BSEL Mod on a socket P explained with photos

[tilleroftheearth]

Not a gamer; but GT 540M or even 555M is not 'devasting' for gaming...

The price sure looks attractive - but I would be seriously looking at this with 8GB RAM and the i7 2670QM (at a minimum) at this point in time.

If this system is dual hard drive bay capable: buy one with the cheapest HDD's you can order it with (or, make sure that the wiring/connectors are available/installed when you do want to upgrade this and put in an SSD+HDD combo).

Is there a reason why their systems are offered so cheap? Usually, you get what you pay for.

[chris89]

From what I have heard they're actually just simply amazingly designed laptops and price match according to the current economy. They design their laptops to upgrade with ease. Removing 1 large panel underneath to get to everything including the cpu, memory, and gpu. That alone makes it amazing. They also take a lot of care in making sure everything stays cool. I'm now considering the ASUS g53SW which is $899 and offers the 2630QM and a GTX 460M MXM board card. They say it isn't upgradable. I find that extremely far fetched. MXM cards are expensive. According to Eurocom laptop upgrade for the Racer laptop it's pretty expensive but they sell all types of MXM graphic cards. The GTX460M is pretty damn good. I mean I'm used to my desktop which is an i7 930 @ 4,200Mhz with hyperthreading enabled, 6GB DDR3-1600, and 2 GTX470's at 800Mhz in SLI. My desktop is simply devastating. I mean when I started looking for another laptop to replace my gateway m-6827 core 2 duo t5750 and x3100 gpu. I just wanted something that I could simply play games on unlike this stupid gateway with intel graphics. I'm starting to think I want a laptop that's pretty portable but will kill new games at high settings. The downside to the ASUS G53SW is the fact you have to remove the entire damn motherboard to get to upgrading the laptop which kinda sucks but if you want something similar from Eurocom it's gonna run you atleast $1,200 unlike the currently priced ASUS at $899.99 and a $100 mail in rebate that'll bring it to $799.99 from newegg. I mean at this point the ASUS has mixed reviews but I love ASUS and I have had a lot of luck with them in motherboards. I hate to have to dismantle the entire freakin laptop to get to anything. It's a pain dismantling laptops, right? Anyway I can't decide if I just want something like the FOX 2.0 or the upgradable ASUS with the MXM board. I mean I'm not looking to go all out, i'm just looking for something better than my gateway. Say I buy the ASUS G53SW with it's 2Ghz quad with hyperthreading turbo mode core i7 that'll kick it up to damn near 3Ghz per core under load and that pretty damn good GTX 460M. Then later down the road the 460M is outdated, and according to Eurocom's site it's gonna run me between $320-$1,000 to upgrade the gpu mxm board to the 470M, 560M, 570M, (insane) 585M @ $790, Quadro 5010M @ $2,495(otherwise known as the price of a used civic), or even the Radeon 6970M @ but i want Optimus. So what do you guy's think? Sorry for moving this thread off subject but in a way it's kind of on subject (lol not really, you tell me).

My choices now are between the FOX 2.0 Core i7 or if i choose core i5 to save $44, the GT 540M or 555M which would damn well be plenty @ $858 with the core i7. Otherwise I could get the ASUS G53SW @ $899 with a $100 rebate. Or I could just say I don't really care and I want something that'll play all games at low setting and a core i3 or i5 at under $550. So I just don't know, later.

[tilleroftheearth]

Probably off topic.

But a $320 - $1,000 'upgrade' is a poor way to view notebooks.

At that time, simply buy another (modern/current platform) with almost the same money (at least at the higher end of your upgrade estimate) for much more performance and a warranty too.

Don't think that all MXM cards are upgradeable: they're not.

Also, there is no such thing as an 'upgradeable' notebook. If there was, I would still be running my 20 yrs old ThinkPAD instead of the mushy things they call a 'keyboard' now on mobile systems.

With that kind of money to spend, think of spending it continuously (on new systems) rather than spending it all at once on a so called 'upgradeable' notebook or part(s).

The only thing worth upgrading a notebook on is the O/S, RAM and the HDD/SSD (if each is applicable and/or do-able).

Nobody price matches according to the current economy. They price their products to move. If they could sell them at the same volume at double the cost (to you/me), they would - in the wink of an eye.

[chris89]

So back to my merom laptop. I put windows 7 back on it and RMClock really's isn't doing anything other than voltages. I set performance on demand and locked it to x12 and it still goes up and down with no regard to my setting in rmclock. It also lags between 1Ghz and 2Ghz or any transition lags a bit. Windows xp transistioned much smoother. Also noticing a constant 50% cpu usage from rmclock and windows task manager shows 0%. Rmclock is insanely buggy in windows 7. Any suggestions on the perferct configuration for windows 7 to not control anything and all rmclock 100% control or something?

[naton]

Not sure what to suggest since for me RMclock works perfectly either under XP or Win7. Are you running RMclock as an administrator?

If you're planning to lock the CPU under one speed\multiplier you should consider using the "power saving" and "maximal performance" instead of "performance in demand".

My CPU is locked at x6 (600MHz) in the "power saving" profile. I do see occasionally the frequency fluctuate to 800Mhz. This is not suppose to happen but it sometimes does. I can't tell you if this happens because of a bug in RMclock or if it because of the architecture of the CPU.

[chris89]

Originally Posted by naton

Not sure what to suggest since for me RMclock works perfectly either under XP or Win7. Are you running RMclock as an administrator?

If you're planning to lock the CPU under one speed\multiplier you should consider using the "power saving" and "maximal performance" instead of "performance in demand".

My CPU is locked at x6 (600MHz) in the "power saving" profile. I do see occasionally the frequency fluctuate to 800Mhz. This is not suppose to happen but it sometimes does. I can't tell you if this happens because of a bug in RMclock or if it because of the architecture of the CPU.

I uninstalled RMClock on my core2duo laptop and run through the windows power options and it actually works beautifully. You set your min and max frequencies and your profile of passive or active which tells how quickly to jump up the frequency. However windows power options drops the voltage to the minimum just like rmclock would do but on windows 7, the integrated power options are extremely efficient. Rmclock isn't intended for windows 7 but since windows xp didn't manipulate the voltages as much RMClock was necessary. Anway I'm getting great battery life without rmclock getting in the way. Locked at x6 0 min 0 max on battery at 1Ghz gets me like 2.5 hours of battery life compared to before when windows and rmclock were constantly battling over control it would only get about 1.5 to 1.75 hours on battery.

Later

*by the way my new laptop with the gt 540m is very good and it does dx11 tesellation excellently at 720p and all high at playable framerates which thats all that matters. It's a powerful fermi based chip.

[naton]

Originally Posted by chris89

I uninstalled RMClock on my core2duo laptop and run through the windows power options and it actually works beautifully. You set your min and max frequencies and your profile of passive or active which tells how quickly to jump up the frequency. However windows power options drops the voltage to the minimum just like rmclock would do but on windows 7, the integrated power options are extremely efficient. Rmclock isn't intended for windows 7 but since windows xp didn't manipulate the voltages as much RMClock was necessary. Anway I'm getting great battery life without rmclock getting in the way. Locked at x6 0 min 0 max on battery at 1Ghz gets me like 2.5 hours of battery life compared to before when windows and rmclock were constantly battling over control it would only get about 1.5 to 1.75 hours on battery.

Later

*by the way my new laptop with the gt 540m is very good and it does dx11 tesellation excellently at 720p and all high at playable framerates which thats all that matters. It's a powerful fermi based chip.

Good to hear that you fixed it

[noric]

What an awesome guide! Congrats!
I own the notebook in sig. As you can see I've replaced the cpu with a X9100 and I'm now wondering if it'd be possible to downvolt it via pinmod. Infact the minimum voltage is way too high (1,05V).
I use Throttlestop and I've seen that with that voltage the cpu is orthos-stable @2,93GHz (that is just a half multiplier below maximum clock).
At maximum clock (3,06GHz) the cpu is stable @1,0875V, while at default the voltage at 3,06GHz is 1,2375V.
Now I'm wondering, what would be the best way to lower voltage by pinmod? Especially the minimum, since it can't be modified by Throttlestop. But if possible the maximum too, since I dual boot Linux and there's no throttlestop for linux!

[naton]

Originally Posted by noric

What an awesome guide! Congrats!
I own the notebook in sig. As you can see I've replaced the cpu with a X9100 and I'm now wondering if it'd be possible to downvolt it via pinmod. Infact the minimum voltage is way too high (1,05V).
I use Throttlestop and I've seen that with that voltage the cpu is orthos-stable @2,93GHz (that is just a half multiplier below maximum clock).
At maximum clock (3,06GHz) the cpu is stable @1,0875V, while at default the voltage at 3,06GHz is 1,2375V.
Now I'm wondering, what would be the best way to lower voltage by pinmod? Especially the minimum, since it can't be modified by Throttlestop. But if possible the maximum too, since I dual boot Linux and there's no throttlestop for linux!

Edited on the 22/03/2012:

Vcore 1.2375v, means VID6543210 = 0010101

You can try VID3 + Vcc

Before mod ------------- after mod
1.2125v to 1.2375v --> 1.1125v to 1.1375v
1.1125v to 1.2000v --> 1.1125v to 1.2000v (remains the same)
1.0500v to 1.1000v --> 0.9500v to 1.0000v

This should allow you to go as low as 0.95 while still being able to boot @ 3.06GHz. The only issue with this mod is you'll be losing access to all the Vcores between 1.0125 and 1.1000 including 1.0125 and 1.1000.

[noric]

Hi naton!
I don't understand: isn't VID3 + VCC supposed to lower the voltage by 0,1V? And not by 0,2V?

Thank you.