**The Official Studio XPS 1645 Intel Core i7 "Owners Lounge"

My RGBLED screen does not flicker. It is the best display I've ever had.

 

Yeah mine doesnt as well, iv had it since the 8th and touch wood have not had any problems with it.

 

Thanks guys, I have some hope then! It's a fantastic screen other than my flickering problem!

 

Mine is hot only some of the time... it gets really hot if I'm charging the battery and using the computer at the same time, or if I'm playing a game. If I'm JUST charging, or JUST doing normal use, it's not very hot for me

 

Thanks a lot kaushikpai and mrhohoha ..

I have attached snapshots of HWMonitor while running Prime95 Torture tests for around an hour for my laptop. The ambient room temperature is low as I am currently in Norway (Maybe 18-20 deg C). I am using the 90W power adapter.

I hope this will help others with similar queries!

@kaushikpai: About the graphics card tests, I don't exactly know which version of 3DMark to use. The 3DMark Vantage appears to be pretty big to download, and is also a paid software! I will post my laptop results if you could confirm the software version/download link.

 

is there a way to run a game in 800x600 in widescreen(16:10) mode with full screen (without bars)?? tried scaling but its showing disabled in the ati control pannel.. Pls help.. urgent... thanks in advance...

 

Figured I'd toss in a second set of numbers.

With the 820QM and AS5 thermal paste, here's a shot of HWMonitor after 10 minutes of running Prime95 (Blend) on 8 threads.

Note: This is with the 130W adapter and TS running.

 

Thanks for sharing your laptop temperature readings n3verm0re. I think the thermal paste definitely improves cooling. I will also consider this option soon!

 

Those are stellar temperatures. I think I'll do the same over break.

It doesn't void the warranty, right?

 

try here: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=5763715#post5763715

 

Mine flickers as well. Its very slight and mostly unnoticeable. Does it about once every 30 seconds or so.

 

Okay, I can cancel my eye appointment. Mine flickers, too.

 

Why does it look like a comparably equipped 1647 with the highest level processor costs about the same as a 1645 with the highest level processor?

By having parity pricing between the quads and the dual cores, is Dell suggesting they are the same system or are comparable systems?

 

Because 1647 is newer system. It probably has longer battery life and less throttling issue due to lower TDP. 620m performance should be comparable to 720qm if not better.

 

I have had mine since the 21st of December and I haven't had any issues whatsoever with mine.

 

ppl... beleive me the RGB LED screen is the screen to die for.. one of my batchmates have 1640 with WLED(which is also good, but not as good as RGBLED) and you can definitely tell the difference.. it just blows WLED off... i'm glad i went a step ahead and paid a lil more for this wonderful screen.... i have had no issues with RGBLED screen whatsoever either with my first system (29 Days of heavenly use) or my replacement system ( around a week of dissappointing use )

anybody can get me on the graphics benchmarks soon plz?

 

When playing MW2 the game sets the optimal resolution at 800 x 600. Does that mean that is the optimal resolution for the 1645? I maxed out the settings and the games was definitely playable, although with some lagging in a couple of scenes. I'd appreciate any input.

 

Depends on which lcd you have. I always prefer native resolution. Or at least you should chose a 16:9 resolution.

 

yeah its the same for me except that before my sxps played well with no laggingg (about 35-40 fps) but since 2 days i'm having gpu problems and i can play but a lot lagging..(20 fps and in some scenes as less as 12-15 fps)

 

Have you verified the gpu problems isnt due to throttling.

 

yeah i did.. i think its something to do with driver problems.. the max fps i get is 60 in any game/ all the games... anybody can tell me their max fps of the games they play? mine are as follows (all in max settings without anti aliasing)

Burnout paradise (1920x1080) : 60 fps
Assassins creed (1920x1080) : 30 fps
NFS undercover (1920x1080) : 60 fps
NFS MW (1280x1024) : 60 fps "Only"!! this game is ages old and i think it should score above 100 fps for the hardware i have.. same goes for NFS CARBON:
NFS CARBON (1280x1024) : 60 fps
Prince of persia warrior within : 60 fps
GTA 4 : 30 fps....
COD MW2 : 40 fps before, now hardly 20 fps
far cry 2: 35 fps
crysis warhead : 15-25 fps...

and many more games...

see?? the max fps i get is 60 fps in any game be it old or new.. i dono why i'm not getting over 60 fps.. has the graphics card max limit been set to 60 fps or something like that?? anybody else can post their games and corresponding fps scores??

 

This is an easy one, disable Vsync in the ATI control panel.

 

yeah thanks.. it was off only i turned it on thinking it improves game detail and performance..

wat is vsync??? and wat is its function??

 

vsync (Vertical synchronization) function results in synchronization of frame changes (farme rate) according to the display device for optimization of the image to be displayed.

so basically Vsync matches your monitors refresh rate to that of 3-d application. 60 hz is the refresh rate for the lcd of sxps 1645.

this prevents tearing of images on your screen while gaming.

 

thanks for that info dude.. i suspected it.. 60hz..60 fps.. now gaming grande!!! i think this solved all the graphics card problems.. THANK YOU FOR HELPING ME!!!!!!

 

Hi everyone.

I have my laptop for a couple weeks now and i was just watching Batman Returns trailer in HD 1080p (youtube) on my rgbled screen and 2 minutes in to the trailer, the screen all of a sudden went all pink/purple and i had to put it to sleep for it to get back to normal.

Any ideas why it done that?

 

I have the WLED 1920x1080. I do play it at max resolution, but I was just wondering the reason why MW2 detects the optimal resolution for this laptop to be 800 x 600. I figured the GPU was good enough as well as the CPU, so no reason why in such system optimal would be the lowest resolution.

 

So is it better to always have Vsync disabled?

 

There's no reason to unless you are doing benchmark. You can't see any fps higher than the monitor capable of.

Probably due to slower CPU clock rate. Some game require 2GHz CPU to play recommended settings, otherwise it will default to lowest setting.

 

No, you can get a tearing effect on the screen with it disabled.

 

You should download Rivatuner, and then run D3DOverrider. It will enable triple buffering in all games, which stops the FPS being halved.

http://downloads.guru3d.com/downloadget.php?id=163&file=4&evp=2d213e528fb556c354432a3976bff55a

 

My RGB screen does not flicker.

 

Just an update. Got a voicemail this morning, they have no parts so won't be coming to fix the Blu Ray drive today. Yet on Friday I specifically asked them if they had the part in stock to carry out the repair and they said they did. The smell of BS is getting stronger. So, they reckon up to 7 days for back-order parts to arrive, but won't commit to any kind of guaranteed fix date. Looks like I could order an external drive and it would arrive sooner than this. I asked about downgrading to just DVDRW drive and they reckoned that would take just as long. Would anyone care to guess on whether this thing will be fixed in, say 9 days, from now. My hopes are fading fast. Starting to look for alternatives (non-Dell) in the event that I give up and get a refund.

 

I've a little big problem

Today I've received my XPS16, with A01 bios version. I've updated to A03 but now I see only 2c/4t




How I can resolve this problem?

Thanks a lot

 

I noticed the same issue, after installing BIOS A03. This is also seen in the Windows Experience Index detailed results. Only using 2 cores. with 2 permanently parked. Am I missing something?

Hillie.

 

I've re-flash A03 and now I see 4C/8T
My CPU WEI was 5.6.....

 

can somebody tell me if it's worth it to get another xps i7 or just get an i5, I have a 1640 T9550 undervolted and I'm pretty happy with it.

 

I think you should at least wait video card refreshed.

 

See attached image WEI Capture.jpg This is a screen shot of the WEI Detailed results and shows a base score of 5.6, but reports only 2 cores Maybe I am reading it wrong...

Hillie

 

did you check in the bios, that multi-core was enabled? or something like that, I seem to remember there may be a setting in there... I think.. I know in the Latitudes there's an option to turn off multi-core support.

otherwise I think there's something wrong with your cpu, I would say call it in, and have them replace it.

 

hi dude.. thats y i din update my bios to A03.. more of a risk for so less benefits.. and i also thought that i wud update after dell released their BIOS for fixing Throttlegate Issue..

Now, coming to your problem.. I definitely think its a BIOS problem.. try updating your BIOS once again.. and see if they are any tweaking options about multi-core/multi threading in bios which can help your bios recognize the remaining cores/threads... because the same thing happened with my old desktop with core 2 quad Q6600 processor.. after i updated bios it just recognized 1 out of 4 cores.. then i called a serviceman and he did some tweking in the bios which resolved the issue.. Hope this resolves for you too.. i'll also look into my SXPS 1645 BIOS regarding this.. [I had never luked into SXPS BIOS before so jus gotta reason to look into.. ]

 

Been doing some tinkering...... Previously I had been into MSCONFIG, BOOT tab, ADVANCED OPTIONS and checked the Number of Processors check box and changed the setting to 4 (consistent with QUAD CORE). The default in windows was un-checked. This change to 4 cores has a marked improvement on Start up time, but also caused the WEI results to report only 2 Cores and a base score of 5.6

To test the impact of this on WEI, I went back into MSCONFIG and unchecked the NUMBER OF PROCESSORS option (restored the default), rebooted then re-ran the WEI test.

The new Base score jumped to 5.8, and also reported 4 cores.... There is some connection between the MSCONFIG Boot configuration and the WEI results. Any ideas.... Test is repeatable on my system.

Will try and post some thumbnails....... Will try to include a Throttlestop image in monitoring mode only under both sets of conditions. TS shows 4 sets of results with the MSCONFIG BOOT option set to 4 cores and 8 sets of results with MSCONFIG BOOT option set to Default state. So non windows tools also see the impact of this setting.

(I hope your can follow my diagnostics without killing too many brain cells)

Hillie

 

I think that the flaw in what you did is that, when you entered "4 processors", you were not entering correct information. You only have 1 processor and that processor has 4 cores.

Also, I'm trying to figure out, with your configuration, why your WIE would be that low. The base score is the lowest of the sub-scores. If you have a non-solid state drive, the best that you can get for the hard drive sub-score is 5.9. With just about any 1645 configuration without a solid state drive, I'd expect that you should be getting a 5.9 for the hard drive and higher scores for everything else. On my system, I'm getting a 5.9 for the non-solid state drive. My next lowest score is 6.7.

Les

 

you make some good points. I spent some time playing with the MSCONFIG Boot Tab settings. Now correct me if I am wrong, but the i7-720QM processor has 4 cores and is capable of supporting 8 hyper-threads!

In the MSCONFIG settings, the Verbiage refers to NUMBER of PROCESSORS. Based on the Intel Description of the i7 this would be 4 (4 seperate processor cores in one chip). However after restoring the MSCONFIG defaults and rebooting I then noticed when going back into MSCONFIG that when checking the Number of Processors box, the drop down selection went upto 8. I therefore selected 8 as the number of processors. Rebooted and re-ran the WEI test with Throttle stop running in monitoring mode only.

My WEI CPU score is now 6.9 The Base score is 5.8 based on the HDD data rate as you had predicted being the slowest aspect of the system. With MSCONFIG settings set to 8 things are performing as expected and making sense. Am I correct in assuming that this setting is in fact refering to the number of available hype threads rather than the number of processsors or cores?

Hillie

 

I can't tell you for sure, but I thought that it refers to the number of processors, not the number of cores or threads. Regardless, my guess would be that any changes you made in those numbers in the MSCONFIG boot settings would only effect how the computer boots, and I'd guess that, once it was booted up, that setting wouldn't make any difference. Someone else with better knowledge of those settings might, however, tell me that I'm mistaken.

Without changing anything in the MSCONFIG boot settings, my sub-score for the processor (with an i7 1.60 processor) is 7.1. So, I'm still not sure why yours would be lower.

Les

 

In theory I agree that the BOOT settings should affect the boot up of the system only. In practice, the results show otherwise and that setting the number of processors # = 4 results in slower performance as two cores are parked. Even TS only reports hal the number of data points and, WEI reports only 2 cores. Change the settings to default, or #=8 and WEI reports 4 processors and a higher CPU Score, and TS reports a full set of results

I would like to understand the relationship of the MSCONFIG BOOT settings more on the general system operation in more detail myself. Thanks for everybodies input on this...... it is appreciated. Keep the comments coming.

Hillie

 

Out of curiosity, I changed the MSCONFIG setting to 8 processors and ran the WEI again. I ended up with exactly the same scores that I had when the setting was at the default setting of 1 processor.

Les

 

Noted, but please try it with a setting of 4, and also look at the WEI detailed results and Number of Processors will probable report 2

 

As I've thought about it a bit more, I think I've come up with an interpretation that makes sense.

If you don't check the box in in question in MSCONFIG, what you are doing is setting the boot to automatically detect the number of cores/threads and make them all active. If you check the box and enter 8, you are manually telling the computer to boot with all 4 cores/8 threads active. On the other hand, if you check the box and select a number less than 8, you are telling the computer to boot with only some of the cores/threads active, and you are disabling some of the cores/threads, which, in theory, should allow the enabled cores to work at a higher turbo boost frequency. Depending on the computer system/motherboard/BIOS, you can do the same thing through a BIOS setting. I don't believe that the 1645 BIOS allows you to change/reduce the number of active cores, but you can do it via this MSCONFIG setting. Also, I don't believe that any changes you make to this setting take effect until you reboot the computer.

Les

 

Is it worth upgrading to A03?