pulling up to 70 watts of power on top of the 35 watt CPU. Unfortunately, the Surface Book comes with a 102-watt charger, and only about 95 watts of that reaches the device, the Verge points out. Microsoft says that the power management system will prevent the battery from draining completely, even during intense gaming, but it would certainly mess up your Destiny 2 session. It also notes that the machine is intended for designers, developers and engineers, with the subtext that it's not exactly marketed as a gaming rig.
How about a nice game of TicTacToe?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
That is spelled WOPR.
War
Operation
Plan
Response
The only way to win is not to play.
Nope. Takes too much from battery.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Depends on which base you do the calculation.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
The only win is if you don't buy it.
Learn to read. Of the 102 Watts the power supply draws only 95 reach the battery. So that's 10 watt shy of the 105 (70+35) Watts needed, ergo the battery drains when playing Destiny 2. Nothing more, nothing less.
Sig?
Both of them?
I'm a leet pirate gamer and I pirate all my games and I pirate all my movies and I've watched WarGames a hundred times and I never paid for WarGame and in real life I look just like the neckbearded guy on the Mr Robot show and you know which guy I mean and I fucked Alexa and I can fit the whole Alexa speaker up my anus and I didn't buy Alexa either because she's not a hooker and I don't pay for sex and I shoplifted Alexa from Best Buy and we're in love and Alexa is my girlfriend.
Batteries are one of those things that Microsoft has a tough time getting right in their hardware products. The Xbox One Controller "Play and Charge Kit" absolutely sucks. The rechargeable battery it comes with doesn't charge after about 3 months, giving you ~20min of play time before the controller dies. Might as well keep using AA batteries and not waste the money. Same issue with the Xbox 360 play and charge kits. Back in the day the Zune had battery issues as well. I guess we can add the Surface Book 2 to the rooster of Microsoft doing batteries wrong.
Who actually green lights a power supply that can't keep a device charged under full load?
Seriously.
Starting at $2,499 ($1,499 for the 13.5-inch model), the 15-inch Surface Book 2 is $100 more than a comparable MacBook Pro and is at the very high end of the laptop market.
I thought only Apple sold overpriced laptops? Turns out if you want the power that used to be only available in a desktop and in the form factor of a portable device then you have to pay for it. The article even ends with a comment that the choice between Apple and Microsoft is mostly over OS preference not price/performance.
It seems part of the problem here is the choice of USB-C for charging. That connector is limited to 100 watts. If they want to make a laptop that sucks down more than 100 watts under heavy load then they should have used a different connector for charging.
They mention the lack of ThunderBolt on the Surface Book 2, this reminds me of the previous rantings on Slashdot of being unable to tell a USB cable from a ThunderBolt cable. I looked into this and found this complaint is just ignorance. The people that hold the rights to the USB icon will only allow it's use on cables that meet the USB spec, if you don't see that symbol on the cable then the cable might not be able to pass a USB signal. Same for ThunderBolt, if it has the ThunderBolt symbol then it's rated for ThunderBolt. There's even symbols for the different speed ratings of cables, so complaining of a USB cable not being "super speed" is just not checking the markings. Complaining about being unable to tell a USB cable from a ThunderBolt cable is no different than complaining about being unable to tell cables apart with the old 25 pin connectors. You can tell the serial cables from the parallel cables from the SCSI cables by looking for the cable markings. If your cable doesn't have markings then you are not only an idiot but you are a cheap idiot for buying cheap cables and then complaining you can't tell them apart.
When it comes to the different power ratings of USB-C cables and power supplies I'm not sure I see a problem here either. I'm pretty sure all the power supplies will have markings indicating their maximum wattage ratings. Unlike trying to use a 10 amp 120 volt extension cord to plug in a coffeepot it's not possible to melt the USB-C cable for exceeding the power rating of a cable. The cable will have a chip telling the power supply what it's current carrying capacity is, not have the wires for high current, or simply not have any power wires at all. If you are melting USB-C cables then you have a serious failure, either in the hardware or in mental capacity for thinking you can use a no name unmarked cable to charge a 100 watt computer.
If people complain about a computer that came with a 100 watt power supply and that power supply can't keep the computer charged then who's the bigger idiot? The people that designed the computer this way or the people that bought it? The $2500 price tag just adds to the idiocy.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
if you buy a Surface Book 2, and even stupider if you game on one.
Signed,
humanity
the fucking power brick (literally)
The power brick is literally copulating? With what?
Why would you try to play games other than FreeCell or Minesweeper on a Surface?!
It's not the USB C connector, Macs with the older MagSafe one have the same problem. It's a design decision.
The issue is that they want to sell a small, under-powered charger. It has to be thin and light weight, rather than appropriately spec'ed. If they really wanted to they could sell a more powerful charger and just use two USB C ports to supply 200W.
This also means that if^H^H when your battery is dead in a couple of years your Surface won't work properly any more.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Not a PSU that can handle the system, that's for sure.
It's not the USB C connector, Macs with the older MagSafe one have the same problem. It's a design decision.
What same problem? Being unable to maintain a charge with the included charger under load? I did not know that was an issue. I'm not saying it didn't happen, only that I have not heard of it elsewhere and I have not experienced it myself. I have two MagSafe laptops, one ten years old and the other five. Both stay charged from 85 watt chargers. This tells me that the laptops and chargers were designed with matching power draw to power supplied.
The issue is that they want to sell a small, under-powered charger. It has to be thin and light weight, rather than appropriately spec'ed. If they really wanted to they could sell a more powerful charger and just use two USB C ports to supply 200W.
I recall from previous uses of two USB cables to draw sufficient power for a device that the USB Implementer Forum frowned on this practice. I know it's been done, that's without doubt. Calling this good practice does seem suspect. I'd think offering a single charging connection to meet all power demands would not only be logical but also not appear as a hack to get around a poor design decision. The Surface family of devices also use the SurfaceConnect port, does that provide more than 100 watts? I've been looking and I can find very little that is definitive on this port.
This also means that if^H^H when your battery is dead in a couple of years your Surface won't work properly any more.
That's far from unique to Microsoft.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
What same problem? Being unable to maintain a charge with the included charger under load? I did not know that was an issue.
Yes. On older models with a removable battery the OS would limit CPU performance when the battery was not installed because of this. Obviously newer models glue the battery in.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It's not Apple, that's what.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Clearly lies from the third word in. Any 1337 gamer would know that.
Reading comprehension challenge I fear. He means it's literally a brick.
That's probably why it can't charge the laptop fast enough.
It's a "power brick." So I can only assume it is an energon cube. Hopefully that could charge their laptop.
...
"in certain circumstances" so it might be fine 98% of the time. Remember that Microsoft is also a relatively new player in the computer hardware market. Apple, Dell, Toshiba have been at it for decades and therefore had time to learn from several power issues with their portable computers. Microsoft is essentially trying to leapfrog everyone with mitigated success.
Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
It has been speculated that perhaps the charger connector can't handle any more power and they wanted people who bought the original Surface to be able to use their chargers.
Thing is that makes no sense - it's not like the Surface devices sold all that well and neither did the Surface Book and if you're making something like a Surface device or a Macbook you shouldn't worry about back compatibility - the device only has to work with the charger it comes with.
Apple have changed their charger port a fair few times - MagSafe 1, MagSafe 2 and now USB C and it's pretty clear that Surface is Microsoft's latest attempt at copying Apple's misfeatures in order to compete with them. Completely missing the point that people put up with Apple's misfeatures because want to run OS-X and Apple is the sole hardware vendor. It's not like anyone actually likes them.
I think they just decided to save a few bucks by not redesigning the connector so they could charge the battery in worst case power usage.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Of course I am not assuming the other stuff is not using any power. I'm merely explaining what was written in the OP.
Sig?
As blindseeer pointed out, the accessory decision and the acknowledgement of the power delivery of that accessoy not being enough is one problem, but a solution to the problem remains a grey area. So...
Does the Surface 2's power input and/or battery support a stronger power supply? (and if it does) How many more nanoseconds before it becomes available as an option, or you provide the option for a free exchange for the current one?
Because the fact they are stating " the machine is intended for designers, developers and engineers, with the subtext that it's not exactly marketed as a gaming rig", to me, sounds just like a LAME excuse for one of 2 things: either not recalling the PSU and replacing it with a stronger one or...; NOT ADMITTING THERE WAS A DESIGN FLAW and not a market scope decision.
In either case, "positioning" the product for whatever is NEVER an excuse for something so EASY to accomplish as increasing electric power delivery. Microsoft is making it look like there is some technology limitation as if no 15'' laptop ever used above 100w... MS is starting to look a lot like the Apple reality distortion field with it's "can't disable updates" or "can't disable data collection", now pulling the "can't provide more of the electricity you have at home to the laptop" argument to the table.
How about a nice game of TicTacToe?
Yes, playing this game would certainly give away that you were a Jill Stein voter.
They call me a space cowboy.
If we can establish: ...
-The order of the digits is: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
70+35 =/= 95 in any base
Some more thoughts on the matter:
-The base is at least 10, because the digit 9 is mentioned.
0 + 5 == '5' and doesn't overflow for any base >= 6.
7 + 3 == '11' in base 9, '10' in base 10, and a non-overflowing '10th' digit in any base > 10, let's say, 'A'. It can never be '9'.
In case of a fractional base, the range of values lies between the two natural bases that surround it. It doesn't give us extra options to get to '95' as an answer.
In case of a negative base, many values need a digit more to be represented compared to the positive base of the same size. The values themselves will be equal or larger in the negative base to make room for the values that have a '-' sign in the positive base. So that doesn't help us either.
Base zero works.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
My Natural keyboard begs to differ.
Er, what makes you think it uses USB-C for charging? It like all the other recent Surface devices uses a Surface Connect connector for charging. You can charge it via the USB-C port but Microsoft don't supply such a power adaptor.
My biggest beef with the Surface power supply is that it comes with a USB-A connector for charging stuff up. It would have been super nice if they had also but a couple extra connectors on the Surface Connect plug and run two wires back to the power supply so that port was also an actual USB port connected to the computer. Would have cost all of say a dollar to do, and would have been so handy because a standard PSU could have been used as a dock for a lot less money than the proper dock with the proviso that you could not use the screen. Would have worked really well for me.
This thing is just an epic fail. It is a piece of a junk. Microsoft is just not a hardware company and every attempt that it makes to develop a piece of hardware ends up a failure.
Back in the day, they made excellent keyboards (loved the original natural keyboard.) As much as I dislike Xbox, I would hardly call any of the iterations failures. "Every attempt" is a little heavy handed. A lot of their other attempts would have likely been successful if they didn't insist on running their software on it. Heck, I'd say they are much better at hardware than software.
If it weren't for shady practices (particularly in the late 80s and 90s,) their software would have been long forgotten. I suspect a lot of their hardware ventures fail because they don't have the same opportunities to compete unfairly in these spaces. Their product has to measure up on its merits alone, and often that's not enough.
Power factor has nothing to do with it. Power factor defines how linear the load is - not the efficiency. Those old power bricks were horrible with regards to power factor. They just used diodes to turn the AC into DC resulting is surge loads on the main power line. Newer DCDC converters distribute the load making it act more like a resistor. No 60Hz transformer and less required capacitance are the real reasons why modern power supplies are so much smaller. Overall an efficiency of ~90% is relatively standard.
Does the Surface 2's power input and/or battery support a stronger power supply?
From what I gather, the laptop uses a USB-C connector to charge, which is defined by the USB Power Delivery standard.
(I can't get information is the Surface Connector can be used for charging and if it follows the same standards and limitations).
USB PD, in its most recent revision supports up to 100W of power (by using thick wires able to hold 5A and using 20V).
So no, the 105W total consumption of the laptop in "Performance" settings, cannot be catered to by any currently available USB-C charger.
They should have :
- provided a special high-power charging solution (like any normal bigger laptop).
- or provided multiple USB-C charging port (clumsy, not recommended by standards maker)
- or provided a proprietary extension that enable Microsoft laptops and migros soft chargers to carry 125W (e.g.: able to negociate a special mode at 25V)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
it's not possible to melt the USB-C cable for exceeding the power rating of a cable.
Only those cables rated for >3A are electronically identified. So cheap USB-C cables can still burn up if they can not handle 3A of current. With a 3A current, most standard cables will have to dissipate 2W per meter of cable. Not that bad but if people go cheap and use 28AWG power conductors, like with some current USB cables, the resulting 4W load could cause things to start smoking.
I like their controllers better. The Playstation ones only feel ergonomic if I hold them upside down and use my fingers instead of my thumbs.
warring low battery deviating power to missile silos
the one ring does not have the power!
Was anyone else expecting the next line of this to include where they stuck that laptop? It's been almost 20 years since that movie came out...
Not just the chargers; the charging port also handles video/USB/etc. etc.. I would suspect they also don't want their docking ports to become useless.
Some older Macs I've had did this. Is was mostly a problem if you used a smaller MagSafe brick than was included with the machine. MagSafe came in 45, 60, and 85 watt versions. You could plug any of them into any machine, and it would work. The difference was like plugging a modern phone into an old 500mA USB port versus a 2.4A quick charge.
My partner & I had 13" and 15" MBP's at one point. My 15" came with an 85 watt brick and her 13" with the 60 watt. Running my 15" on her brick made the brick get hotter than normal and would result in just *barely* maintaining the charge (not actually increasing) if I was doing heavy CPU/GPU stuff.
P=I*V
Microsoft has plenty of examples successful hardware: keyboards, mice, the sidewinder joystick, video game controllers and systems.
Coming up with a device that embodies in itself the disadvantages of a laptop and the shortcomings of a tablet is exactly what one would expect MS to do.
"Unlike trying to use a 10 amp 120 volt extension cord to plug in a coffeepot it's not possible to melt the USB-C cable for exceeding the power rating of a cable."
This is actually wrong and we even had a story right here on /. about a guy finding wrongly-specced USB-C charging cables (and their subsequent failures) on Amazon and similar sites. Doesn't matter telling the system you can handle 5 amps when you're using 32AWG wiring, the shit will fucking blow at 5 amps because you can't push that much current down that small of a wire.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
They could put one of those normal PC laptop barrel connectors in as well and supply a 105W charger for that.
You can buy them in volume for like $10 each.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Doesn't matter telling the system you can handle 5 amps when you're using 32AWG wiring, the shit will fucking blow at 5 amps because you can't push that much current down that small of a wire.
Isn't this something you can detect with an intelligent charger? Device asks for x watts, you try to deliver x watts and it doesn't arrive, device says "I'm only getting x/y watts" and the charger reduces output? What fucking year is it?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Only those cables rated for >3A are electronically identified.
My mistake. This just means that a device assumes a low ampere cable unless told otherwise.
So cheap USB-C cables can still burn up if they can not handle 3A of current.
Right, that's what I said. If you get cables with the USB logo on it then it's been tested for the current carrying capacity. Lacking that logo it can burn up on you.
With a 3A current, most standard cables will have to dissipate 2W per meter of cable. Not that bad but if people go cheap and use 28AWG power conductors, like with some current USB cables, the resulting 4W load could cause things to start smoking.
Right, so don't buy cheap cables. Which was my point.
Are you saying that even cables with the USB logo will burn up? I'll find that hard to believe. Even if the spec was somehow lacking and would allow for such cables to get the logo I'm pretty sure that name brand cable makers would then exceed the spec and/or the spec would be revised so melting cables would be rare on the market pretty quickly.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
So we have to interpret tiny embossed markings in order to tell them apart? I don't think you understand what "looks pretty much the same" means.
I do understand what that means, and this is not a new problem. We've had this problem for a long time and the solution has existed for a long time. We label our cables. If you cannot be bothered to look for the label then that's your problem.
We've been re-using connectors for a long time now. I gave the 25 pin connector example already. There's also the DE-9 connector, that could be used for a number of serial or video connections. The RJ-45 can be Ethernet, serial, telephone, and more. There's those mini-DIN cables with there various number of pins that require a close look on how many pins it's got and what kind of device it uses. This is not a new problem.
It might be new to people used to laptops from just a few months ago, where every device type had a unique connector, video had one shape, USB had another, power a different shape, and ThunderBolt a different one yet. Now that they all use the same connector people are going to have to take a closer look at the cable, or take care to buy quality cables for everything so it doesn't matter which one they pick up from their bag.
Personally I find USB-C a net gain.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Did they have a USB logo? Or, did they just have the USB shaped connector?
It's possible that some of those early connectors somehow was able to slip by with getting the logo on the connector and still not meet spec but that's growing pains that most anything new goes through.
I bought one of those cables without a USB logo on it. It was from a respectable cable maker but they made it clear that it was not a USB cable. I missed that detail when I bought it though. I was kind of bummed that it could only pass power but not data, at first anyway. Now I kind of like the idea of a quality "USB-C like" power cable rated for 60 watts that cannot pass data, it protects my devices from having someone try to hack in on a suspicious power port.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
It has been speculated that perhaps the charger connector can't handle any more power and they wanted people who bought the original Surface to be able to use their chargers.
The "speculators" would be wrong.
The power connector on the original Surface "1" and 2 is different from the connector on the Surfaces that followed.
Maybe he was referring to War Games (ok, likely). Or, maybe he was just a hungry lil' AC. Because, it's always a good time for flame-broiled, 80's goodness.
sig: sauer
First - Why link to an Engadget article talking/linking to a Verge article that is clickbait/repeat from the original Verge article. wtf... Second - At max loading in the described Destiny 2/max performance setting quandry, it was "at least" 10% an hour. One could literally play for more than 9 hours NON-STOP before draining the battery. This is a concern for... who exactly? Hard core gamers that wear a diaper and didn't buy a gaming rig?
They do, but when it happens you have to take the battery out, flip it, and put it back in. So your gaming session is interrupted.
If the Surface Book 3 has auto reverse we'll be set.
Well, I guess I'm part of the idiocy then, I just bought one. I also owned the original surface book. I'm a greybeard, been doing this since TRS-80. Was linux guy for a long time till OSX was a better linux, then did macs. I only say all this to provide some context, I'm really far from being a ms fanboi.
The Surface Book devices are hands down the best computing devices I've ever owned. Not even close to anything else. And yes, I've owned and still own top-end Macs, top-end System 76 Linux boxes, etc...
Windows 10 is a delight. With WSL enabled, I have everything I want and need immediately available. The precision touchpad on the surface book is the only one I've ever used that's comparable to a mac, and works amazingly well. I set up three or for different desktops and four-finger brush between them, and three finger brush between apps in a desktop. This is better than the OSX experience.
The battery drain issue is overblown imho and experience. I played Divinity 2 dialed all the way up for hours and the battery charged, albeit slowly.
Additionally, even if you're getting a drain, it's not like it's going to ruin your day. We're talking about like 5-10% per hour or something, plugged in. I mean, you can game for a really long time at max-awesome without any problem. And guess what. When you take a break to eat lunch, the laptop will be fully charged again when you're ready.
I had the same concern before I bought it, and then realized that basically this is a non-issue for real, practical purposes. This laptop is lightweight, has amazing engineering and unique features, a detachable tablet, and can play modern games without really working hard.
Hell, I played Divinity 2 on battery *alone* for almost three hours. I've never seen a laptop that can do that. Ever.
Considering that I spend 10-14 hours a day on my laptop, the $3k I paid for this one is well worth it.
Drinking habits can be dangerous. You can choke on the cloth and the nuns will wonder where their clothes are.
I'm not so sure. I'm typing this comment on a Surface Book, and I have to tell you, I really, really like it. I've used the Book for 2 years now, and it's been great--excluding the first couple months of firmware updates. It's fast, has a great form factor, has a rad touchpad, the screen is good, and it's cool to handwrite notes (I do way better with memory retention when I hand write, vs. typing notes; go figure). It's my daily driver and I run my business from it. I'd definitely like the 2, just for the quad-core.
Older Macbook Pro have this "feature", too, with their 85W power supply. Happened to me on my 2012 15" Macbook Pro, and it seems I was not the only one. For example, just a simple Google search shows discussions like https://discussions.apple.com/... or https://apple.stackexchange.co...
The vast majority of people are not going to look for a USB certification logo on their USB cable. And even with the logo, there is a strong possibility they could be fake. Pushing 3A through such a cable is pushing the boundaries of what can be performed safely. No doubt the USB consortium knows this which is why anything above 3A requires an active cable.
My point is that 3A is not a low current draw. 3A is 1/5 the maximum current for most household outlets that use 14 gauge conductors. For comparison, a 24 gauge USB cable (typical) providing 3A is like a 15A circuit (12A continuous) providing 30A continuous. For the cheap USB cables that use 28 gauge conductors, it is > 60A. Then to make it even worse, USB cables are less efficient at dissipating energy due to the small size. Should someone have the cable bundled up or in some way insulated - a fire could easily result. Oh, the resistance also increases with temperature so to make a long story short - it is definitely dangerous.
I really like the USB-C power delivery design. It is great but not perfect. In my opinion the 3A limit is a bit much - 1.5A would have been more reasonable.