Clamibot

Has anyone else encountered an issue where touch input on a touchscreen won't register if the screen is running below its native refresh rate? If so, how did you resolve it? It never ceases to amaze me the vast amount of weirdo issues that pop up with hardware and software. As a software engineer and game dev, I see these things happen all the time, and I exect them to pop up very frequently.

@Mr. Fox Speaking of legal requirements, I think all motherboards present in all devices should be required by law to have a dual BIOS. Ones that don't should never be sold. I had a bit of a scare today when flashing a BIOS update on my Lenovo Legion Go. The device stupidly decided to shut off in the middle of the update. and the power button turned red. I got freaked out for a second but remembered I read somewhere before I got the device that it had a dual BIOS, so I powered it on and off a few times until something showed on the screen again, and then the update restarted and completed successfully the second time around. This is the first case of me ever seeing a dual BIOS in a handheld, which makes it pretty special in that regard. Had it been something like the Steam Deck or ROG Ally, I'd have been screwed. Good thing Lenovo had the foresight to include a dual BIOS in their handheld.

My 10900K in my X170 can do 5.2 GHz all cores while consuming around 215-220 watts of power. This is specifically when playing Jedi Fallen Order, a pretty CPU heavy game. Cinebench R15 runs make that spike up to around 245-250 watts. For giggles, I did try to see exactly how far I could push it, and I can manage 5.3 GHz all core in Cinebench R15 with the power draw spiking to 275 watts at the maximum. The laptop's cooling system on the CPU side can't handle this for very long and therefore I have never been able to complete a full run at that speed. Pushing it any higher results in a crash. It won't go any higher, regardless of how low I get the temperature. The good news is the power delivery on this laptop is very robust, so if you can manage to cool the CPU and have an excellent sample, you can push it very far in this laptop. I also acquired an even better sample from @Mr. Fox a while back that can do above 5.5 GHz all core as long as you keep the temperature below 60°C. Go any higher, and the system will crash regardless of how high you push the voltage. I did drop this sample in my X170 to see what it could do in a laptop, and that one did 5.4 GHz all core in Jedi Fallen Order at a slightly higher power draw (225 watts) as my first 10900K at 5.2 GHz all core (215-220 watts) in game. I use this super sample in my desktop now with the Cooler Master Masterliquid ML 360 Sub Zero cooler. The highest speed I've been able to achieve on this CPU so far with the TEC cooler on full blast is 5.7 GHz on 4 cores, and 5.6 GHz all core during Cinebench R15 runs. I don't remember what the power draw was at that speed, so I need to go measure that again. I just remember overwhelming my cooler after a while, but these speeds are definitely sustainable indefinitely for games. These are the results you can expect with super samples.

Yup. Mine has liquid metal plus the zTecpc mods, so it can cool a little over 200W sustained without the CPU thermal throttling. I definitely need that as pushing the CPU to the max + DXVK Async is the only way I can sustain 144 FPS in Jedi Fallen Order. This laptop is just awesome and it's a shame nobody has made a similar one ever since.

My recommendation to you if you still want a portable form factor in something that resembles a laptop is to look into military style or industrial portable PC cases. You can get something that essentially looks like a laptop from the 1990s but can house desktop parts inside. They're expensive cases but are really cool. One was featured in a recent LinusTechTips video as they build their own laptop using such a case. This was the case they used: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/New-design-16-1-Inch-LCD_1600578225544.html Looks like it may have enough space to even squeeze and ATX motherboard into based on the case dimensions. Note that you'll probably need to use a Flex ATX power supply with it. However, I wouldn't be surprised if someone managed to cram an SFX power supply into it. Have fun building your own *forever* upgradeable laptop! Edit: I did some more digging and the case officially fits up to a Micto ATX motherboard.

Happy new year everyone! I hope you all have an awesome fun filled day!

My real life usage experience so far is that the Optane SSD has done the following for me over a standard SSD: Much faster hibernation Much faster wake from hibernation Much faster loading times in open world games (Borderlands 3 loads 3X faster off the Optane 905P vs my Samsung 970 Evo Plus) Faster copying of large batches of small files Faster load times for Unity projects Faster webpage loading times Faster code compilation Faster game builds Slightly faster boot times Slightly more responsive OS Optane SSDs greatly benefit games that do a lot of asset streaming because of the mad fast random read speeds. Now that's not the reason I got it, but I might as well put some games on my Optane SSD since I use my computers for both work and play. My workflow has also had some of it's bottlenecks alleviated so I can now spend more time programming rather than waiting. I do use 2 computers while working, but that incurs it's own latency penalty when I need to sync the code I wrote between both computers I use. In short, Optane is definitely worth it for a work computer or if you play a lot of open world games. I strongly recommend an Optane SSD to anyone who does software development like me, works with databases, or mainly plays open world games. I never want to go back to a standard SSD for work. It looks like it will be quite a long while before Optane SSDs will be beat in random reads, and these things are built to last! They can last a lifetime!

Turns out the x4 slot was also running in x1 mode since my 4th m.2 slot shares bandwidth with the 4th PCIe slot😐 I disabled that slot and now have to move the drive that was installed there. My drive performance increased significantly after that change since now the slot is actually running in x4 mode. Apparently m.2 slots 2 and 3 will be disabled if I use SATA ports 5 and 6 as well. Some motherboards have wacky designs. This would be the last thing I expected out of my MSI Unify Z590. If they're gonna put the ports there, they should all be useable at once. Edit: Thanks for the help everyone. While you guys didn't directly answer my question about the drivers, you gave me a strong push in the right direction and I was able to figure things out. If anyone else encounters suboptimal Optane SSD performance in the future, this is the fix: Make sure your Optane SSD is connected directly to the CPU (not through the chipset, check your motherboard manual to see which PCIe slots are connected though the chipset and which ones are connected directly though the CPU). Then, make sure the motherboard doesn't do something wacky like limit the bandwidth (like in my case) due to it sharing bandwidth with another slot. Then, install the Optane drivers last and restart your computer. If your x4 slot is running in 4 lane mode, is connected directly to the CPU, and you have the Optane drivers installed, this will maximize the performance of your Optane SSD.

The 1.5 TB 905P model I got costed $400. It's really expensive😅 I wanted to see how much of an impact it would have on my workflow as from what I've seen, it theoretically would significantly speed up my workflow. I spend a significant part of my workdays compiling code and waiting on builds to be made so I can test the games I develop. I wanted more time to actually do software engineering in a day and thus increase my productivity. I'm using the U.2 version as that was the cheapest. I have it connected to my PC through a Startech x4 U.2 to PCIe adapter. The AIC versions of the 905P are a lot more expensive which is really silly. What is this Intel Optane Panel you speak of? Edit: Welp I found out why the drive isn't performing as expected. The x4 PCIe slot on my motherboard is connected to the chipset, not directly to the CPU. I need to go set it to CPU mode first🤣 Ohh I'm a doofus.

I'm using the 905P as an ordinary storage device. I cloned my OS disk to it. The immediate benefits that were apparent to me were faster load times for multiple programs at once, faster webpage loading, faster hibernation and wake from hibernation, and faster build times for games with Unity. I don't remember there being a BIOS option pertaining to Optane. I'll have to dig around and see if I find one.

Hey guys, I recently got ahold of a 1.5 TB Optane 905P SSD for christmas and have been loving it so far, except for one really strange issue I've been having. The drive is very fast in of itself, but the dedicated Optane drivers significantly decrease performance over the default Windows storage device drivers (my game build times INCREASE by about 27.5%). According to individuals on the Level1Techs forums (which is where I got the driver from), the driver is supposed to significantly increase performance. For anyone on this forum that has experience with Optane, is there a specific driver verison I should be using with the 905P to maximize its performance?

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!!! I hope you all have a stupendous day with your families and friends! This is my personal favorite holiday of the year. It truly is full of cheer.

You're looking at prebuilts right? In that case, you're gonna be paying a premium over building one yourself. A prebuilt desktop should still be less money than a laptop with the same processing power though. Maybe it's a pricing glitch in your region due to market factors and hopefully things return to normal soon.

That's an anomaly as typically laptops are more expensive than desktops for the same processing power. However it also doesn't help that CPUs in different devices are typically misleadingly named. For example, a laptop i9 is equivalent to a desktop i7, and an ultrabook i9 is equivalent to a desktop i5 running at low power. A tablet i9 is equivalent to a desktop i3, and thus is wholly undeserving of the i9 moniker. Therefore, it can seem you're getting more processing power than you actually are from the laptop you buy.

I've seen some of those displays and they look absolutely gorgeous. It's really a shame that the laptops that are equipped with them are garbage, but my goodness the screens look amazing! I would like an OLED screen for my custom laptop build, but all portable OLED screens are currently very expensive. Perhaps they will have dropped in price by quite a bit once I actually get around to starting the build.

After looking again at the dimensions of the first case I posted (that Linus uses in his video), I'm pretty sure it can fit an ATX motherboard as long as you use a dual slot graphics card. The dimensions of the case are larger than an ATX motherboard, suggesting that one would fit. I'd really like a version with an 18 inch high refresh rate screen though. That would be perfect for me. We'll wait and see what awesome new toys are in store for us in the coming weeks and months. More parts keep popping up that make it more convenient to go through with my dream custom laptop build. I am greatly looking forward to that day I finish said build. I fully expect the upfront cost to be prohibitive, but it'll be cheaper for me in the long run vs buying modern laptops (which suck anyways, so I want nothing to do with them anymore).

@Mr. Fox That video I linked to is not what you're thinking of. The links to the cases I put in my previous post are cases for fully customizable builds, no proprietary parts except the screen, keyboard, and trackpad. You must be thinking of this: https://videocardz.com/newz/chinese-company-preparing-workstation-laptop-with-64-core-epyc-7713-cpu-desktop-rtx-4080-graphics-and-built-in-liquid-cooling That new Rev-9 laptop that comes out in 2 days looks super awesome. I don't know if they use a proprietary motherboard. Hopefully not, but at the very least they use an actual desktop GPU, so that will be upgradeable.

This is a Linus Tech Tips video you guys would definitely find interesting: Linus builds his own laptop out of desktop parts. Now that's a REAL laptop! I've seen industrial rugged cases like this before, but never one that looked like a laptop that you could actually install some respectable hardware into. This is the link to the case: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/New-design-16-1-Inch-LCD_1600578225544.html I also found a version that can fit an ATX motherboard: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Panel-PC-Server-Case-With-LCD_1600578236601.html?spm=a2700.shop_plgr.41413.11.3e411b1cQlT2wq We can make some very interesting builds with these! No need for me to custom fab my own case anymore!

Unfortunately the way G-Sync works on laptops isn't like how it works with desktop monitors. For G-Sync to work on laptop monitors, you must use specific model panels with the G-Sync chip in them, AND the laptop firmware has to support that model, AND the driver has to support that configuration. It's pretty stupid since with desktop monitors, you just plug a device in, and G-Sync (or freesync) just work, so universal compatibility is possible, it's just that the laptop hardware was deliberately engineered to not support G-Sync on ann G-Sync compatible panels. Personally though, I wouldn't worry too much about it. G-Sync and AMD' Freesync are gimmicks. You'd want to run games at your monitor's max refresh rate anyway for maximum visual fluidity, so the refresh rate syncing tech doesn't really offer much value. If you find you can't run games at your screen's max refresh rate, you can use something like Custom Resolution Utility to create a native resolution profile with a lower refresh rate that you can easily match in games. You can do this through Nvidia Control Panel as well. That's just me though, I prefer a static refresh rate and framerate. Variable refresh rates irk me because it looks uneven.

Is there anything in particular that you noticed caused this to happen? I'd say if not, first try and check to see if the display cable is plugged in all the way. Sometimes the connectors can come loose on laptop screens. There's the end that plugs into the motherboard and the one that plugs into the screen. The end that plugs into the screen will be a pain to check as the screen is glued into the housing instead of screwed in, so hopefully that's not the issue. I broke my X170's original screen when trying to remove it and had to replace it.

I probably will get one sometime in the future if I don't have an easier option to achieve sub-ambient temperatures. My current case allows for external water cooling as it has rubber holes in the back that I can route tubes through. For anyone on this thread who has a chiller, what would you say is a good chiller to get?

That's very disappointing as I really like my Cryo cooler from Cooler Master. Yeah it's super power inefficient, but it works very well (probably because I have a well binned 10900K), and doubles as making my desktop even more of a space heater during the winter. I was hoping to see these stick around so I could build a similar system as I have now in the future, and I was hoping to see more extreme cooling methods become mainstream. Man I am hooked on these lower temperatures to increase overclocking headroom!

Which part of the video specifically did you want translated? Or is there a specific question you had that you'd like me to look for the answer for in the video?

So looks like my initial performance assessment of Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga on my desktop vs my X170 was inaccurate. Not satisfied with the results I got lat time, I decided to dig deeper to find what was causing the performance disparity I found last time. My results from this run confused me more, but made me happier at the same time. So the game does in fact perform significantly better on my desktop in an absolute sense due to the significantly faster memory, which is what I expected. What I didn't expect was that my X170 would somehow get higher framerates than my desktop in one scenario: when standing still. With my framerate comparison I described before, I tested the performance of the game on both my systems right after loading into the game on Endor. I did not move the mouse on either system, I just let the viewport stay as it was when loading into the level, and looked at the framerates RTSS was reporting on both systems. When standing still looking out at the ewok village, my desktop was getting 95 FPS while my X170 was getting 121 FPS. However, this time I actually moved the mouse, and the framerate dipped dramatically on my X170 all the way down to 79 FPS. It felt extremely choppy and stuttery as well. Welp, this was weird I thought, so I did the same thing on my desktop. No frame dip. Even though the game was still lagging by my standards, the mouse movement felt significantly smoother since there was no frame dip. I repeated the same experiment again on both systems, and once again the framerate was dipping and skyrocketing all the way from 82 FPS to 121 FPS, while my framerate remained within the 95-100 FPS range on my desktop. I have 2 potential explanations for this. Either this game does in fact perform significantly better on Nvidia cards, but is a stuttery mess on my X170 due to a single thread performance bottleneck that is partially alleviated on my desktop due to the faster memory I have in it, or the game has more stable frametimes on AMD cards. One way to confirm this would be to either overclock the memory in my X170 or tighten the timings, or I could swap out the 6950 XT in my desktop with an old spare GTX 1060, although swapping in an RTX 2080 SUuper would allow for the most accurate comparison. It'd still be interesting to see the game performing better on a GTX 1060 vs a 6950 XT though.🤣 None of my other games behave this way. This is such weird behavior, but is not something I'm a stranger too. I develop software myself, specifically games, so I know that game performance can be drastically affected by architectural differences in hardware, depending on what area of the hardware the game stresses most.

Thanks! I really appreciate this! As far as I can tell, MSI afterburner works almost as well as GPU Tweak III does for me. Really the only major difference is the voltage slider actually works on GPU Tweak III whereas it does not on MSI Afterburner, but that's reason enough to use GPU Tweak instead, so that you very much for pointing me to this tool! What's wrong with MSI afterburner for you? What doesn't work with it? Also I did some more benchmarking with my games to compare how hardware differences between my laptop and desktop affected framerates. Here are my results: Desktop Killer (X170SM-G) VS Sagattarius A (Desktop) In Games: - Desktop Killer: i9 10900K, 32 GB DDR4 3200 MHz CL 16 RAM, RTX 2080 Super - Sagattarius A: i9 10900K, 32 GB DDR4 4000 MHz CL 15 RAM, RX 6950 XT The CPUs in both machines are clocked at 3.7 GHz in these tests. Control: 122 FPS vs 144 FPS at the Crossroads Control Point in the Foundation sector, 103 FPS vs 144 FPS in intense fights while doing Bureau missions. Far Cry 5: 101 FPS vs 144 FPS at the cabin near the bunker from the start of the game Jedi Fallen Order: 96 FPS vs 143 FPS at first save point on the first planet in the game <- I wouldn't have gotten these framerates with the game at stock configuration. I installed DXVK Async 2.0 into the game, which significantly boosted the framerate. The comparison was done using this awesome piece of software installed with the game on both machines. Mass Effect Andromeda: 136 FPS vs 144 FPS on Voeld, right next to one of the Kett facilities Shadow Of The Tomb Raider: 105 FPS vs 139 FPS at Kuwaq Yaku, right outside the shop looking out at the crowd in front of it Hitman Absolution: 80 FPS minimum, 103 FPS average vs 88 FPS minimum, 110 FPS average in the built in game benchmark <- I also installed DXVK 2.0 into this game, which yielded a minor improvement in framerates (around 5-6%) Hitman 3: 140 FPS vs 140 FPS in the Dartmoor benchmark, 143 FPS vs 143 FPS in Dubai benchmark <- No difference at all in this game. Hitman 3's engine is much better optimized than Hitman 1 or Hitman 2, especially on the CPU side, so that definitely makes a difference. All Hitman 1 and 2 missions run MUCH better in the Hitman 3 engine. Just Cause 4: 144 FPS vs 144 FPS <- No difference at all in this game, at least in large, open fields. I'll have to test this again in a populated area like Quya. Lego Star Wars - The Skywalker Saga: 126 FPS vs 94 FPS at Endor Ewok village <- This is the only game that performs WORSE on my desktop for some stupid reason. This game must really not like AMD GPUs. The screen keeps flickering at certain times and the framerate likes to cap itself at 60 FPS if you alt-tab out and back in. So in summary, looks like for the most part that in the games where an AMD GPU + very fast memory makes a difference, you will get anywhere between a major to gargantuan improvement. In my case, the smallest of those was about a 32% improvement in Shadow Of The Tomb Raider, and the greatest was about a 49% improvement in Jedi Fallen Order. The two exceptions so far were in Hitman Absolution, which only saw a 10% improvement in minimums and about a 6.8% improvement in average framerates (still pretty nice), and Mass Effect Andromeda, which only got about a 5.9% improvement in framerates. For the games that saw no improvement, either I was not CPU bound at all at the framerate I was running at, those games just don't care because the hardware changes yield performance gains in areas these games just don't/can't take advantage of, some other weird thing is the performance bottleneck, or they don't contain any AMD or Nvidia specific optimizations. I'll need to retest these games either with Vsync off, or with an even higher refresh rate display. I have no idea what happened in Lego Star Wars - The Skywalker Saga. This game seems to really hate AMD GPUs for some reason. I'll definitely be testing more games to see what the differences are in those games for me. My verdict still stands. If you want the absolute best gaming performance, an Intel CPU + an AMD GPU + the fastest RAM (lowest absolute latency at highest possible bandwidth) you can get will yield the absolute highest gaming performance you can get.