PHVM_BR

New score now with IETS GT600:

You're right, the different layout I saw was from the BIOS of the Neo 16 E23/E24. Your BIOS and options seem to be exactly the same as on my laptop. Including the exact same version 2.22.0059.

You probably changed parameters in the advanced BIOS that you shouldn't have, or changed them in the wrong way. From what I saw, I believe you changed the ICC Max to 0 (auto) while in my BIOS this value is at the maximum (2047). It seems you also changed P-core Power Density Throttle and Turbo Thermal Protection... According to the screenshots, that's what you did in addition to what I suggested. I can't tell if you changed anything else... I had only written to disable Undervolting Protection, Virtualization features, and Overclocking Lock. I suggest you don't change anything you don't understand. I believe your best option is to reset the BIOS to the original settings. Turn off the laptop, unplug the charger cable for a few seconds and plug it back in. Then press and hold Ctrl + Alt + F11 and then press the power button. Keep them all pressed for a few seconds and release them. The BIOS will enter a factory reset process. When the BIOS reverts to factory defaults, you'll be able to make the changes you want, knowing exactly what you're altering... It doesn't appear that the BIOS for the XMG Neo 16 E25 is installed. I believe the layout is completely different.

In the Control Center's Custom Performance tab, check the "Advanced CPU Settings" box (or similar) to unlock CPU settings in the BIOS. Close ThrottleStop and delete the settings file. It's an automatically created .ini file in the same folder as the icon. Disable Core Isolation in Windows. Restart the system and access the BIOS. There will be an "Advanced CPU" tab. Click on it. There, you can disable virtualization features, Overclocking Lock, and Undervolting Protection. Restart the system and you'll be ready to adjust the throttlestop!

Yes, I leave it on the custom profile with maximum performance and boost fans for benchmarks.

There's no OC on the CPU, only undervolting. I tried increasing the ratios using ThrottleStop, but although I can change it in the FIVR window, it doesn't seem to be applied. Both the P-cores and E-cores remain at their standard clock limit of 5.2GHz and 4.6GHz under full load. My undervolt is -60mV for the CPU Core and CPU P Cache and -30mV for the iGPU, with IccMax at maximum on all. I also unchecked the TVB option in FIVR so that the CPU doesn't reduce its clock speed due to the target temperature (I believe that with TVB enabled, the P-cores decrease by 100MHz starting at 70°C and another 100MHz when the temperature reaches 95°C).

Yes, yes, I can get similar numbers, but I want more... There is still thermal headroom, especially when using a water cooling solution or a cooling pad! My Control Panel is exactly the same! NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 (notebook) video card benchmark result - Intel Core Ultra 9 Processor 275HX,Avell STORM 580 Take a look at the single core from one of the screenshots.

I'm thinking of switching to the XMG BIOS because it has more adjustment options and because of the updates. It really works well, but I couldn't overclock the processor even after disabling Overclocking Lock in the advanced menu of the American Megatrends BIOS. Even increasing the Ratios in ThrottleStop or XTU, the CPU doesn't exceed the standard clock, even without temperature and power limitations... Undervolting, however, works perfectly. Thank you very much!

I have an Avell (Brazilian company) Storm 580 with an Ultra 9 275HX and an RTX 5080, which is exactly the same as the Medion Erazer Beast 16 with the American Megatrends BIOS. Did the BIOS update for the XMG Neo 16 go smoothly? Could you tell me about your experience? Furthermore, I can't access the XMG driver portal...

Be very careful when replacing thermal pads because if they are not the correct thickness you will have a big problem. If any pad is too thin, there will be no contact with the heatsink; if it is too thick, it can impair contact with other pads and the CPU and/or GPU. I recommend measuring the thickness of each original pad with a caliper and using soft pads. Or use good quality thermal putty and you shouldn't have any problems.

Simply download the VBIOS update firmware available in the driver list on the P7550 support page, extract its contents with 7zip, and click on the corresponding option (RTX 5000 or RTX 4000). The installation is automatic. https://www.dell.com/support/home/en-us/drivers/driversdetails?driverid=m1hhx&oscode=wt64a&productcode=precision-15-7550-laptop

My Precision is stored away; I've been using a newer laptop. Maybe this weekend...

I had an i7-9750H for four years, and it was completely stable at -125mV/-215mV for cache/core. With Speedshift = 0 (Windows power plan set to High Performance) I could maintain it at -135mV/-225mV. i7, i9, Xeon... I think it all depends on the silicon lottery. I agree that a 180W charger is sufficient for i7 (6-core) versions.

Not necessarily. Phase change pads better fill heat sink contact gaps.

Don't waste your time with Carbonaut because Kryosheet is much better. Your temperatures are fine, I wouldn't change anything if your CPU reaches max performance at 85°C at full load. On my Precision, Kryosheet provides up to ~15% more thermal headroom than the PTM 7950, but, as I mentioned earlier, it requires good contact between the heatsink and the CPU. I've tested Kryosheet on another laptop and didn't get good results due to uneven heatsink contact. You'll need to test it to find out. I like to drip a micro drop of thermal paste in 2 diagonals close to the CPU die so that the graphene sheet remains fixed. I forgot to mention, but I only use Kryosheet on the CPU. On the GPU, the phase change pad works great and is more than sufficient. Your CPU must be undervolted to achieve its full performance on this machine. On my old i7-9750H in Cinebench R23 to sustain 4.0GHz on all cores (maximum clock at full load): . without undervolt: ~100W at ~95°C and fans at 100% . with undervolt: ~60W at ~78°C and fans at ~75%

I tested almost everything available on the 7540's i9, including Gelid HeatPhase. In my tests, its performance falls short of the PTM 7950 or TG PhaseSheet, which are identical. The Gelid phase-change pad appears to be of lower quality, at least when I tested it. In any case, with an undervolt, your 7530 with Gelid HeatPhase should be able to deliver the full performance of the i7-8750H without difficulty. Before the i9-9980HK, my Precision originally came with an i7-9750H (very similar to the 8750H), and with a fully stable undervolt, it consumed a maximum of 60-61W to deliver its peak performance in Cinebench R23 (4.0GHz on all cores), and the temperature hovered around 80°C with the fans at ~75%. On my i9, Kryosheet can provide more thermal headroom than the PTM 7950, but this requires good heatsink contact. Otherwise, the phase change pad will be better... Always keep the air intake away from the tabletop with a laptop stand. It makes a big difference on these Precision laptops.

4.6GHz in one benchmark may be different from 4.6GHz in another. It depends on the intensity of the load. For example, sustaining 4.6GHz may require 100W in one benchmark and 150W in another. The more watts, the more heat. Try Cinebench R23 or 2024. The load is heavier. As for UserBenchmark, no one cares, so you won't have a basis for comparison.

Try another benchmark, nobody cares about userbenchmark. It's crap!

I'm using Kryosheet on the CPU and PTM 7950 on the GPU. I also tested PTM 7950 on the CPU, but its performance is lower compared to Kryosheet. The problem with Kryosheet is that the heatsink needs to make a perfect contact with the die, uniform, otherwise the performance will be equal or worse than PTM 7950. I have 2 heatsinks for the P7540, the original one for Quadro T2000 and the one I bought for RTX 4000. I can only get these 160W with the original heatsink because unfortunately with the new, 2 cores reach the thermal limit at ~130W in the short CBR23 test. About undervolt, my i9 is totally stable with -102mV for the cache and -170mV for the core. This is for Windows in Balanced mode, with Speedshift at 84, where the clocks vary constantly... In High Performance mode (Speedshift = 0), the stable undervolt varies according to the set clock and to use a more aggressive undervolt I need to set the same clock for all loads on all cores. On my i9, for 4.2 and 4.3GHz the stable undervolt is the one mentioned above, but above that I can extract more: 4.4GHz -120mV / -200mV 4.5GHz -140mV / -230mV 4.6GHz -150mV / -250mV 4.7GHz -135mV / -225mV One tip is that with the default IccMax (140A) the maximum power the CPU can use is ~120W, which on the CBR23 with undervolt is equivalent to ~4.4GHz on all cores. Above that, it is necessary to increase the IccMax of the core and cache. For normal use, I keep it at default, for intensive tasks with overclocking or for benchmarks I increase both to the maximum.

Horrible! They ended up with strong names, consolidated, with the excuse of making it easier to identify the lines and put something totally generic.

https://videocardz.com/newz/alienware-brings-back-area-51-laptops-core-ultra-200hx-and-geforce-rtx-50-on-board

The 7670/7680 already have a TGP +100W. For the claimed 170W of CPU + GPU consumption I would bet on 55W + 115W with around 130/140W with Dynamic Boost.

https://www.notebookcheck.com/Dell-Pro-Max-16-und-Pro-Max-18-Plus-leaken-als-Flaggschiff-Laptops-mit-Tandem-OLED-und-drei-Lueftern.930490.0.html

WTF! I never imagined that the Precision 7540 could do Cinebench R23 at 4.6GHz all core consuming +150W and without thermal throttling! In Cinebench 2024 which is a longer benchmark (~8 minutes vs ~1 minute in R23) I can sustain 4.5GHz consuming +130W reaching a maximum of ~92°C. Edit: At 4,7GHz all cores consuming 157W:

In Cinebench reducing it to -210mV you should see the clock increase with the temperature remaining the same as it will continue to consume 60W. Generally with Speedshift at 0 with high performance selected in the Throttlestop main window it is possible to increase the undervoltage. This occurs because the voltage x clock curve varies and generally at higher clocks it is possible to reduce the voltage a little more. With Speedshift at 0, the processor will always try to keep clocks at maximum, thus allowing greater undervoltage. Try setting High Performance in Throttlestop with -135mV in cache and -225mV in core. This will allow reaching higher clocks in Cinebench, probably close to the maximum clock possible on all CPU cores (4.1GHz) but probably still limited by the PL1 of 60W. The only way I know of getting around the EC power limit is by changing the IMON slope/IMON offset, but on the Precision 7540 I found that forcing the CPU for about 2 minutes at 92°C or more causes the power limit decrease even when changing IMON slope.