i7-6820HQ vs i7-6820HK

LOL... You're more than welcome to think whatever you wish. That's fine. You're obviously not a performance enthusiast and don't do any competitive benchmarking or extreme overclocking. Otherwise, you would have a better understanding of the situation and wouldn't think that crippled technology is OK.

But, that's all right. If everyone in the world was awesome, being awesome would have no meaning. There's nothing wrong with being an mainstream consumer that enjoys whatever flavor of Kool-Aid that happens to be served. That's the status quo, but for some folks there is more pleasure in life to be had than just rolling with the punches.

For the record, I think first generation Haswell CPUs suck really bad, whether socketed or BGA. The whole SoC and on-die memory controller scheme is a cochamame abortion. All of those special new features won't do enough to make a silk purse from a BGA sow's ear. Coupled with a socketed and fully unlocked CPU with unlimited TDP those features are great. As standalone features they're boring and contribute to an ordinary consumer experience.

Have a nice weekend.

 

Well I have a desktop with Core i7 5820K overclocked at 4.5Ghz @ 1.26v in custom loop (2x 360mm HWlabs Black Ice GTX w/ AP-15's, R9 290, 144Hz monitor, 1TB SSD & 6TB WD Red NAS.

I constantly upgrade hardware my PC.

as for laptop I have AW 15 4k screen for classes and G751JT with G-SYNC and screen overclocked @ 103Hz for on the go gaming.

 

You're willing to put up with a whole lot more crap than I ever will be. I'd be drop-kicking those crippled BGA laptops over the back fence.

 

For me it's the functionality of the device, can I get out of it the limit of the silicon and is it crippled in any way.

A truly unlocked chip with MXM graphics gives the device a lot of longevity and tweaking potential, no less in any practical respect than a socketed CPU with MXM graphics.

 

Honestly, competitive benchmarking is such a niche segment it's not even funny. Exponentially more niche than gaming is compared to the mass.

Saying that, I understand how niche my needs are, thin and light that can game well.. I wouldn't accept anything over 4-4.5 lb and I want something rigid thats nice to lay my hands on with a good keyboard and trackpad that has respectable battery life for non-gaming. Narrow, narrow band... I wouldn't get what I want without BGA due to ultra low "volumetric" requirements. I think LGA should still exist for those that want it though, as long as the manufacturers see worth in producing the products and they're selling well enough to make it worthwhile.

 

Yup, and doing that with laptops is even more of a niche segment. That's one of the reasons I think it's so wonderful and enjoy it so much. I love being able to use a laptop to mop the floor with most gamer-boy single GPU desktops, and I have been blessed with several laptops with those bragging rights.

As long as we all have choices then everyone can be happy. It only blows when we have to settle for something that isn't what we want. Since this is my hobby and it is something I am passionate about, I am never going to be flexible or forgiving, or willing to compromise. A thin and light laptop that is capable of playing games just isn't the right tool for the job. I've resigned myself to the possibility that I may have to abandon laptops completely in light of the fact that there may be zero suitable options available in the near future. And, that sucks something fierce.

Having to put up with low-TDP BGA CPUs or BGA GPUs in my case is just as tragic as expecting a passionate PC gamer to be OK with being forced to use a console would be. Just think how upset Ultrabook gamers would be if NVIDIA and AMD decided to stop supporting mobile graphics entirely and the only thing left to choose from was Intel HD Graphics. That's where I am at a personal level with this BGA filth.

 

AMD APUs? I mean, AMD wouldn't let an entire computer market be dominated by Intel (I'm ignoring Chromebooks). It's dumb.

 

That would still suck though. While they are better than Intel HD Graphics, they are still nothing to be overly excited about. An AMD APU would be no less disappointing and useless to me, just another form of crippled trash at a less severe order of magnitude compared to Intel HD Graphics.

That was the best example I could think of to explain why I am so disappointed with BGA garbage. I'm simply not interested is something that is extraordinarily light/thin/portable and, in the best case scenario, capable of gaming at a playable framerate. If the excuse or caveat is a dockable contraption helps make up some of the difference, a desktop becomes the only acceptable option for my interests at that point. The problem with that is I really hate sitting at a desk, but I'll take that compromise over a hardware/performance compromise.

 

No, there's never enough power. The chips can't pass 57W FOR ANY REASON unless they're a 48xxHQ or 49xxHQ line, and if they are, only for a maximum of 2.5 minutes (you know... just enough for a benchmark so intel can say they can OC properly?) after which, ALL HQ CHIPS LOCK THEMSELVES TO 47W, PERIOD. That means that simply rendering a video over 2 minutes long at 3.5GHz even with this hefty undervolt I have on my 4800MQ is impossible without throttling. It doesn't matter if you have a 330W power brick and shove the power sliders up to 200W for long and short power. It *WILL* lock itself to 47W, and all 47xxHQ chips will not even ever pass 57W. You haven't begun to take cooling solution into this point yet.

And what of the ones who do? Why is it the larger/bulkier ones like the GT72 have to be crippled because Intel said "no socketed CPUs anymore k"? I find the GT72 is actually a pretty nicely designed machine all things considered, but its HQ chip automagically makes me never consider it for any reason ever because CPU power is very important to me, whether it be for livestreaming or rendering videos or even if I feel like running the odd benchmark or two. It's my machine, I should be able to do whatever I want with it.

DDR4 is FAR worse than DDR3, even DDR3L right now, especially for notebooks. This is a benefit, not a downside. To take your own words, "by the time DDR4 has improved so much that it becomes a benefit, the laptop would be obsolete anyways".

I often see users with older laptops wanting to get the best CPU they can to make the machine do as much as possible as a backup machine or for their parents or something. By your words, this is a useless practice =D. Besides, there have been many users in the past who buy the cheaper CPU when purchasing the laptop and get the strongest one later on sale or for cheap via e-bay. I'll be no different; I'll eventually get a 4930MX for this, and I'll make pretty good use of it too. I'll repeat the words someone else said before: "why bother with sockets on desktops then? Why not just get all desktops soldered?" and add to it with "If your arguement is that there's little need for socketed chips, the same can be said of every desktop in existence today". If you argue for one, you must argue for the other. The treatment of laptops as some lesser device that must accept lesser demands for performance and modularity because "who really cares?" is why we're in this position in the first place.

That would be because there are no socketed machines anymore, because Intel said so. Prior to the big BGA movement intel didn't tell anybody in the media about, you had two separate lines from MSI (GT and GE, each with 15" and 17" variants), four kinds of models from Clevo (15" with about 3 variants, 17" with two variants, SLI model with 3 variants, desktop CPU using model), three model types from Alienware (M14x, M17x, M18x), ASUS G-series notebooks (15" and 17"), and the odd original cyberpower PC notebook that wasn't built off any existing chassis (which, while I know nobody who bought one and finding a review is even harder, counts as choice) even though most of their line was rebranded Clevo and MSI notebooks.

You want socket now? You buy desktop CPU-using laptop. End of storeh. That lack of choice is the problem we have with BGA. Nobody really cares if BGA exists... we just care that its existence has rooted out the superior socketed chips (and superior for the reasons I listed above in response to the other poster). Also, another problem is that the HQ chips we've seen have all had wildly different voltage levels. There was even one 4720HQ that had a voltage of 1.4v. Not even i7-4960X CPUs use 1.4v daily for fear of chip degradation. They're a huge bargain bin, far FAR more so than the MQ chips were. And even with the big notebooks like the GT72 which should be able to handle things, it still can't even stretch its legs with the exceedingly expensive i7-4980HQ type chip.

 

Seriously, those of you who defend BGA and say that it doesn't affect them in any way and they are not disposable... hold this though couple of years. That's approximately how much new tech lasts lately, also that's how much the end-user warranty usually is (unless extended). What would happen? Couple of things. First - you'll realize how much your replacement motherboard actually costs (because you'll be out of warranty and you'll have to pay for it). Second - you'll realize that it really is disposable. Just like ink-jet printers - cheaper to get new one, than changing the cartridges. Then comes something that most of you haven't even thought about - nature. Do you realize how much precious and rare elements go into the production of each electronic device? Prolonging its life as much as you can and getting the most out of it for as long as possible is something that everyone should be concerned, but most people wont care. Replacing a single component is still a waste, but throwing away a whole device is even more so. Those new soldered everything devices are NOT environmentally friendly, they are exactly the opposite.

 

The BGA limits do not stop there. As I mentioned, the same 4700HQ line of CPUs can be heavily crippled showing different performance level. Depending on the aggressive implementation of the TDP control, you might not even go above the 47W TDP which is the case for lenovo laptops that must use throttlestop to get extra juice at the expense of their PSU. This means that even the turbo speeds are not even attainable most of the time for a wide array of models with the same CPU. My Titan can happily run at full speed for the small turbo duration, but then it will drop its speed. I have no other choice for CPU.

Every single HQ processor is locked and since it is soldered, it won't matter which one you pick, they perform the same under stress. So why are you paying more? Why is there even an option to buy a higher end HQ processor that will perform exactly the same as a 4700hq? For the IGPU? that thing sucks even more power out of the package, leaving you with even LESS performance for the cores.

There is no reason to go for a soldered mobile core i7 that is not ULV. You don't even get that much of a reduction in your chassis, that is worth loosing quality, performance and choice. Having more options is never a bad thing, and they took it away.

Not to mention, you might buy a very bad quality HQ processor that can't even beyond past its rated 2.6ghz speed, because it was very low binned. There have been cases of the same CPU require quite more voltage to reach the same clocks stably, resulting in higher temps and lower overall performance. So then the nameline 4XXX is meaningless.

Why would anyone in their right mind, for the same price, buy a 4700HQ vs an MQ that can be tweaked much more? One that you can even swap out. As a customer, you are not getting anything out of the BGA line.

Of course this pertains only high performing laptops. Talking about budget laptops with core i7 is meaningless. Because even those machines can't handle the power or thermal requirements of the lower end core i7s. They shouldn't be using a core i7 to begin with.

 

CPUs don't tend to fail though.

 

I agree with this. I've never had a CPU fail in my 20 years using and building computers.

Other things on the motherboard do fail though. I've had more motherboard failures than anything else. It would definitely suck having the motherboard die and suffering a loss of a great CPU because of it.

 

If you really cared about it that much you could de-solder the cpu from one and solder it onto the other.

 

That's a big part of why they suck so bad. Overpriced motherboard that is disposable, delivers less performance and priced closer to an Extreme CPU... high price, less performance and zero flexibility. At least with a socketed CPU and MXM GPU you can effortlessly move desirable high performance components to another system to continue using them, or sell them to recover part of your loss in the event that repairs are not feasible. With the new design model, you just toss everything into a dumpster, (including the GPU if you made the exceptionally tragic mistake of compromising on everything,) walk away from a total loss, then bend over and lube up again. And, that's exactly why Intel and many OEMs want BGA. They don't want anyone to be able to fix anything because that hurts their bottom line.

This is not a feature, but a curse and a subliminal form of extortion. They love money and control above all else, and don't give a rat's butt about customers. I cannot see any way to view that as being OK. I might have less of a problem with the concept if they sold BGA-powered systems for pennies on the dollar compared to the superior socketed/slotted products, but they give less and still charge a premium for crap. There's not even a legitimate economic incentive or value proposition for end users to be happy about.

I'm all for having crappy, disposable, inexpensive electronics readily available. I actually own some of that trash and have a use for it. It's just hard to get excited about crappy, disposable expensive electronics, especially when that is almost the only thing left to choose from.

 

ask yourself: what would meaker do?

6820HK vs. 6700K....desktop all the way, period.

asking prema, he says clevo's target clocks for ocing these two are 4ghz for the 6820HK vs. 4.5 ghz for the 6700K. bam, 12.5% more potential right there plus serviceability, truly unlocked tdp/voltages/everything, actually cheaper pricing, especially in the long run and the knowledge that at 4.5 ghz u can beat or come even with any haswell chip at around 4.7 ghz with 10C cooler at SAME clocks. nice package id say and go ahead to buy it, if i hadnt already done so with a beautiful machine sporting a very nicely overclockable 4790K

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

And solder the old CPU back onto the other Motherboard? I guess it's possible but would vendors like Power Notebooks want their customers doing that? I doubt anyone would.
I'm sure warranty would be void and the first trace of tampering.

 

You make some fair points but I'm not sure I'd agree with this. RMAs cost the OEM more if they have to chuck the entire board rather than being able to slot the CPU and GPU in a new board. It's possible they go through the process of actually lifting the BGA stuff off the board and soldering it anew but this too costs time and money, and requires expertise. And, you still inevitable lose components (VRAM, power delivery components, etc).

BGA is just another form of integration, I think the goal is simply smaller devices.

There are specialty places that do that sort of thing.

 

how much smaller really ? rMBP with bga and non bga cpus is the same 0.7" thickness.
whats the point of having thinner devices with full voltage quads ? i get ulv bga where every mm matters but full voltage quads !!

 

So? How does that affect the people who make larger devices for power? Note my post near the bottom of the last page: there is no choice. There was choice, and intel decided "nobody cares about socketed chips let's go full soldered". It's why desktop CPUs are being used in the first place.

And as the person under me said, again: "any arguement you make towards laptops, AT ALL, with regards to defending BGA integration, you should make towards desktops and see if it sticks" (paraphrasing). And let me tell you, it will never stick. The problem is that people are defending BGA in laptops (and we mean BGA-only; not how it was up until early 2014) and they'd never do so for desktops, because they see desktops as something different; something "more enthusiast" and "more modular". And to a point they are right; the chassis (case), motherboards, screens and keyboards are much more modular. But everything outside of that (CPU, GPU, 2nd GPU if you have one, RAM, HDD, other HDD, SSD, other SSD, possible ODD, wifi card, etc) are just as modular as desktops are... or they were, until this new generation of soldered everything everywhere. And now people are all "ha! You see! You can't change anything in laptops!" and we just go "and whose fault is that?".

When people stop seeing laptops as inferior, unfit-for-gaming, disposable crap you should never spend more than $300 on, we might actually get somewhere in the market. But holy spaghetti-ful meat grinders, let's please not DEFEND less modularity in these machines.

 

Full on soldering of all components, cpu, gpu, mbo and ram (to some extent) as a single logical board is promoting products that have built in obsolescence, timed lifespan, deny almost all cheap(er) forms of end user repair. Manufacturers have started to hide mbo schematics behind copyright laws thus denying local electronic repair shops of information needed to provide simple repairs such as replacing blown capacitors and other simple stuff.

Rather than enabling you to repair and use your device they either offer to sell you new part at almost half the price of new notebook and force users to buy new product. Not to mention increases in amount of e-waste this business model creates.

Entry price for technologically advanced gimmicks have never been lower, but operating cost in the long run has never been higher.

EDIT:
You cant argue that only BGA notebooks can be light and portable, take a look at older Lenovo X200 series, HP Elitebook 25XXP series. They might not be thin but they pack a serious punch (expecially compared to ULV crap) and with some clever engineering we could have them both thin and light with non soldered and non replacable CPU, RAM, SSD and battery.

Only real reason behind all that is greed - Intel wants to sell more chips and best way is to only deliver BGA chips that forces user to buy new when it brakes down. Manufacturer has a choice to sell crap or not to sell anything.

sent from crvena strela

 

If you have done enough ocing to know your chip is a golden sample and you care that much it's likely your warranty is long gone anyway.

 

No, that's definitely not the case. I mean Clevo ships their laptops with XTU and even has a shortcut to XTU in the Hotkey app. XTU is all you really need to massively overclock your chip and since they don't void your warranty for servicing your own machine, including thermal paste replacement, its possible to get some massive gains.

 

While we could debate about the warranty implications of running your system outside of specs, what we are talking here is golden sample overclocking. At this point like I have done you are maxing the hardware, running volt mods and pushing the hardware to the extreme edge. At that point you have to man up and own the fact that it was you who have pushed the system to the point where asking for replacements is unreasonable when things go wrong.

If you are not going to that point the small difference in frequency from one chip to the next is not going to have any real impact on your usage experience. The important thing is having the ability to control the chip and optimise it.

That ignores the fact we are talking mainstream systems here, clevo offers you a socketed option with a desktop CPU, if you are that much of an enthusiast you have your platform. Sager/clevo provide it. The level of modding and the extra value the 6820HK provide IF the TDP is fully programmable fits perfectly with these systems.

Plus I have still yet to see someone do a total mod of the cooling system to get it fitting perfectly to a de-lidded chip anyway in those desktop CPU based systems. Seems people are not that serious yet.

 

Well, expecting a notebook with a tuned-up BGA processor to ever be a true high performance machine is about like expecting a Honda Civic Si to magically become the equivalent of a muscle car just because it has a Flowmaster exhaust system and makes more noise than it used to. You can rub on it until the flashy finish wears off the plastic, but there will be no genie coming out and you won't get three wishes.

 

Oh I expect put side by side without a frame rate counter you could not practically tell the difference between the two.

If you tweak for your gaming experience a socketed processor is of little import to you, especially with an unlocked BGA part.

Let's not forget after all as an electrical connection BGA is superior to a socket. You get less electrical interference, can deliver more power and you can also dissipate more heat though the PCB, clever use of that can improve the thermal performance of the device.

 

It's really extremely disappointing to see so much rationalization about this BGA trash being OK instead of harsh criticism coming from someone that has been so in touch with enthusiasts for a long time. Honestly, I'm very puzzled and disheartened by the fact that you're embracing it. You can dress up a pig in a tuxedo, polish its hooves and but a solid gold ring adorned with diamonds in its snout, but it's always going to be a pig. The only way we are going to defeat this filthy model is by affecting the perceptions of the uninformed buying public and turning as many people against it as possible. Most consumers are ignorant and easily influenced for good or bad, so the more negativity we can spread, the more harm we can cause by being openly critical of their sinister agenda. I'm not saying this to be cute or insulting in any way. I really am very serious and sincere.

For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world...​

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
- Edmund Burke​

 

I want socketed CPUs to come back and I definitely think going more and more integrated is terrible as a platform moving ahead, but I still rather what's available now works rather than doesn't work.

It's often difficult to tell someone who wants a $1500 notebook for rendering that their only option is a $1800-$2000 desktop-CPU-using system if they want their CPUs to work properly (comparing P750ZMs with decent RAM, a small OS SSD and storage HDD to P650SE/P650SA with the same deal, for example).

I still see no need whatsoever for the death of socketed CPUs (and let's be honest: if Clevo wasn't making desktop-CPU laptops because they used to in the past, we'd have absolutely no modular laptops on the planet right now), but if the available chips can actually WORK this time, people would be in a lot better position. So my desires in order are:

1 - I want socketed mobile CPUs back. Yes, desktop CPUs are great and amazing and everything, but they do mean some parts of the chipsets are broken; like how the desktop chips have no iGPU access (for quicksync acceleration) etc, and the way the old alienwares had iGPU only, Optimus mode, or dGPU only was the best way to go, but is impossible now. Desktop CPU-using laptops can remain of course; no reason to axe them. But some people might prefer the mobile chips.
2 - If above isn't happening, I'd rather more desktop-CPU-using laptops to come out. MSI's GT72 and GT80 could easily be revamped with desktop CPUs and get rid of the crippled mobile chips; they already have the thickness and the PSU potential.
3 - If above ain't happening, I'd rather the chips we have to live with at least properly work. Not overloaded with voltage (I SWEAR TO SOLAIRE AND THE HEIRS OF THE SUN COVENANT THAT THERE WAS A USER ON THIS FORUM WHOSE i7-4720HQ HAD A DEFAULT VOLTAGE OF 1.412v!), not having exceedingly random performance ranges across all the individual chips of each name (there's no reason one i7-4720HQ should be incapable of passing 3GHz and another can keep its 3.4GHz in the same game in similar environments at stock settings) and fully capable of being set to draw as much power as necessary to complete the task given to it, BIOS-permitting (I know some OEMs lock down their BIOSes in this regard, but Clevo and (legacy) Alienware never have, and some higher end MSIs and possibly even ASUS (lol) models might even be up for such open BIOSes in their gaming grade machines that aren't under 1" thick).

 

I'm an engineer first and foremost, it instills a lot of practical thinking.

Since there still is a high end socket based platform out there with superior cooling for the high end tweakers it makes all this discussion mute since the 6820hk should hopefully satisfy the lower tier enthusiasts.

 

And what high end machine would this be that you are referring too that is still in production?

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

 

The sager desktop cpu line, I suggest you have a look at the threads about the current and upcoming models.

 

I really don't understand how some can rationalize the descriptions being put on a product before it has even been evaluated yet simply because its a BGA CPU.

I have seen the thread I just wasn't aware they were still selling or still had a desktop cpu SLI based laptop in production. I understand there are some new models awaiting to be released but I guess I missed the 570WM replacement so good to note its not just a wish list of speculation.

And thats what I get for not reading ssj92 post in that thread, can't wait to see that P870DM released, hopefully its has some sleek lines unlike its older sibling.

 

Because trend is that the BGA chips are pretty power crippled (as you've seen if you read even the last couple pages in this thread and/or my mobile CPU guide). Of course as I've been saying I rather they improve if we happen to be stuck with them, though I don't agree that full BGA is any sort of good idea.

But let me use the same example: would you hate a new desktop CPU line of CPUs from Intel if they were ALL soldered? You buy the mobo with the CPU you want and upgrading is impossible? If yes, then you've come to the same conclusion as the users here.

 

What about the different bending characteristics of the MoBo and the chip? It's not such a problem for low-power chips, but for an HK it would be. That's how balls get cracked over time

 

dem BGA chips crackin enthusiast balls

 

Like exactly what I meant

 

Just ordered a AW15 with i7-6820HK, don't care about BGA not going to be able to place the next gen chip in it even if was socketed. BGA will be fine, the 980M has BGA also and it rated somewhere around 100W. Looking forwards to the processor being unlocked, also has a good size level 3 cache of 8GB. I be going from i7-2820QM --> i7-6820HK
Paid extra for it, but ain't going to live forever, now is now.

 

I understand the point completely and your example is completely rational and if everyone had a choice we would all take a socket over solder but trashing a product before release a bit like judging a book by its cover is all. I am still hoping this chip brings back some of the lost potential with manageable pl1 and pl2 tdp power and not stress about what we already know.

Just trying to look at the glass half full maybe

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

 

Socketed mobile CPU are not making a return, rather an exit. Get over it!

 

BGA should require a better warranty, at least three years.


...I know it's not one of the two CPUs in the topic, but that i5 6440HQ seems like a great CPU for a budget gaming laptop with a 970m 3GB/980m 4GB.

 

In theory BGA is superior to LGA, but in practice manufactureres will cheap out and guess who will pay for it in the end

 

That's the first mobile mainstream quad I think too.

 

And what about the balls on the PGA socket that is soldered to the board?

Don't see what the problem is. If you want a socket buy a laptop with a desktop CPU. Mobile and desktop CPU's are after all made of the same silicon.

 

No... They're not. It's been consistently demonstrated that mobile BGA chips tend to get the worst silicon nine times out of ten. Sorry but 1.4v on a 47xxHQ is beyond retarded. Intel knows they can pass off those garbage CPUs because they're TDP locked so they don't really have to worry about people tweaking them (in most cases, I'm aware that some machines have a way around the lock). Those are all chips that would have gone in the trash if Intel didn't stick lipstick on a pig. Hence why everyone calls them garbage... They are...

 

I actually think it's not the machines, but rather the CPUs themselves. I've seen a couple alienwares and one... I can't remember... I think it was a MSI? Or an Acer? It wasn't an alienware is all I remember... where the TDP wasn't locked. It's more the specific chips probably were 4710MQs they re-purposed and didn't code the lock in I'm betting. It's definitely not "by vendor"; and "by machine" is impossible to determine due to them being soldered. If you could drop another HQ chip in the board of an "unlocked" machine and see if it worked unlocked or not, we'd know for sure. But if we could do that, we wouldn't even be in this BGA scenario now, would we?

 

That's why I just went with the generic "some machines" rather than specific CPUs, motherboards, models, etc

 

well this is what I mean, it's not really that some machines have a way around the lock; it's that their CPUs don't have the lock to begin with.

 

We don't know that because as you said, we don't have an easy way of removing the CPU and swapping it into another machine. Machine = generic term for an assembled laptop. Nothing more, nothing less. I remember seeing an example of what I believe was an MSI machine that someone hacked the system BIOS to get around restrictions. It doesn't matter. Tomato, tomato...

 

Well theoretically it's possible. I mean Dufus has managed to unlock multipliers on his 4700MQ and hit 4.2GHz or higher and has the benchmarks to prove it, but that's not what's normally available and is quite literally a BIOS hack. I don't see why it's not possible for the HQ chips. I know however that Prema BIOS Clevos and Svet-unlocked MSI BIOSes don't do jack for the power limits, so it's not normally available by the design of the systems from Clevo/MSI/Alienware/Gigabyte/Razer/Acer/etc.

 

It is soldered, indeed. But the CPU link with the MoBo (what I was talking about) is weaker and allows some flex, exactly because the socket, where the BGA allows none.