LG Gram 17 (2021): Some Impressions

[John Ratsey]

4 hours ago, Steerpike said:

EDIT TO ADD: I looked in the Bios for the first time just now; wow - what a sparse BIOS! NOTHING relating to standby configs, or much else for that matter. I read there is an 'advanced' view accessed by Ctrl-Alt-F7, but that didn't work for me.  Am I doing something wrong?

This says Ctrl-Alt-Shift-F7 is needed for the 2021 Gram. I've just got it to work by not trying to press all the keys together but pressing and holding first Ctrl then Alt then Shift and finally F7. However, I'm not planning to fiddle with any of the numerous extra settings without good reason.

 

What CPU load are you seeing in Task Manager? Without Firefox running but with a few other things open I am seeing less than 1%.

 

PS: Yes, the power drain was done in Excel. Rename the .txt file as .csv then all the columns will load correctly. I then added a column for the watts (milliwatts / 1000).

[Steerpike]

 

So - based on this article, kindly referred by @rs4 - Windows 10 V2004: Can't deactivate ‘Modern Standby’ | Born's Tech and Windows World (borncity.com) . I made the following change to the registry on my Win 11 home 2021 LG Gram 17 - 

 

HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power

Enter the 32-bit DWORD value PlatformAoAcOverride and set it to 0. 

 

The change 'worked', in that 'powercfg /a' now shows I have S3 (and no longer have S0). It also says I have hibernate: 

 

The following sleep states are available on this system:
    Standby (S3)
    Hibernate
    Fast Startup

The following sleep states are not available on this system:
    Standby (S1)
        The system firmware does not support this standby state.

    Standby (S2)
        The system firmware does not support this standby state.

    Standby (S0 Low Power Idle)
        The system firmware does not support this standby state.

    Hybrid Sleep
        The hypervisor does not support this standby state.

I also tested, and verified S3 is working (and is logged by BatteryInfoView).  BUT - "hibernate after..." is no longer working! I tested it before making the change, and the system hibernated on schedule (after the stated idle time), but now, the system goes to sleep according to "sleep after ..." but does not go to hibernate. Hibernate does work from the start menu - I can put the system directly into hibernate state. So I have more work to do here, troubleshooting this. 

 

[Steerpike]

40 minutes ago, John Ratsey said:

This says Ctrl-Alt-Shift-F7 is needed for the 2021 Gram. I've just got it to work by not trying to press all the keys together but pressing and holding first Ctrl then Alt then Shift and finally F7. However, I'm not planning to fiddle with any of the numerous extra settings without good reason.

 

What CPU load are you seeing in Task Manager? Without Firefox running but with a few other things open I am seeing less than 1%.

 

PS: Yes, the power drain was done in Excel. Rename the .txt file as .csv then all the columns will load correctly. I then added a column for the watts (milliwatts / 1000).

Ctrl-Alt-Shift-F7 worked like a charm!  Thanks for that. 

 

In task manager, I see typically 1% when nothing is going on. I am also seeing about 6-7W power consumption in BIV (BatteryInfoView). I currently have display brightness at 52, and I've set 'max processor state' for battery at 70% (was playing with this for other reasons). 

 

Looking back at the log from last night, this jumped out at me: 

 

 

The battery was at 90% when I stopped using it (and it went to 'modern standby' and then to 'hibernate'), and it was only 61% when I woke the system up from hibernate this morning. So this would suggest 'hibernate' was not doing it's thing at all!  I looked in the Event Viewer and there was no indication of anything happening between the two milestones - the computer didn't wake and do stuff.  So this is another mystery I will need to pursue. 

 

Yet another question for you in dealing with the log - how are you manipulating that first column (time/date) in excel, to get it to be treated as a time/date field? The raw data in the log is in this format: 

 

 

And excel clearly 'knows' this is date/time, because it's displaying as:

 

 

but when I try to use that column as a graph 'x' axis, it stacks all the data into one time slot. I used to be very comfortable with this stuff in excel but it's been a while! 

 

I can fudge it by parsing out the date portion (leaving just the time, using 'text to columns' function), which works fine until I want to chart > 24 hours! 

[hfm]

13 hours ago, Steerpike said:

Some quick questions and comments as I work my way through this ...

 

 

 

Were you able to change the display in batteryinfoview to Watts, or did you do that outside of the tool?  And what tool are you using to create the graphs - excel? 

 

I killed Edge and Chrome (I too have >50 tabs open, typically). I set display brightness to 60. Task manager indicates nothing else of significance running. I paused OneDrive to stop it from checking for changes. I'm still not getting below 6W. 

 

 

There are two things on my laptop that suggest an LG-specific config - one is, I had 'LG Control Center', 'LG Update Center', and 'Virtoo by LG' pinned to the taskbar on initial run, and secondly ,a boat-load of McAfee crap showing in Task Manager that I haven't even got around to getting rid of yet ... Look at all this crap! 

 

 

 

The quick way to check your 'standby' config is to open a command prompt and type 'powercfg /a'

This is what I get: 

The following sleep states are available on this system:
    Standby (S0 Low Power Idle) Network Connected
    Hibernate
    Fast Startup

The following sleep states are not available on this system:
    Standby (S1)
        The system firmware does not support this standby state.
        This standby state is disabled when S0 low power idle is supported.

    Standby (S2)
        The system firmware does not support this standby state.
        This standby state is disabled when S0 low power idle is supported.

    Standby (S3)
        This standby state is disabled when S0 low power idle is supported.

    Hybrid Sleep
        Standby (S3) is not available.
        The hypervisor does not support this standby state.

 

I haven't yet ventured into the BIOS to see what options I can change. I remember reading that Dell had completely removed S3 / standby support from its firmware, and I'd assumed LG did the same but don't know. I'll take a look in the BIOS. 

 

EDIT TO ADD: I looked in the Bios for the first time just now; wow - what a sparse BIOS! NOTHING relating to standby configs, or much else for that matter. I read there is an 'advanced' view accessed by Ctrl-Alt-F7, but that didn't work for me.  Am I doing something wrong? 

 

I would also note, Windows has a pretty decent battery report of its own - type powercfg /batteryreport at the command prompt and you'll get a pretty decent report.  There are a LOT of reports available through powercfg, actually - worth a browse. 

 

 

I will explore ThrottleStop next ... 

 

Wow, that download site 'mediafire' is a sneaky one - threw all kinds of stuff at me!   Nice little utility though! 

 

I would uninstall McAfee, defender is just fine.

[John Ratsey]

11 hours ago, Steerpike said:

Yet another question for you in dealing with the log - how are you manipulating that first column (time/date) in excel, to get it to be treated as a time/date field?

Select the data > Format > Custom > hh:mm:ss . This displays only the time and the labels on the graph should use the same formatting unless set otherwise. Alternatively, if you want to keep the date in the data you can format the axis to apply the hh:mm:ss.

 

I haven't tried checking if sleep automatically transitions to hibernation. I've had so many problems with Windows sleep crashing over the years that I manually select hibernation rather than discover that the computer has hung and work in progress has been lost. The other worry I have about Windows sleep is the unexpected wake-up although better thermal management reduces the likelihood of computers suffering melt-down in bags. However, I also remember that when I first got my Gram 17 and shut the display expecting it to go to sleep (which my little Galaxy Book Pro does very happily) the fan in the Gram 17 became very noisy when it should have gone off. Given that the fan exhaust is effectively blocked when the display is shut caused me to manually select hibernation. I've checked and it seems to be better behaved (perhaps the S3 fix has helped) but there's lingering doubt.

[Steerpike]

8 hours ago, John Ratsey said:

...

I haven't tried checking if sleep automatically transitions to hibernation. I've had so many problems with Windows sleep crashing over the years that I manually select hibernation rather than discover that the computer has hung and work in progress has been lost. The other worry I have about Windows sleep is the unexpected wake-up although better thermal management reduces the likelihood of computers suffering melt-down in bags. However, I also remember that when I first got my Gram 17 and shut the display expecting it to go to sleep (which my little Galaxy Book Pro does very happily) the fan in the Gram 17 became very noisy when it should have gone off. Given that the fan exhaust is effectively blocked when the display is shut caused me to manually select hibernation. I've checked and it seems to be better behaved (perhaps the S3 fix has helped) but there's lingering doubt.

I've been fussing with this for several hours now.  If I enable 'Modern Standby' (S0) then the auto-transition to hibernate ('hibernate after ...') works. But if I enable classic sleep (S3) then I cannot get 'hibernate after ...' to work at all. Hibernate on demand is working in both modes (ie, choose hibernate from start menu, power option).  I've toggled back and forth a few times and the problem is persistent.  I also disabled 'fast start' as part of my troubleshooting, no change. I have read, a while back now, that there are a few variations on the 'hiberfile.sys' characteristics; there's a smaller version that supports 'fast start', and a larger version that supports full hibernate / recovery. But I haven't had a chance to dig back into that aspect. But I did delete the hiberfile.sys and let it get re-created, in case it was latching onto the 'wrong' kind for some reason.  Interestingly, when I tried to delete hiberfile.sys, it was giving me a 'file in use' error. I finally got rid of it using "powercfg /hibernate off". 

 

I'm with you on the risk associated with assuming the transition to hibernation succeeds (and generally assuming 'S3 sleep' works); more than once, with my old Samsung, I would open my backpack to find my laptop super-hot, thanks to something waking the laptop while it was in lid-close / S3 sleep. I could never track down why, so chose to manually hibernate.  

 

At this point, it seems I have two choices - 'Modern Standby' with 'hibernate after ...' working, or 'Classic Sleep' without 'hibernate after...'.  Since there's nothing about 'modern standby' that I like, I guess I'll go with 'classic sleep', and manually go to hibernate when I travel. 

 

The one remaining mystery seems to be - when I DID hibernate, the other day, power still dropped significantly. So I will do some testing on that today. I still need to figure out why I'm consuming 6-9 watts when doing next-to-nothing on the machine! 

 

 

[John Ratsey]

2 hours ago, Steerpike said:

At this point, it seems I have two choices - 'Modern Standby' with 'hibernate after ...' working, or 'Classic Sleep' without 'hibernate after...'.  Since there's nothing about 'modern standby' that I like, I guess I'll go with 'classic sleep', and manually go to hibernate when I travel. 

 

The one remaining mystery seems to be - when I DID hibernate, the other day, power still dropped significantly. So I will do some testing on that today. I still need to figure out why I'm consuming 6-9 watts when doing next-to-nothing on the machine!

Thanks for your update. I've also concluded from a couple of tests today that the transition from S3 sleep to hibernation isn't working. This could well be a long-standing issue with Windows. The observation here is that when the computer wakes from sleep in order to hibernate it forgets to hibernate and restarts the timer for sleeping. Perhaps that's the strength of S0 sleep: The computer isn't properly sleeping and therefore has the resources awake to go into hibernation when the time comes.

 

Hibernation should take zero, or very close to zero (eg checking to see if the power button is pressed) power. Microsoft's explanation of the different sleep states might throw a little light on what is using power. Do you have anything connected to the computer when running on battery? If so, the USB hub may be staying active even if the computer is sleeping. Or it might be the SSD interface. Unhide the various  link state power managements options and set them to be the lowest when on battery.

 

BTW: I've just noticed another bug / feature: I've had the Extend Battery Life option enabled in the LG Control Centre and this has resulted in the computer reporting that the 80% charge is actually 100% which suggests I've got a dying battery (Full Charged Capacity 59,390 mWh) rather than the % of the actual capacity. I've not seen that on other computers - my Galaxy Book Pro with battery saver enabled says 84%.

[RS4]

1 hour ago, John Ratsey said:

Thanks for your update. I've also concluded from a couple of tests today that the transition from S3 sleep to hibernation isn't working. This could well be a long-standing issue with Windows. The observation here is that when the computer wakes from sleep in order to hibernate it forgets to hibernate and restarts the timer for sleeping. Perhaps that's the strength of S0 sleep: The computer isn't properly sleeping and therefore has the resources awake to go into hibernation when the time comes.

 

Hibernation should take zero, or very close to zero (eg checking to see if the power button is pressed) power. Microsoft's explanation of the different sleep states might throw a little light on what is using power. Do you have anything connected to the computer when running on battery? If so, the USB hub may be staying active even if the computer is sleeping. Or it might be the SSD interface. Unhide the various  link state power managements options and set them to be the lowest when on battery.

 

BTW: I've just noticed another bug / feature: I've had the Extend Battery Life option enabled in the LG Control Centre and this has resulted in the computer reporting that the 80% charge is actually 100% which suggests I've got a dying battery (Full Charged Capacity 59,390 mWh) rather than the % of the actual capacity. I've not seen that on other computers - my Galaxy Book Pro with battery saver enabled says 84%.

 

I have also limited charging to 80% but no such bug on my Gram 2021.

[Steerpike]

5 hours ago, John Ratsey said:

Thanks for your update. I've also concluded from a couple of tests today that the transition from S3 sleep to hibernation isn't working. This could well be a long-standing issue with Windows. The observation here is that when the computer wakes from sleep in order to hibernate it forgets to hibernate and restarts the timer for sleeping. Perhaps that's the strength of S0 sleep: The computer isn't properly sleeping and therefore has the resources awake to go into hibernation when the time comes.

 

Hibernation should take zero, or very close to zero (eg checking to see if the power button is pressed) power. Microsoft's explanation of the different sleep states might throw a little light on what is using power. Do you have anything connected to the computer when running on battery? If so, the USB hub may be staying active even if the computer is sleeping. Or it might be the SSD interface. Unhide the various  link state power managements options and set them to be the lowest when on battery.

 

BTW: I've just noticed another bug / feature: I've had the Extend Battery Life option enabled in the LG Control Centre and this has resulted in the computer reporting that the 80% charge is actually 100% which suggests I've got a dying battery (Full Charged Capacity 59,390 mWh) rather than the % of the actual capacity. I've not seen that on other computers - my Galaxy Book Pro with battery saver enabled says 84%.

I just did a basic test, manually/explicitly putting the laptop into hibernate from the start menu. After 6 hours, there was ZERO change in battery level (as reported by BIV) so at least that is working!  I'm now doing a second test to see if the hibernate that is triggered by 'hibernate after ...' (which is 'working' in 'modern standby' mode) is somehow different. I'll leave it off for a good 5 or so hours to get a good test period.  To answer your question, no, I have nothing connected to the laptop. 

 

Regarding the LG 'extend battery life' option; may or may not be relevant, but I recall reading somewhere (maybe even in this forum/thread!) that there's a bug along the lines of, if you enable the feature when the battery is already above 80%, things behave differently compared to if the battery was below 80% at the time of the setting. 

[Steerpike]

I've done some testing of 'hibernate', 'Classic S3 Sleep', and 'Modern Standby (S0)' over the past few days, using BatteryInfoView (BIV) for readings and the event log for exact times of state transitions. 

 

First, I did several 'hibernate' tests, with both manual hibernate actions (initiate hibernate from the start menu) and timed hibernate actions (using 'hibernate after ...' setting in advanced power options).  In all cases, over several hours each, consumption during the hibernate period was effectively zero (what consumption I did read was probably due to the fact that I was only logging battery level at 1-minute intervals).  

 

Next, I did a test of 'Classic S3 Sleep'.  I 'slept' the computer from the start menu, and let it sit for 4hr 52mn (292 mins). The battery dropped by 1,120 mWh.  So that's 3.8 mWh per minute. 

 

Next, I did a test of 'Modern Standby (S0)'. I 'slept' the computer from the start menu (having switched it to modern standby mode) for 6hr 57mn (417 mins).  The battery dropped by 2,200 mWh.  So that's 5.2 mWh per minute.  This is quite a bit more than 'classic sleep', and is what you would expect, knowing how 'modern standby' keeps the system more active. 

 

Next, I did a test of 'simple idle'; in this case, I turned off 'modern standby' mode, and set the 'sleep after...' timers to a high value so it would not go into sleep mode. I used the event log to tell me exactly when the monitor went dark.  Note that for this test, I did have outlook, chrome, edge, whatsapp, and more running, so it's not a very scientific test (I should see lower numbers if these apps are not running, obviously). I left it idle for 78 minutes, and during this time, battery level dropped by 700 mWh. So that's 9 mWh per minute. 

 

Finally, I will note that I'm seeing the 'capacity' drop by about 100 mWh per minute when the computer is in active (but light) use - screen on, same apps as above running, etc. This again is very unscientific, but gives a comparative value for the various standby and idle readings.

[John Ratsey]

That's an interesting unit: mWh/min! By my reckoning 1 mWh/min = 0.06W so all those states of idleness are low drain (but subject to Windows deciding it's time to do some housekeeping). 100mWh/min is 6W which is the number I chucked into the air a few days ago as a reasonable target power drain under light usage. Perhaps Windows has settled down? It might previously have been doing indexing during any idle moments.

 

I have also carried out some more testing on my Gram 17. I had previously disabled the battery saver option to check the fully charged capacity. It's only 72.5Whr but this was a pre-owned Gram 17 so I don't know how the battery was treated. I'll wait and see of the reported full charged capacity stays there or reverts to 80% of that number when the computer next starts up.

Then I needed to drain the battery below the 80% level for the battery saver setting to become effective so I let BatteryInfoView do some logging which resulted in this graph:

I spent most of the time composing a long email but I had Firefox (with the innumerable tabs) open and was intermittently looking for information. I also went away from the computer at intervals. The display was at about 1/2 brightness and the graph confirms my previous observation of an average power drain of about 8W when running on battery with Firefox open. I'm happy with this as my Gram 17 will be rarely used away from my desk.

[Steerpike]

9 hours ago, John Ratsey said:

That's an interesting unit: mWh/min! By my reckoning 1 mWh/min = 0.06W so all those states of idleness are low drain (but subject to Windows deciding it's time to do some housekeeping). 100mWh/min is 6W which is the number I chucked into the air a few days ago as a reasonable target power drain under light usage. Perhaps Windows has settled down? It might previously have been doing indexing during any idle moments.

 

Interesting unit indeed!  I was really just noting down the values presented in BIV for 'Current Capacity Value', and my original 'write-up' just said 'units', but then I thought that was a bit lame so referred to the actual units, which are mWh. But then I realized, how odd it is to refer to a unit with 'hours' in the name, and then say 'per minute'.   I'm an electrical engineer by training, and I spent an hour messing around with this trying to re-state the units, but it was one of those situations where I just couldn't get my head around it!  In general, in the physical world, it's more typical to refer to 'capacities' as volumes ("a gallon of gas"), and indeed, another way to refer to energy capacity is in terms of 'joules', but for some reason we do tend to talk of electrical energy in terms of kWh - basically, "how much energy capacity will deliver 'x' kW for an hour" - a somewhat strange way of looking at it, but nonetheless one that is rooted in our society. 

 

SO - if I may - how do you 'convert' 100mWh/min to 6W? I agree with the number, I just couldn't find an obvious way to write that down as a formula! (that is - how do you say, "100 * x / y = 6"?).   And again, this just a weird mental block that I couldn't get around; something about 'per hour' vs 'for an hour' I think! 

 

 

9 hours ago, John Ratsey said:

 

I have also carried out some more testing on my Gram 17. I had previously disabled the battery saver option to check the fully charged capacity. It's only 72.5Whr but this was a pre-owned Gram 17 so I don't know how the battery was treated. I'll wait and see of the reported full charged capacity stays there or reverts to 80% of that number when the computer next starts up.

 

My battery capacity is showing as 77,020, and I had no charge cycles when I first started (battery health = 96.3%). Indications are, my unit was built in November 2021, so it's been sitting around for 5 months - may or may not be relevant.  I too am now running the battery down to below 80% so I can turn on the battery saver feature. 

 

But - take a look at this. I happened to spot this in the BIV log just now, for this morning's 'session'. 

 

 

Notice how, for the period 9:43 to 9:54 (11 minutes), the battery is discharging, and actual energy is being consumed as shown in the 'Rate' column, but yet the 'Capacity' is stuck at 77,020 - which is the 'max capacity' I just mentioned, as presented by BIV.  This does not make sense - the 'Capacity' value should be dropping by a certain amount each minute. If you assume about 110 mWh per minute, times 11 minutes, that's 1,210 - which added to 77,020 would give you 78,230 - closer to the 'design capacity'.  Not a big deal, just something I noticed! 

9 hours ago, John Ratsey said:

Then I needed to drain the battery below the 80% level for the battery saver setting to become effective so I let BatteryInfoView do some logging which resulted in this graph:

I spent most of the time composing a long email but I had Firefox (with the innumerable tabs) open and was intermittently looking for information. I also went away from the computer at intervals. The display was at about 1/2 brightness and the graph confirms my previous observation of an average power drain of about 8W when running on battery with Firefox open. I'm happy with this as my Gram 17 will be rarely used away from my desk.

 

[John Ratsey]

2 hours ago, Steerpike said:

SO - if I may - how do you 'convert' 100mWh/min to 6W? I agree with the number, I just couldn't find an obvious way to write that down as a formula! (that is - how do you say, "100 * x / y = 6"?).   And again, this just a weird mental block that I couldn't get around; something about 'per hour' vs 'for an hour' I think!

My formula to convert 100mWh is divide by 1000 to convert from mW to W and then multiply by 60 to remove the hr/min which then just leaves the unit as Watts. I have a dim recollection of doing this type of exercise either at school or at university both of which were a long (>50 years) ago.

2 hours ago, Steerpike said:

 

My battery capacity is showing as 77,020, and I had no charge cycles when I first started (battery health = 96.3%). Indications are, my unit was built in November 2021, so it's been sitting around for 5 months - may or may not be relevant.  I too am now running the battery down to below 80% so I can turn on the battery saver feature. But - take a look at this. I happened to spot this in the BIV log just now, for this morning's 'session'. 

 

Notice how, for the period 9:43 to 9:54 (11 minutes), the battery is discharging, and actual energy is being consumed as shown in the 'Rate' column, but yet the 'Capacity' is stuck at 77,020 - which is the 'max capacity' I just mentioned, as presented by BIV.  This does not make sense - the 'Capacity' value should be dropping by a certain amount each minute. If you assume about 110 mWh per minute, times 11 minutes, that's 1,210 - which added to 77,020 would give you 78,230 - closer to the 'design capacity'.  Not a big deal, just something I noticed!

That's an interesting observation which indicates that the battery calibration isn't quite right. Samsung used to include a battery calibration in the BIOS so that users could, every few months, fully drain the battery and then fully recharge it in order to reset the voltage - capacity relationship. Windows won't allow the battery to be fully drained as a low capacity will trigger hibernation or shutdown but the workaround is to open the BIOS setup and leave the computer until it's empty. I'm wondering if some of my missing battery capacity would reappear if I did this, but it's not a priority as the battery is effectively only a backup against mains failure.

 

Something else I should mention is that I was just using the touchpad during my time on battery and I had no problems with scrolling etc.

[John Ratsey]

While exploring other parts of this forum I came across this power saving guide which has been copied from NBR (hence no graphics) and has many relevant suggestions for trying to reduce the power consumption.

[extremecarver]

Most important is the Intel graphics driver and making sure the display self refresh stuff is activated. Without it no S10 and way higher power consumption.

Make sure all power saving stuff there except darkening your display are activated. The rest is the usual stuff mainly important to disable processes and enable devsleep for the nvme. Make sure the nvme supports it. 4w should be easily possible even though Windows 11 is not battery friendly. Downgrade to 10 for better battery life. On the 16 I can get down to 1.6-1.7w with display on. Minimum brightness, or 2.4w at 50 percent or so. Don't exactly remember

 

[Steerpike]

On 3/19/2022 at 4:25 AM, John Ratsey said:

After a week of use my hands are happy with the keyboard even though it's offset. They action is good. I can occasionally hear the fan but it's very quiet compared with an XPS 15 which I've temporarily got alongside it. I've got a Thunderbolt dock connected using one of these magnetic connectors which means that disconnection doesn't cause any port wear.

 

The very glossy screen is noticeable when sun is coming in the window but can be mitigated when there's a light background by turning up the brightness which I normally have at about 60%. I haven't discarded the possibility of getting an anti-glare screen protector although this may worsen what is a delightfully crisp display. A factory-applied slightly matte finish would be the best solution.

Thanks for the tip on the magnetic connectors!  I just bought one and it makes life SO MUCH easier - more than I imagined!  The model I got in the US was a 2-pack, but looks identical to yours - Amazon.com: USB C Magnetic Adapter, (2 Pack) Magnetic USB C Adapter, 24Pins USB3.1 10Gbps Data Transfer 4K 60Hz Video PD 100w Charge Compatible with MacBook Pro/Air USB-C Laptop : Electronics .  

 

Also, I've had my LG Gram 17 for almost 3 months now. The glossy screen is not as much of an issue as I thought it would be (being a portable device, you can always twist / wobble / angle the screen somehow to avoid the nasty reflections, at least indoors) and the screen sharpness is amazing. The 'numeric keypad' is also something I'm adapting to quite well, though I do still wish it were just a standard keyboard plus the home/end/pgup/pgdn' column (I could not live with the 'pure' standard keyboard on the XPS 17!).   The trackpad is proving to be the biggest disappointment. I've turned off triple- and double-tap altogether, as well as pinch-to-zoom, but I'm still unable to get it to reliably distinguish between single tap (select) and double-tap and drag (scroll). Half the time, when scrolling a page using 'double-tap and drag', if there's a hyperlink under the cursor, I get a 'select' action rather than scroll. I've tried all the sensitivity settings to no avail.  Further - why is the trackpad so BIG?! My right hand palm (base of thumb) is always touching it and making the cursor go crazy. Luckily, not much happens when I do this, but it's annoying. I did appreciate it when trackpads got bigger, but nowadays, it seems to be getting ridiculous! I think we're getting past 'optimal' sizing! 

 

The only other strange thing I can think of is the screen brightness. I've noticed it will tend to very slowly darken, and then very slowly brighten again, for no apparent reason. I can always manually tweak it using Fn+F2/F3, but the next day the same thing will happen.  Not a big deal, just something to keep an eye on. 

 

I think it's time for me to open it up and install a second SSD, and move all my video / photo content over to it - making it my 'one and only' machine! 

[Steerpike]

USB C hub issue - I bought this decent-looking USB-C Hub on Amazon - Amazon.com: Baseus 8-in-1 USB C Hub Docking Station, USB C Adapter with 4K HDMI, 3 USB 3.0, TF/SD Reader, Ethernet, 100W Power Delivery ... but when I plug it in, and then plug power into it, I get the warning "An auxiliary power source with a lower rating has been connected. The battery may be discharged ... connect a properly rated adaptor ...". The power source is the original 65W unit that shipped with the laptop. I've tried other 3rd party chargers and they work without issue when directly plugged in, but I get the same warning message when connecting through this 'hub'.  So it would seem there is a problem in the way this hub is handling power.  I'm assuming a properly designed hub like this should pass through the power with no issues? The battery DOES charge, and (eg) the video port works, so the hub is functioning, it's just that I'm getting this warnng. 

 

Is there any way to troubleshoot a power source?  I now understand (from looking into USB-C PD cables) that USB-C PD is quite complex, and involves 'negotiation' between power supply and device.  I can imagine a utility that would hook into the driver for the power subsystem on the laptop, and reveal various things (such as, what power levels were negotiated). 

 

Could it be that the laptop wants 65W, and the hub itself is using a small fraction of the power being delivered by the 65W supply for it's own purposes, and thus only, say, 62 watts are being passed through, which is being detected as 'not sufficient'?   I really don't care if the device is 'only' passing through, say, 60W but it's not telling me how much; for all I know, I may only be getting a very low power delivery. I guess I could reverse-engineer the actual power delivery by using Battery Info View to monitor the battery level over time ... 

 

[John Ratsey]

I suspect that the docking station could be allowing for both the power it uses and the power it might supply to other devices which can be plugged into it at the same time so the 65W from the LG PSU could be reduced to 45W or less and that's what it reports to the computer. Each USB port is likely to be rated at 1A (ie 5W) minimum. It's unlikely, but not impossible to have, for example, a portable hard drive plugged into every USB port at the same time or be charging phones or other devices. My docking station came with a 135W brick (literally) so it has loads of spare power.

 

The Gram's own calculation of power needed assumes a combination of loaded CPU, devices plugged into the USB ports and charging the battery. If the power source isn't sufficient then the battery charge rate will be reduced and, in the worst case, the battery will supply power to help keep everything else running. If it's running happily after giving the power warning then there's nothing to worry about. The alternative is to look for a reasonably-priced 100W USB-C PSU.

[John Ratsey]

On 6/27/2022 at 4:26 AM, Steerpike said:

Also, I've had my LG Gram 17 for almost 3 months now. The glossy screen is not as much of an issue as I thought it would be (being a portable device, you can always twist / wobble / angle the screen somehow to avoid the nasty reflections, at least indoors) and the screen sharpness is amazing. The 'numeric keypad' is also something I'm adapting to quite well, though I do still wish it were just a standard keyboard plus the home/end/pgup/pgdn' column (I could not live with the 'pure' standard keyboard on the XPS 17!).

 

I think it's time for me to open it up and install a second SSD, and move all my video / photo content over to it - making it my 'one and only' machine! 

My screen reflection problems only occurred in the spring when the sun was shining through the window. They may re-appear in the autumn. I agree that the lack of an anti-glare coating improves the sharpness. I'm using the numpad for navigation but, because it pushes the main keyboard to the left I'm often hitting NumLk when aiming for Backspace. I'd much prefer the simple column of navigation keys without the numpad.

 

Getting into the Gram 17 is easy. You need a charp object to prise off the 4 big feet, the small lump between the two back feet and the other screw covers then use a size 0 Philips screwdriver to remove the screws. Finally prise the case apart starting at the middle front. I installed a 2nd SSD months ago and yesterday I changed the original 1TB drive for a 2TB WD Black SN770 which has been on sale here remarkably cheaply. So far it's running fine but I need to get inside again to temporarily install the original SSD to release the licence for a software package which clearly uses the storage drive as part of the device fingerprint (two other packages didn't mind the SSD swap). Having two M.2 2280 slots is a big benefit.

[Steerpike]

8 hours ago, John Ratsey said:

My screen reflection problems only occurred in the spring when the sun was shining through the window. They may re-appear in the autumn. I agree that the lack of an anti-glare coating improves the sharpness. I'm using the numpad for navigation but, because it pushes the main keyboard to the left I'm often hitting NumLk when aiming for Backspace. I'd much prefer the simple column of navigation keys without the numpad.

 

Getting into the Gram 17 is easy. You need a charp object to prise off the 4 big feet, the small lump between the two back feet and the other screw covers then use a size 0 Philips screwdriver to remove the screws. Finally prise the case apart starting at the middle front. I installed a 2nd SSD months ago and yesterday I changed the original 1TB drive for a 2TB WD Black SN770 which has been on sale here remarkably cheaply. So far it's running fine but I need to get inside again to temporarily install the original SSD to release the licence for a software package which clearly uses the storage drive as part of the device fingerprint (two other packages didn't mind the SSD swap). Having two M.2 2280 slots is a big benefit.

Did you ever try any 'before/after' comparisons of power utilization of the SSD?  Turns out, I'm using my laptop every day now on battery, all day, so I'm very keen to optimize usage. 

[Steerpike]

8 hours ago, John Ratsey said:

I suspect that the docking station could be allowing for both the power it uses and the power it might supply to other devices which can be plugged into it at the same time so the 65W from the LG PSU could be reduced to 45W or less and that's what it reports to the computer. Each USB port is likely to be rated at 1A (ie 5W) minimum. It's unlikely, but not impossible to have, for example, a portable hard drive plugged into every USB port at the same time or be charging phones or other devices. My docking station came with a 135W brick (literally) so it has loads of spare power.

 

The Gram's own calculation of power needed assumes a combination of loaded CPU, devices plugged into the USB ports and charging the battery. If the power source isn't sufficient then the battery charge rate will be reduced and, in the worst case, the battery will supply power to help keep everything else running. If it's running happily after giving the power warning then there's nothing to worry about. The alternative is to look for a reasonably-priced 100W USB-C PSU.

That's certainly an interesting thought - it's subtracting a pre-defined amount from the source capability as a 'reserve' for other port usage.  I just bought another 65 W USB-C PD power supply (remarkably small and lightweight!), but I don't have any plans to buy a 100W version since size/weight are key considerations. Since they are so cheap, though, I could buy a 100W version and dedicate it to home use. 

[RS4]

21 hours ago, John Ratsey said:

My screen reflection problems only occurred in the spring when the sun was shining through the window. They may re-appear in the autumn. I agree that the lack of an anti-glare coating improves the sharpness. I'm using the numpad for navigation but, because it pushes the main keyboard to the left I'm often hitting NumLk when aiming for Backspace. I'd much prefer the simple column of navigation keys without the numpad.

 

Getting into the Gram 17 is easy. You need a charp object to prise off the 4 big feet, the small lump between the two back feet and the other screw covers then use a size 0 Philips screwdriver to remove the screws. Finally prise the case apart starting at the middle front. I installed a 2nd SSD months ago and yesterday I changed the original 1TB drive for a 2TB WD Black SN770 which has been on sale here remarkably cheaply. So far it's running fine but I need to get inside again to temporarily install the original SSD to release the licence for a software package which clearly uses the storage drive as part of the device fingerprint (two other packages didn't mind the SSD swap). Having two M.2 2280 slots is a big benefit.

 

I also prefer the sharpness of glossy screen when compared to the matte texture, as far a sun shining is considered I am in India and the sun shines with fire and fury here most of the year.

 

I was dreading the keyboard before getting the laptop but now I love it. I am just happy disabling it and using it as big arrow buttons and page up , page down, Home, End buttons. Very useful as those dedicated buttons have disappeared in most of the consumer line laptops and also the arrow buttons have gotten slimmer and smaller over the years.

 

So, what is your final storage capacity after all the SSD upgrades?

[John Ratsey]

2 hours ago, RS4 said:

So, what is your final storage capacity after all the SSD upgrades?

It's a nominal 4TB (never that much in reality plus I've left about 150GB unallocated on each SSD to help with garbage management (which might not be necessary these days). When I've time and inclination I'll work through all my old drives and try to get everything into one place which will then be backed up onto a portable HDD. I also wanted enough space to do some video building.

 

I've not looked at the power consumption as my Gram 17 is being used as a compact desktop which is easy to put out of the way if I want the desk for other uses. However, I think that power management on recent NVMe SSDs is good and they quickly go to sleep if not busy.

[RS4]

On 7/18/2022 at 2:45 AM, John Ratsey said:

It's a nominal 4TB (never that much in reality plus I've left about 150GB unallocated on each SSD to help with garbage management (which might not be necessary these days). When I've time and inclination I'll work through all my old drives and try to get everything into one place which will then be backed up onto a portable HDD. I also wanted enough space to do some video building.

 

I've not looked at the power consumption as my Gram 17 is being used as a compact desktop which is easy to put out of the way if I want the desk for other uses. However, I think that power management on recent NVMe SSDs is good and they quickly go to sleep if not busy.

 

After opening it up twice, how is the glue of the rubber feet holding up? A Gram owner was complaining about feet feeling loose afterwards.

[John Ratsey]

On 7/23/2022 at 2:07 AM, RS4 said:

 

After opening it up twice, how is the glue of the rubber feet holding up? A Gram owner was complaining about feet feeling loose afterwards.

It's now been opened up 3 times. Yesterday I temporarily put back the original SSD as I needed to release the licence on a software package which didn't like the SSD swap (two other packages didn't complain). While I had the base off I also repasted the CPU to see if I could reduce the occurrence of thermal throttling. The original paste was a bit dry. The CPU still hits the thermal limits under sustained load but now it's running a bit cooler under normal conditions. I also put thermal pads on the SSDs and they are keeping cooler.

 

As for the glue, it's still quite sticky. When the feet are pulled off some of the glue comes with them and some stays on the base cover. I try to put back the feet so that the circle of glue is reformed.  However, the computer's feet have an easy time as my Gram 17 is used as a compact desktop and doesn't get put into / taken out of a bag several times a day. Nonetheless, for anyone worrying about the feet getting loose, the fix will be to buy some 15mm circular double-sided tape pads (example here) and use them to replace the original glue when it gets tired.