*OFFICIAL* Alienware Area-51M R1 Owner's Lounge

Discussion in '2015+ Alienware 13 / 15 / 17' started by ssj92, Jan 8, 2019.

  1. S.K

    S.K Batch 80286

    Reputations:
    447
    Messages:
    976
    Likes Received:
    1,151
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Choose 1.3.2 over 1.3.0 because 1.3.2 has some noticeable "Performance Enhancements" or as Dell says, "Enhanced the performance of the system." on the download page, that are not in the base 1.3.0 version. For me, 1.3.2 feels A LOT snappier than 1.5.0. The new Intel micro code that they push with every new version of BIOS actually slows things down to some extent as well. But hey, you have all these versions at hand and now you can install any one of them without worrying about locks or limitations. So just try each and every one of them out and keep what works best for you.
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2019
  2. VoodooChild

    VoodooChild Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    519
    Messages:
    541
    Likes Received:
    1,014
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Great post! Truly appreciated. I'm now on 1.3.2 which I've never used before. Time to test it out!

    Sent from a Galaxy S9+

    Hey guys, the only remaining issue I have with this system is that I can't seem to be able to change the .icc profiles shared earlier in the thread. I've successfully added all of them to the Color Management profiles tab and its showing all of them. But when I click "set as default" to any one of them, it doesn't do anything.

    I used to use this on my old Windows 10 installation (M17xR3) flawlessly but something is not right with this one. Am I missing something here? Do I need to some extra Admin rights or something? Any tips will be appreciated. Thanks



    Sent from a Galaxy S9+
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 1, 2019
    S.K likes this.
  3. ahanganu

    ahanganu Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    26
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Hello everyone,

    Got a bit more time to toy with the 180W and 200W vbios. I am sorry I can't find the 190W one, on the website there is an older version but it seems to take you to the 200W one.

    1) The good news is that it's easy to upgrade/downgrade from them. With no external screen connected I had no issues. You can see it's a downgrade from the versions but it never complained about it, I swapped them 10 times now.

    2) My first impression (that it got hotter) was bad, thermals are better in 180W and it seems to be derived from lower voltages both value wise and the way the curve applies them to clock values.

    I've done each 2x Metro Exodus benchmarks Extreme runs with 200% shading (it's pretty much ultra @4K) with and without undervolting, all of them on Performance Fan profile.

    These are the results:

    upload_2019-6-1_10-8-16.png


    I still find it hilarious that undervolting yields better performance in both cases.

    What's not in the table is the fact that the average VCC for 180W is lower, maybe a wiser person can tell us if the performance drop is from that. Unfortunately I wasn't wise enough to write down the AVG too but it was noticeable to the naked eye. On the 200W it pretty much starts at 1.000 V and it goes up and down, while on 180W it started rather low (~800 mV) and only very rarely got past 1.000V. I actually never saw 1.025 in the MSI overlay and just got it from the GPU-Z max value, while on 200W I could read 1.060+ loud and clear.

    Personally I'll probably stick with undervolted 200W for now but It would be interesting to know if this 180W is actually intended to lower the burn risk. And truth be told, it might be worth the update, the performance difference is not mind bending and it seems to play it safer VCC wise.
     
    c69k, Xatanú, LoneSyndal and 3 others like this.
  4. JAGGERBREAD

    JAGGERBREAD Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    23
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Your temp limit got capped by the buggy awcc oc control, try apply any of the oc
    Profile and change to off to see performance boost and temp over 80. This is not the real thermal performance of a 2080 as the wall is set to 75
    play metro exodus longer to stress the temp
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2019
  5. clayton006

    clayton006 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    103
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    76
    1935 is my GPU speed. That’s higher than it was running at 69-74c
     
    VoodooChild and LoneSyndal like this.
  6. JAGGERBREAD

    JAGGERBREAD Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    23
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    56
    again, try to apply an oc profile in the AWCC , your temp wall is capped by a bug at 75c disable undervolt to see what happens.thermal stress at 80+ is actually normal for a rtx2080 in area51m
     
  7. clayton006

    clayton006 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    103
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    76
    I’m not hitting that bug with the current setup that I’m aware of. My temps are at 68c running at 1935mhz. I’m not concerned with trying to overclock the GPU.
     
  8. JAGGERBREAD

    JAGGERBREAD Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    23
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Would appreciate if you give us a before and after screenshot in furmark stress test per ten minutes if you are available. cuz that's the real thermal limit test for a system.
     
  9. Vasudev

    Vasudev Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    9,032
    Messages:
    10,839
    Likes Received:
    8,141
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Use DisplayCal to apply it at startup always. Windows 10 doesn't apply calibration profile correctly these days.
     
    VoodooChild likes this.
  10. clayton006

    clayton006 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    103
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    76
    I'm a little too leery of running furmark these days as I'm not trying to push my hardware to the thermal limit. Maybe Furmark has a bad rap for destroying cards or pushing them to an unrealistic workload. AIDA64 I imagine would be a better choice.

    My post was to respond to questions earlier about my undervolt and where my GPU clocks were sitting. I'm not running the latest BIOS but I wanted to see if I could keep my temps lower than 75c and it looks like I've been able to pull that off in the scenarios I would use the device in.
     
  11. LoneSyndal

    LoneSyndal Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    341
    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    529
    Trophy Points:
    106
    I lost $1500 to Furmark already. It is no longer taking my money. RIP Clevo 680m and GTX 980.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    S.K likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page