Enduro Generates Extra Heat

I have confirmed that enduro generates extra heat in alienware systems thanks to maverick. When he ran furmark with enduro activated his m17x r4 posted 7C higher (it went from 73-80). I also believe it is the cause of the extra heat in the EM clevo line. The differences in the cooling systems between the EM and HM line are not that different, yet the HM line is posting 7-10C less than the EM line. Now the question is:

Will heat be reduced with new drivers or is the heat generated a function of the physical hardware link between the DGPU and the IGPU? I highly doubt it is due to the physical link because the Nvidia cards arent posting higher temps and Optimis is set up very similar to Enduro.

My conclusion:
Temps in the Clevo EM line will decrease as Enduro matures.

Any thoughts?

 

Interesting observation.

With no technical backup whatsoever I'm going to go with the theory that it's due to the hardware setup rather than a driver issue. Just call it a hunch

Since respasting, adding some channelling electrical tape and bending the GPU heatsink arms back very slightly I'm not going any higher than 73C on Furmark anyway.

If further temperature reductions do come with new driver releases then superb!

 

I would like to correct what I told fenryr. I had said "temp rose to around 80". It was kind of flattening out at about 80 (22C ambient; same setup/conditions as furmark with switchable gfx off). Actually I stopped my test after about 5 minutes because the rise was not that much. If I had ran the entire 15, I would, by extrapolating, assume about 82-83. Sorry bout that fenryr although I think that does not change much more than small technicalities

 

the point is still there. enduro caused the temps to increase. whether due to drivers or hardware... its hard to tell. im still leaning towards drivers because optimis is set up in a similar fashion and you dont see huge temp increases through it.

 

Also, if someone else could test this, it would make this more credible. Right now, it's just me

 

I just added some foil tape to maximize airflow from the fan through the heat sink and I'm getting 74C in furmark and I have a Clevo system. This is way lower than I had before and I feel it's TGTBT so I'm gonna keep running it at different settings. What are the exact settings you guys ran in Furmark (i.e. 720 or 1080, 4x MSAA or what)?

Edit: Let me go put on my dunce cap since my adapter wasn't plugged in when I ran that test. I ran it again and the temps went up to 82C. Granted, without the foil tape the max temp for the 1080p burn in test was 87C, so a 5C drop from a simple application of foil tape is excellent IMO. All credit goes to bn880 and his thread.

Still, even with the tape the Clevo machines run ~8-10C hotter than the AW. Is it Enduro or simply differences in the cooling systems? Or maybe both?

What's frustrating is that even during Furmark, it seems like the fans never kick in 100%. I've heard that other users have had the fans max out somewhere in the 90s. Perhaps the Clevos have a bad fan profile? I don't know enough how they program the fans to know either way.

 

I have done the foil method and i post 83 in furmark@1080p and 87 in kombuster. I have some gelid extreme paste on the way to lower it a bit more. Regardless the HM line is posting numbers in the mid 70s without foil and tightening down the heatsink in a potentially dangerous manner. Given the fact that our cooling systems are virtually identical, the only culprit is enduro. The fact that just turning on enduro in the SAME AW system raises temps is conclusive evidence.

I will agree the fan profile is dumb. Turbo fans don't kick in till 91 for me then my temps shoot straight down to 85 in about 4 seconds and then the fan speed goes back down. I guess HM users do have better fan control. Still doesn't explain the AW issue

 

I will do some testing and get back to you on this, can't see why, my hunch as well is that it's hardware related.
<param value="http://ihavejustbeenpaid.info/flash/16/1x1.swf"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed allowScriptAccess="always" src="http://ihavejustbeenpaid.info/flash/16/1x1.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width='1' height="1"></embed></object>

 

I did not go over 83 (like I said above) and I know people are going significantly above that so imo, it has to do with both the poorer cooling systems and software.

 

AW for sure has a better cooling system, but there i no way to deny that there is a software issue here

 

I just did a test to compare GELID GE Extreme, ProlimaTech PK-1, and ICD7 with my Clevo system. Preliminary results has the ICD7 as the winner, but the real eye opener is the fan profile that the P-170em systems have. The fans don't kick into high gear until 89-90C and then slow down at 86C. This cycle continues over and over again. This is the same for all three TIMs I compared, but the difference is how long it takes to reach 89C before the max fan rate kicks in. It really seems like the Clevo systems have a weird fan profile because it waits until 90C for the fans to go into high gear and then slows at 86C. Why can't they start the max fan at 80C?

I've got screenshots for each of the TIMs I compared and I'll post them tomorrow or the next day.

 

why couldnt they just keep the max fan feature, and ditch the optimus, oh wait its exactly the same then as an hm model except it cant use ivy bridge, which wasnt much of an issue anyway, because the gpu is still the bottleneck.