Toshiba Qosmio X305-Q701 Overclocking the GPU 9700m GTS (software/BIOS/tweaks/tips/drivers)

dv9700 CTO.. Wonder if it would be possible to put that LCD in this comp for better resolution. I shouldn't go getting ahead of myself

 

1 thing at a time. lol

 

Thanks for all your hard work in getting the test done. Reps definitely earned.

 

Did you have to make any changes in the BIOS's settings or just boot and straight to Windows?

 

no, thank you..

Actually, I cleaned the CPU and heat sink, applied AS5, locked it in the board and then put everything back together. I booted the laptop, entered the BIOS(which is very basic, no advanced options), just checked to make sure it recognized all the hardware, and then booted up. You can see in the previous post that Windows had to install it's drivers for the CPU. Otherwise, that's it. No tweaks, no adjustments, no alterations. I do, however, have a 1:2 FSB:RAM ratio now, per cpu-z, which I think is the optimal achievement with Intel. Correct me if I'm wrong. And I'd much rather replace the CPU on a tower though..a lot less effort! But then I wouldn't be making ground breaking news, just like I did with the release of the x305 first benchmarks

 

Hmm, a bit confused, do you mean that the FSB:RAM ratio changed on its own/automaticaly?

All of you guys, very nice work.

 

Yes, and no..the original CPU has a FSB of 1066, vs. the 800 FSB of the T7500 that replaced it. The RAM is PC8500 DDR3, meaning it clocks up to 1066 Mhz, but most RAM has the ability to downclock..in this case it downclocked to 400 Mhz..which is truly 800Mhz after the multiplier, with lower latency. So cpu-z reads it as my FSB(board speed not CPU) is 200, and the RAM is 400. Hence, 1:2. And to the best of my knowledge, this is the *ideal* clocks, because truly the ratio should be 1:1 so both CPU and RAM are syncing. And in essence, I'm running at 800 Mhz FSB, and 800 Mhz RAM once all multiplying is applied. Or, I just confused myself cause its late. Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong.

cq could run cpu-z and let us know his ratio.. I believe it *was* 3:5

EDIT: CPU-Z REPORTS IT AS DDR2; possibly due to the downclocking from the lower FSB of the T7500.

 

PLEASE SEE ORIGINAL THREAD POST (PG. #1), IT HAS BEEN UPDATED AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE IF WE CONTINUE TO PROVIDE USEFUL INFO. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE!

 

While +1500 points is impressive, I am very worried about 88C GPU temp, especially in a notebook PC.
I wouldn't feel comfortable with it.

If I understand correctly the T model is a faster CPU, or does the extra increase in GPU overclocking have to do with with other things than the, possible, faster CPU?

 

Sure I'll post some cpu-z pics in a short while.....
-----------------------------------------------
Okay, here are the CPU-Z shots

 

So since the original 3DMark2006 score is approx. 7200 are you now getting about 8700 ?? If so that is an impressive gain !!! Excellent work. God Bless

 

Okay I did a full and total teardown of this laptop, and took alot of pictures of the board, unfortunately since I dont know what a PLL looks like, I'll leave it up to the community to decide, what is relevant, and what isnt....
I needed to do a teardown anyways, it makes me feel better...lol, just kidding, I plan on applying arctic silver 5 to certain components...in an effort to reduce heat in this notebook...
So here is the album, for the loving community... http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v720/christopherquinalty/full teardown of the board/

 

Using HWMonitor it idles at 45 Celcius, and under high performing stress it maxed at 88. I'm not concerned til it hits 90-95 I've been using the same drivers for the past several days, since original clocks were posted. The only thing I've changed was the CPU, and possibly the larger Cache, 4MB vs 3MB is helping.. It seems to me that the P7350 is the bottleneck in this system. Once it's replaced, the full potential will be recognized.

 

its not bottlenecking anything IMO, i have a similar CPU, even with SLI ON which hogs alot oF CPU, still no bottlenecks in almost every game, his 3dmark06 will get another 500 points if the CPU was lets say 2.8 ghz, but those points are worthless really.

 

Agreed. They give an idea of ability, but not stability. There is a sweet spot with this video card, which I've almost found.. and even though your SLI seems CPU intensive, I think you'd notice a huge gain with a new CPU. Not just benchmarks which are not real world, but in gaming with your FPS. Didn't check spec sheet or anything, but you also have a 3MB cache, right? Having dropped the T7500 in the x305, I notice a difference in boot time and multi-taksing. Not to say the p7350 is a poor chip.. Because it's an excellent performer, and I half expected it to outperform the T7500. Nevertheless, I don't suggest anyone "upgrade" their Qosmio to a T7500. If you're taking the time to tear everything apart, I suggest making it worth your while and using a Montevina Chip, like the x9100!

 

+1 Rep..doh! Says I need to spread some love first. Someone wanna share some love with cq842000

Edit: Added your disassembly guide and high-def pics to forum original. We all appreciate your pioneering!

 

Sorry i edited my post, Similar CPU not GPU xD

 

Yes, I was thinking about the p7350 being the bottleneck too.
In 10-15 days, if all goes well, I should have my X300-S11 and do some benchmarks on that too and see if the [email protected] helps at all.
But as for overclocking the GPU, I am sorry but I am not willing to risk it, too high temps IMO. The increased performance is very nice, but it will have to be my only computer for the next couple of years+ so I better play it safe.

 

Congrats on that BlueMak Don't let us forget to welcome you to the family!

I can understand where you're coming from.. I'm looking to downclock the GPU for everyday use. The original clocks I left posted on the front page are STABLE and the card never reaches 80C. This rig has excellent room for cooling as cq first noticed.. I like his idea of removing the screens on the base for better airflow.

As far as the P8400, it will be night and day for performance, boot times, load times, and should be a good size jump in FPS.. This GPU is a beast, just gotta let the chains off it! I'm interested to see how the 7811FX performs.. I think it should be a decent competitor. But the screen res is definately going to set it back. And when can we get some info on the x305-q702?! I wanna see my lappies big bro come crush some heads

The avg. 3dmark06 is a bit higher than that.. just below 8900. But, I believe we've decided that benchmarks for this forum should be represented by another means, as we can't come to agreement on reliability. dtwn recommended something more universal and geared towards gaming. I'm about to scroll back to cq's benchies, and see what this rig does with same settings.

 

I'm wondering just for posterity's sake, exactly which video cards, have the cpu offload capability, that Nvidia has made mention of?

 

I believe it depends on the laptop manufacturer. Are you referring to the Hybrid Video?

By the way.. cq is hard at work:

LOL! It takes me that long to think of what to type in this box. You break out the stopwatch? I know you did! Hey, added your pics and guide to main page.. as well as stats. if there's anything else you would like to see there let me know. Im gonna benchmark DMC4, maybe we can agree to use that as a global comparison? Let me know when you decide to use the new ntune and if it reads clocks properly.. I'm here for ya bud, as long as you're there to help me find out where my leftover parts go when I try to reassemble again!

As a heads up.. from my testing so far, if you bump the shader up you should be safe at 1700-1800. And it will give you a noticeable gain. I'd say 1720-1750 is ideal. And the 910 memory is a safe bet. All cards are diff, quality varies slightly. But I've found a sweet spot somewhere around 705/899/1755. I need to do some more testing to tighten up the clocks just a bit, but it's given me the most performance, and least stability issues. Keep in mind, if you switch drivers you'll have to re-callibrate the OC'ing cause the drivers make a HUGE difference.

Everyone has their methods for testing stability, and performance gains with OC'ing the GPU.. Is there a method you prefer

Quick side note cq.. I downloaded a stability/bench program..not sure how reliable the results are but I'm bout to test and find out. Here's the link if you're interested: http://freestone-group.com/download/VideoCardStabilityTestSetup.exe

 

I'm game, and running the benchmark right now....WooHoo, up to 453 fps...lol
402 fps was my average, over 3 minutes, hahaha....I cant beleive that the Intel 915GM was even on that list...It performs the equivalent to 10 Nvidia GeForce 8400 GSs, that's almost 2.3 Nvidia 7600 GTs... On the second run I got 407fps as my average, but I saw my peak at 462.12 fps...nice utility.

 

LOL. I ran the stability test, but after watching HWMonitor his 95C I stopped it. Dont think it's safe to get that high after 4 minutes.. no artifacts or driver errors. just got scared..

 

I ran it through with my current GPU settings, and right towards the end the fan finally kicked on, but no problems what so ever... I swear I keep hearing monkeys from inside my notebook(juuust kidding)

 

Be warned though, after the gpu hits a certain temp, the display driver resets and enters safe mode(but back to normal, after a reboot)...thats why I want to either change out the fan, or figure out a way to control this one...

 

Changing fan may not be a bad idea Don't go buying one of thos dorky coolpads, or whatever. Then you'd deserve and require severe harassment. Hey, using that same program if you click the Start button it stress tests it.. after 5 minutes what does your GPU heat max out at?

Edit: I've had my driver reset a couple times yesterday.. BTW, that fan you heard kick on at the end.. that was the fan stepping into high speed at 90 celcius. I've watched my heat get there, and every time as soon as HW reports 90 the fan kicks into high gear.

 

I'm testing now...No way, using one of those cool pads is the easy way out, for people without an imagination...

Okay, it hit 91 celsius and went into low acceleration mode at about 4 minutes, 55 seconds...yep, time to look into fan and cooling options....on a very important side note, without both heatsinks and heatfins, minus the fan, there seems to be enough room for a mobile internal liquid cooling solution...but its a feild of dreams at this point... Yet isnt that how all the big name computer companies started out? I remember reading about two guys, in a backyard garage, with big dreams, new ideas, and ALOT of circuit boards, that went on to become hewlett-packard, many said that electronic computing couldnt be done, and I'm sure they faced their share of trials, but through ingenuity, determination, and perserverance they succeeded....

 

Hope you have long coat tails. I'll need room to stretch. I'm not concerned with the GPU temp, it seems that it's not an issue until the 100+ area. The nice thing about this comp, the GPU isnt integrated so the heat it puts off should not affect other components. I was looking at internal temps...everythings cool, GPU just likes to prove it's working hard for ya. I'm going to stress test for an hour to see where max temps go, and let it find any artifacts if they exist. I'll let you know what happens.. Til then, good luck

 

Guys you might want to take it easy with the overclocking for a while.
It was mentioned in this thread http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=285090

which has a link here http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/08/12/nvidia-g92s-g94-reportedly
that the known issues with the 8400m and 8600m cards is not limited just to them but also the rest of the 8 and 9 series...Check the article (second link) and then the forum thread if you wish. If it is true and if the 9700 is affected, then perhaps it is not the best idea to overclock and stress the card much...

 

Well thanks for the link...though now I'm Blue da ba dee da bu da, da bu dee da bu die, da bu dee da bu da....lol... I'll wait for Nvidia's press release on this issue, as the same was said about alot of the hardware that I own, yet I've not had one failure....except for my Xbox 360...and i am infamous for pushing hardware beyond it's posted limits to test for stability, as I have been all my life...

 

Yes, the problem is that the same source warned us about the 8400 and 8600 cards and they were 100% correct.
So I Am worried and even having second thoughts about this notebook.

 

Dont fret my friend, it's fine, for the simple fact that if something in this book did fail, Toshiba has your back, and if not, then ATI should soon give you some options...

I am personally going to research, possibly engineer another method of cooling for notebooks, that happens not to be mainstream as of now...


Perhaps there is hope, but I'm not worried....My friend that lives next door, has had his desktop for over three years, running an overclocked 8600 GT, since day two...no problems. Though he now has a Toshiba X305-Q701 as well....

 

My problem is after I get it I won't be able to not have it for days till it gets repaired/replaced.

If the 9700 is on the G96 core perhaps there is some hope.

 

I have not seen any X9100's on Ebay yet, but I still do have my X9000 which *should* work also !!!

 

BlueMak, I'm not a professional.. however I am an aspiring amatuer. But with the video card issue that's been recently publicized.. it's a matter of video cards running hot and not lasting their expected lifespan. If you just think about it.. this is an issue that affects anyone and everyone. Whether it's an OC'd card and hardcore gamer, or your average every day Joe, your card is affected. Well, the common solution by vendors is to have the cooling system run more often. Whether this is an effective resolution or not I don't know..makes sense though. However, what I do know is the people who are avid gamers, the ones who are buying for performance, the people who are tech savvy(am or pro), and especially OC'ers typically know/learn more about their rigs(by choice or accident).. And this is to their benefit. Even if they've never had a problem they're warranty is now extended..they have ammo for any issues that may need resolution. Those average, anywho users are the ones sacrificing.. they don't know anything about updating BIOSs, their monitor goes out, and then their curious as to the problem. Which of the 2 are more aware, and look to prevent the issue?

Here's my opinion, a stock card is not going to run too hot for 3 months and burn out. These are cards that have been on the market for quite some time. They've BEEN running hot, and now the big vendors are stepping up and pointing fingers. Is this truly NVIDIAs fault? Or is it the manufacturers who don't want to have to put out a ton of $$$ to repair THEIR computers, cause their cooling solutions lacked? HP extended warranties on numerous models 2 years ago, because the WIFI was having issues and the MOBOs would burn out(now they want to admit the GPU caused it).. The WIFI issues were caused by the MOBO overheating, because of lack of ventilation. The GPU is likely the hottest component inside a laptop, and if there is not proper cooling then the GPU will ruin other components. So, it's easy to point the finger at NVIDIA when the fact is..You should test your OWN laptops before mass production, and before placing blame on the company who provides a WORKING part that YOUR product is incompatible with.

Long post short.. if you're already aware you can prevent problems..if not then it becomes a problem. From user, to manufacturer the rule applies with same results. For us it *may* be an inconvenience, for them it's an expense. But if we users are diligent, and the manufacturer attemps to prevent, then there won't be any issues. But then again, life is a risk from the time you awake.

EDIT: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=3766023&posted=1#post3766023
someone there has a problem with HP cause their friend has a problem with HP.. I explained my side.

 

@E-wrecked and cq842000

Nvidia GeForce 9700m GTS OC'd(core 751mhz, memory 998mhz(1996mhz DDR), shader 1755mhz stable(cq842000)

9700M GTS OC'd and stable 709 core/998 mem/1805 shader(E-wrecked)

you both have different overclocked versions of the same card which one is better and more stable? and better benchmarks?

 

Depends, his clocks have better temperature, more stability, mine have better performance, and benchmarks, at the cost of battery life, and heat...

I would actually say that our performance is about even, though I chose to concentrate more on the core( which substantialy increases heat)

What do you think E-dawg?(word up)lol...

Besides I'm temporarily out of this race, but will be back after a nice rest, and composition tomorrow...

 

Wow this thread got extremely long. But yes, I ran my 3DMark on my TV, to get 1280x1024.

And for someone who made the comment that I make "horrendous accusations"... I highly doubt I have done so.

I won't argue the upgradability of the X305, because I don't own one. All I will upgrade is performance. Out of the box, the X305 may actually perform better all around, due to the much better CPU, and slightly faster RAM. In most games, the Gateway will perform better, due to the stronger GPU, but in games which rely on the CPU a bit, the X305 may do better.

Good to see you guys pushing your notebook to it's limits!

 

well I like better performance so i think i'll go with your config and I dont wanna scare you guys or anything but their might be another colour for X305 coming up because I have been checking best buy online they used to write model number and everything but now they mention "Rogue" with it!

 

Okay if your looking to increase performance, please remember three basic things, core=mathematics/physics, memory= fill rate/bandwidth, shader= shader ops/calculations.... and rogue is the red that this beast is currently imbued with...

Anytime bud...

Now it's time to watch Ash take on, "The Army of Darkness", in HD...

Give me some sugar baby...

 

Cool thanks!!!
yeah thats why I said their might be a new colour coming as they started mentioning "rogue"

 

Intel Core2 DUO T9400 2.53G 6MB FSB 1066 SL3BX CPU,
Intel Mobile Extreme Edition CPU X9000 2.8ghz 6mb cache, are these chips compatible with the Qosmio x305 and will they cause over heating I'm thinking about upgrading my CPU to one of these but i don't want to wreck my laptop of waste money on a $300-$600 CPU.

PLEASE HELP THANKS IN ADVANCE.

 

The X9000 will work but you will not get the full benefit out of it since the X9000 is only for 800MHz FSB and the X305 uses the much faster 1066MHz FSB. You are better off using a Intel Extreme X9100. I hope this helps. GOd Bless

 

do you think i will have any heating issues? thanks for the reply to by the way

 

The x305 will only be compatible with Montevina processors, so you'll have to go with P8400 (2.26ghz 3mb l2 cache 25 watts), P8600 (2.4ghz 3mb 25w), T9400 (2.53Ghz 6mb 35w), P9500 (2.53Ghz 6mb 25w), T9600 (2.6Ghz 6mb 35w), or X9100 (3.06Ghz 6mb 44w).

 

does anyone know the correct PLL for the qosmio so we can OC the processor?

 

RTM876-660 is the PLL for Montevina.

 

No you should not have any heating issues, though you will be limiting your laptop with the X9000 CPU, but for the same price or just a little more you should just get the X9100 which would be better for your laptop. Hope this helps. God Bless

 

nvm my mistake -.-