MyPC8MyBrain

i receive hopefully my final third replacement 7770 yesterday afternoon, to my surprise it wasn't spitting lava out of the box as experienced before, even on ultimate performance in bios and windows it was happy idling at mid 60c, decided to tune Dell's original image instead of wiping out and using my enterprise edition, got it to where im almost happy with it enough to get a baseline where performance are with this unit, getting 22500 in CB23 and a 11800 in 3DMARK Time Spy bench, this is with original Dell paste, i have not yet cracked this unit open, with max 25700 for CB23 and 12177 for 3DMARK with LM TIM, i can surmise that there's overall 10% increase potential with LM TIM for the 7770 unit, most LM TIM gains are from cpu side not much benefits for dgpu from what i can tell, it is prob better to keep dgpu with regular paste because that layer serves as heat shield protection when cpu is revving pumping temps up fast, i think it would be most efficient especially for the way both cpu and dgpu are setup inline on the heat pipe, i am starting to think that the stiffer thermal application Dell uses serves another propose intentionally the compound get stiffer after application to help with bonding due to mobility and lack of full physical support,

since @PHVM_BR brought the subject to our attention I've been researching Dynamic Boost 2.0 bit deeper, from what i learned and possible saw in person is a 5w Dynamic Boost 2.0 for our specific sku, Dynamic Boost 2.0 doesn't mean it will boost to max TGP rather attempt a prefixed predefined boost value, that boost may be as low as 5w in our sku case, i haven't found a source to verify what exactly Dynamic Boost 2.0 is for our specific sku, with heat dissipation being a big factor we all verified we can reach 120w under some circumstances, before i test locked my cpu to 30w i only saw short spikes from 115w to 120w during benching, when it was locked i could see 120w sustained (rails were listing 134.5w)

that may have been the perception a decade or two ago not so much today, Precision line is Dell's most expensive from their offerings, consumers today are educated, well versed, not to mention well connected with their community and technical peers (even government entities) 😉 what precision represented years ago as industry standard is now common knowledge and standards all manufactures follow in order to compete with Dell, today just about any run of the mill laptop will do the same designated workload used to be reserved to the few powerful stations which there's almost no distinction today when it comes to power engineering laptops, i deliberately am using the word "laptops" because the line between a workstation almost doesn't exists now days, things have changed dramatically since this old perception was put in place 20 years ago, to be fair that 330w brick is anything but portable, i would not appose to a dual AC adapter solutions 240w / 330w based on needs, this way one could dial his needs when more juice needed and be more green and light when not needed, @Dell-Mano_G if that was an option and the logic as a consumer id purchase both power supplies with my system at the time of sale.

better late than never, well done Dell! i wonder if they implemented other settings as well, i did notice and reported some perceived "relaxation" with 1.8.0 bios few days back (though i thought it might be placebo or wishful thinking),

lets just hope the engineers assigned to the new platform will not package all this with a 240w brick

i cant help but ask myself where is this going? im all for desktop power in a mobile station, but it has to work not just "run" with power, these products and specs look great on paper but don't really work efficiently in a small chassis, how is twice E core will work in same chassis before pigs fly or laws of physics change?

that cant be good for business,

according to the article these should be available sometime in the next 10 days (aka before 2023), i find that hard to believe,

the replacement for my original replacement should be arriving tomorrow (to Dell's credit they sent two replacements, the first replacement had some dGpu issue), i decided to run another test on the original unit, i removed dGpu completely out of the chassis, the goal was to see how the chassis will perform with the dGpu plate dedicated for cooling without anything below it, results were interesting AIDA64 was unable to get it to thermal throttle, temps stay at max 78c or below 80, that's with me changing and locking a new TDP (going off Intel XTU own auto tuning numbers) i changed and locked PL1 at 110 and PL2 at 165, CB23 single run score is 25700 atm, during CB23 run system consumed around 210w sustained (dGpu out of chassis), cool down is almost instantly back to temps below 40c, and idles at 31c,

we are all here pretty much disappointed as well (accept maybe one owner), i have not tested with turbo boost 3 off, and i have not noticed that it disables dgpu boost, agreed 100%, new ordered from Dell the 3080Ti option alone is over $2200, paying that price for sku that's not performing as expected is the same as flushing hard earned money down the toilet, i paid almost $4500 for my current 7770 configuration out of that $2200+ is just for the 3080Ti, for $2000 yes id absolutely keep it and be happy with with its very low (relative) performance, for $4500 I'm afraid it would be a no go for me, my dGpu bus is capable and should be running PCIE x16 4.0 lane speeds, currently it is only running at PCIE x8 4.0/1.1 speeds at best, can someone please confirm if this only my system please, (i tested a single nvme in every slot to rule out PCIE lane sharing)

at what? nothing stated there contradicts or conflicts with my result or suggests a different configuration, i have 7770 in hand and tested your theory even with PL1/2 both locked at 30 the dGpu still only draw max 120w out of allotted 150w no matter what steps i take, and I've even went the distance shutting every peripheral off in bios to make sure there's no current waste, i even went further distance and order a 330w Dell power brick and still no go, no matter what i did dGpu will not draw beyond 120w (you can watch the bench i run with 330w power brick few posts back, that's with bios recognizing 330w brick with matching PL4 limit, that test alone rules out any TDP+TGP power limit theories out there). ill disclose few random observation there was one time never to happen again where i saw 130w for a split second, with that i also saw 750w max dGpu power limit, i believe its some math fluke by HWiNfo as it never accrued again, on the other hand 115w-120w max dGpu usage is consistent throughout. i am very happy with CPU performance, dGpu is a BIG disappointment from getting a capped sku to not having it even perform to its cap is another BIG disappointment,

i believe i understand the point you're trying to make, it just didn't work the way you envision it, locking PL1 and PL2 to 55-65 did nothing but slow the test down to a crawl with a score of 9k, dGpu usage wattage/TGP wise remained the same regardless of manual cpu cap i imposed, sound like you believe the cpu "reserves" its entire TDP range which is simply not the case,

speaking with hands on experience your theory didn't hold, cpu stress test runs after gpu test, during that time gpu had at least 35w overhead to consume more wattage, it simply didn't, the test afterwards had no issues demanding and consuming more with thermal headroom,

therefore my logical conclusion would be... if the test afterwards was able to draw 225w, at the least this suggests dgpu had 35w buffer it choose not to/or was unable to utilize in the dgpu focused phase before! the premise of lack of AC power was proved wrong with the 330w brick tests i run, to me it is obvious that something is actively preventing dgpu from even reaching its current 150w declared TGP even with plenty of power available and thermal buffer (small as it may be),

locking PL1/2 to 50w will not set the cpu to lower MHz, few cores can still go as high as they can within that 50w limit, the only way is locking cores manually, doing so will defeat the premise of your theory limiting the systems full potential, if thermals will allow power plan rules will place cpu cores at highest regardless, it doesn't need too, 157w happens when all cores utilized to the max, they usually alternate with only few holding high MHz until thermals saturate the system and it starts ramping down, during Time Spy runs i have seen both cpu reaching its 157w PL2 limit and dgpu using max 120w (with HWiNfo), you can observe wattage draw during different segments of Time Spay right off the wall in the videos i posted few posts back, i also seen the system push almost 300w in AIDA64 bench (with 330w brick),

the cpu is at 4.7MHz because that's the highest its allowed to ramp up (all cores locked via TS at 4.7), power plan aka Ultimate Performance places cpu to its highest state until PL2 rules are broken and then cpu is placed within PL1 power limits followed by reducing MHz to reduce thermals, the graph is showing that the cpu was able to run through Time Spy bench without breaking PL2 rules which would have placed it in PL1 limits, the unit is essentially maintaining manageable PL2 terms during the bench with undervolt,

i made bit of a mess with the info i submitted earlier, here is live capture with info present live so there's no confusion, not trying to break records just to capture power usage during runs with 240w brick CB23 Run 3DMARK Time Spy Run 330w brick CB23 330w Run 3DMARK Time Spy Run 330w AIDA64 Run 330w (290w+)

i should still have a copy of Aaron's vbios, it wouldn't flash the old 7670, my current 7770 vbios is 94.03.19.00.EE

here are the graphs for my best score mentioned earlier, note cpu is holding 4.7Mhz throughout the run, this is very different from previous runs with early cpu undervolt and gpu overclock setting, with all my previous settings that purple line would dip to around 1.7MHz almost instantly (yes this is replicable), with 30w withheld from 150w = 120w which what we all able to get in effect, 25% performance missing from an already capped 175w dGpu to 150w we only get 120w from, if Dell allowed us to regain the full limited 150w i bet we could close the gap we currently see, https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/85032368

maybe its just placebo... after BIOS 1.8.0 update my system seems to idle 3-4 degrees cooler (package is usually 41c at idle),

noticed some weird hardware error issues recently, not sure if they were there the whole time or started recently, i tried to eliminate variables to try and narrow this down but i have no lead atm, it is not caused by the under or overvolting, its not a driver compatibility issues (went back to original OEM image), seems to be related to the dgpu but no additional info can be found even system logs are very vague, it wont happen during CB23 run nor when running Valley bench, but if i open Afterburner or 3DMARK just to the main interface not even running tests yet it will trigger these hardware errors instantly, can someone please help validate if this is just on my system?

the system pulls noticeably allot more power from the wall with the 330 brick, 280w is the average sustained pull form the wall during Time Spy bench, with the slim brick it pulling a max of 235w but averaged much lower 180w sustained, difference in scores is 0 during CB23 bench with 25.5k scores if i recall correctly it wont even reach PL1 limit, it utilized 81w max for the whole run, it wont thermal throttle either unless i hammer it with 4-5 consecutive runs without cooling for a minute, even fans don't ramp up through the run, i haven't tested my current config with my special sauce yet, i believe adding that will get me over the hump to the 26k score,

same here, if you get the 7770 without dgpu, connected to external enclosure via thunderbolt with 4090 gpu you should have a chunk of change left with twice the performance if you went the 3080Ti or the A5500 route in the 7770, the 3080Ti and the A5500 are both priced over $2200 option for the 7X70 line,

my best 7770 3DMARK Time Spy score so far 12145, allot of tinkering to find the right undervolt balance, what's interesting is with the right undervolt settings i am finally able to maintain 4,423 MHz average clock frequency throughout the test (with all my previous attempts i got good scores but cpu always ramped down to 2000Mhz), still getting slight thermal throttling but not enough to ramp the whole system down, 25.5k scores in CB23 are a regular occurrences now, trying to hit that illusive 26k CB23 score, (id share my tests graphs and TS settings but i am not allowed to upload anymore images ) https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/85032368 (with LM TIM application on both cpu and dgpu) TS > FIVR: CPU Core -146.5 (-150 effective) with IccMax 185.00 CPU P Cache -73.2 (-75 effective) Cache Ratio > Min/Max value 8/36 Turbo Groups > all performance cores set to 47 (everything else left to its default settings) MSI Afterburner Settings Core Clock (MHz) +225 Memory Clock(MHz) +1400

i was wrong (must have mixed it with older 7670), this one goes up to 3600 rpm,