HP ENVY 14 - GPU Clock and Undervoltage POLL

It's premium in as much as it is the pinnacle of HP's consumer line up. Like the HDX was.

Speaking of the HDX, the 8800M GTS in the HDX 9000 was a bit subpar to the 8800M GTS in the Gateway FX series. It would bench lower than the Gateway. Reason; HP had their 8800M MXM card custom made for the machine.

Just letting you know that it's not the first time HP used a proprietary component in a machine.

 

Any confirmation out there that an overclock to 500/550 will not make more heat ? If so how much did it do.

Thanks

 

I take it you mean 550/800, or 500/850. No it won't increase heat meaningfully. I've overclocked to 575/880 and ran 3DMark 06 (granted it's probably not a stable OC for games) and the temps never got much past 60. I think 65 was about tops. I don't know what games you're playing but if it's something like SC2, it'll stress your computer more. Still, if you can get your card stable at either of those speeds you'll be fine. The cooling system is pretty good.

 

HDX Dragon is such a cooler name than Envy 14. *sigh*

 

And not for nothing, it was the best notebook HP ever made. I have two of them myself.

 

I agree, "Envy" is too pretentious for my liking.

Then again, I didn't buy it for looks or names.

Honestly I preferred the matte black of the Beats edition, aside from the awful Beats branding. A matte black finish Envy would be great by me.

 

If you don't care about any of these features and you don't like the way it looks, then why did you get one? There's really no reason to. Personally I don't know of a laptop that has all of these features together outside of the MBP for around $1000. That to me makes this a premium laptop.

The Envy IS a consumer laptop. Their HP professional models are the Elitebooks. This laptop is marketed squarely at consumers. It's just that this is one of their top consumer models.

The dv6tse people keep pointing at as inferior is ALSO a top of the line model in HP's lineup (se = "selected edition") and is virtually the same aside from aesthetics. In terms of cost, the dv6tse starts at 949 (on sale now though) and the Envy 14 starts at 999. It's not like one of these costs $400 and the other $1600.

Honestly, the only reasons to buy the Envy over the dv6tse are those that I outlined previously (aluminum body, slot load, etc); if the Envy was missing these I'd be right there too. If these features aren't worth 5-9 FPS to you, then go ahead and return the Envy and buy something that will give you back that precious frame rate.

When you listen to people who complain, all you're going to hear are complaints. Personally, my Envy is flawless and I've never been happier with a machine. Also if the other chip was in the machine we'd be listening to people talk about how it's too expensive.

 

I guess what I meant, though I may not have been super clear is:

If I were given the option of changing either the processor speed on my GPU or lowering the screen resolution from 900 to 720, most games would more significantly benefit from a 22% processor up clock.

Because of this, I believe it becomes less important to suggest a 720 screen purchase over an HP generated fix of some kind. (Which 2.0 feels is highly unlikely.)

Therefore I'm still in support of an organized complaint on multiple fronts.

(@happy: This response isn't fully in contradiction to you, just building off our conversation)

 

Kazbaeden, I agree with you completely, except for the quality of the Envy 14.

I think everyone would agree HP needs to get their quality control up to par, and their out-of-box (not talking the packaging) experience better.

 

Moving from 720p to 900p is an increase in about 46% of the pixel quantity. Moving from 900p down to 720p is a reduction of about 31%). Games that are completely non-GPU bound at 720p may have their framerates cut significantly when moving to 900p, depending (of course) on whether 900p was significantly GPU bound. However, in those games that are not GPU bound would also not benefit at all from any increase in the clock of the GPU. So I don't understand what you're trying to say?

Is increasing the clock speed of the GPU a higher ROI than decreasing the resolution by an equivalent percentage?

Ultimately, I think the answer is "it depends". I wouldn't be so bold as to make the claim that more than half of all games would benefit from a GPU bump in clock speed than a reduction in resolution to increase framerate. What is true, however, is that for a given resolution, an increase in GPU clock speed is the only way to increase FPS performance (all other things being equal).

 

Because it came out before the Acers and I really don't care for acer due to bad experiences. The only laptop from a large company I would buy is probably Asus but they don't have the laptop in this specification. So HP is the lesser of all the evils. Maybe I should try Lenovo...

What I meant by consumer laptops are the kind that are prebuilt and can be picked up from any store. The envy series most of the time have to be ordered until HP makes a fastship version. It is the Macbook pro of the HP line lets just say.

The Envy 14 just came out so less coupons but if you have the same built, with the DV6t (what se? You don't need the SE edition for 5650), it is $200 cheaper with HPA (since the e14 standard comes with non-radiance screen now).

So tell me whats the $200 go to and why is the envy costing more for less performance. A slot loading dvd is $50 give or take. Like I said before I could care less about looks. The e14 does have better build quality but the dv6t isn't fragile either. So $150 for frame? Then subtract some money for the failure GPUs (since lower binned cards are the failure cards that can't make it to average). I can't even get to 490 stable when trying to overclock. That shows you how horrible the card is.

I love the envy but what HP is doing is pretty shady. I'm not going to return it because I feel like its not worth the hassle but for those new potential buyers this might be a very big deciding factor.

 

Don't know where you're getting your numbers, but less coupons I'm seeing the standard dv6t specced as an Envy 14 is only $90 cheaper.

dv6t

Code:

Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-450M Dual Core processor (2.40GHz, 3MB L3 Cache)with Turbo Boost up to 2.66 GHz
4GB DDR3 System Memory (2 Dimm)
FREE Upgrade to 500GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection
1GB ATI Mobility Radeon(TM) HD 5650 switchable graphics [HDMI, VGA]
15.6" diagonal High Definition LED HP Brightview Widescreen Display (1366x768)
SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-R/RW with Double Layer Support
Intel Wireless-N Card with Bluetooth

$999.99

Envy 14

Code:

Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-450M Dual Core processor (2.40GHz, 3MB L3 Cache)with Turbo Boost up to 2.66 GHz
4GB DDR3 System Memory (2 Dimm)
500GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection
1GB ATI Mobility Radeon(TM) HD 5650 switchable graphics [HDMI] - For Dual Core Processors
14.5" diagonal High Definition HP BrightView Infinity LED Display (1366x768)
SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-R/RW with Double Layer Support (Slot Load)
Intel Wireless-N Card with Bluetooth
Backlit Keyboard

$1089.99

Difference: $90

As far as I can tell, the difference is size, aluminum chassis, mini dvi port, slot load, 8 cell battery, backlit keyboard, edge to edge screen, and 100 MHz slower graphics card. Most of those are cosmetic so I guess if you don't care about looks the obvious choice is the dv6t.

Again, if 5-9 FPS + $90 is worth more than size, aluminum chassis, mini dvi port, slot load, 8 cell battery, backlit keyboard,and edge to edge screen then maybe the Envy isn't for you.

 

QFT.

I also have to call shenanigans on the guy claming to be running SC2 smoothly at the Envy's native rez on ultra with a 5650.

There game becomes considerably more demanding on certain levels (lava one comes to mind) and, obviously, with more units.

On the map with the lava, my fps drops to the low 30s on ultra 1920x1200 with a Q9550 @ 3.8Ghz and 2 Radeon 4870s in Crossfire. On the 5650, I have to reduce shaders and lighting/shadows to get smooth gameplay at all times, even at 1366x768.

Still looks nice, though. I am very impressed by the gaming performance of a 550mhz 5650 in a 14" chassis.

 

OH whoops I forgot that the envy14 also lowered $100 due to the screen.

I use HPA as many people do so the Difference comes out to $130. But also don't forget the large amount of coupons for the dv6t (It was a $300 coupons was it not) when the envy14 was just released but thats not really saying anything.

For me in the end its only the chassis, backlit and small size that appealed to me. For me I guess thats worth the extra $130 (or around $300 on time of order). Those coupons really makes the difference but I choice the premium option and got slightly burned but I'll live as gaming isn't my top priority in a laptop. I just feel ticked off that they used cheap parts in a high quality laptop.

 

How do we know it's a "cheap" part?
Has anyone seen the OEM price list?

Likely it costs as much if not slightly more than the higher clocked 5650 @ 550mhz due to the fact that it won't enjoy volume discount being a lesser specified and apparently specialized part. (Remember, it's not HP that makes the Envy but their ODM that does. And their ODM makes notebooks for other manufacturers that use the 5650. The ODM would enjoy a volume discount more so than HP would.)

I'm not picking on you, per se. Just making an observation about the general gripe. None of the arguments seem to hold much weight.

The one argument that would make sense as far as premium notebook is concerned, would be "why didn't HP spec out the 5650 with the 650mhz core/shader clock?"

That would be more consistent with the "premium argument." That would be something truly worth fighting for, IMO.

 

Aside from the downclocked GPU, the Envy 14 components are pretty much identical to every other laptop with the 5650.

It would not surprise me if the Lenovo Y460, Hp Envy 14/DV6 and Acer 3820, etc. were all the same computer made by the same ODM wrapped in a slightly different case, keyboard, screen, etc.

 

I'm thinking Quanta as the ODM of Envy 14 since they were for the 15 and 17. A run of CPU-z should be able to verify under mainboard tab. DV6 and Lenovo Y460 is Quanta also. The Acer is likely Wistron. But could be a joint development with Quanta. But it just doesn't look like a Quanta.

 

You've got a couple points slightly backwards, though I understood what you meant.

Here's what I mean.

We do agree that "it depends" is a good answer, although I'm still leaning towards a GPU clock speed increase as the best way to increase performance in the widest range of situations given the available specs of the Envy 14.

 

So in your opinion, the 450MHz clocked GPU is really based on a design decision and not on cost? If that is the case, then most likely this whole "protest" is a moot point because they probably can't run a faster clocked GPU for some engineering reason.

It still confuses me though because the Vaio Z runs the GT 330m in a much tighter space and effectively cools it (yes it's a different GPU altogether), and the Acer 3820TG has basically the same specs as the Envy 14 minus the screen resolution in a much smaller package too and manages the 550MHz version HD 5650.

 

HP did this to cut costs, which is perfectly fine, but nobody really expected the 5650 to have difficulty reaching 550MHz like the GPUs in many other comparable laptops. I guess it's a compromise.

 

The protest is moot, regardless. Considering HP's track record and design philosophy. But nothing beats a failure like a try.

Definitely based on a design decision. HP has always been conservative with GPU choice. It's their philosophy. They never use a top of class GPU in their products. Not that it mattered much in the past since, thanks to Nvidia's failings, GPUs were failing and still failing.

Could the 550mhz version be cooled adequately in the Envy 14? Sure. So what? I'm not being facetious. This is HP. As an example, I have an HDX Dragon. Has an 8800M GTS. Superior cooling system. Would easily have adequately cooled an 8800M GTX. But that's not how HP rolls.

Whatayagonnado? Is what it is.

Can't claim deception. It is after all still an ATI 5650. They never said what clock speed it would run at in any literature.

No case can be properly made that since it's a "premium" notebook that it should have came with a 550Mhz version of the GPU since their non-premium Pavilion DV6 comes with that. One would have to argue for the 650Mhz version if they're going to press the "premium" issue.

And the issue won't hurt sales enough to make HP notice. Though they may improve the GPU offering in the next gen of the E14. But that likely won't be because of complaints. It's just what they do anyway.

 

I can't get mine to run stable at 500MHz. In fact, closest I have gotten is around 480 before it starts going nuts when I game or stress test. Mine will definitely be going back (not only because of this, but also because of build quality issues like minor but noticeable bends/warping of the outer edges and top panel). I am sure I could return it for a new one, but I am not really wanting to play laptop roulette to see if I get lucky.

Oh well, I will reevaluate HP notebooks again in a couple years. I am going to stick with a Vaio Z for now (you listening HP?). It has similar graphics performance in a much smaller form factor, 1lb less weight, superior build. Downside: it costs more, but I will pay for quality. Sometimes (most of the time) we get what we pay for.

 

No one bins gpu for lower speeds or processors for that fact. Chips that are not as expected or get cut on the bad part of the die becomes cheap products. This works with processors with entire Intel lines based off the same tech priced according because of how well they perform. Even AMD does it with the phenoms. How did you think tri-cores came to be anyways. Not a decision choice but a production of failure quads.

Thus no one would lower the speed of a processor. Most overclockers know the main cause of temperature rise is because of changing the voltage. I can OC my card as high as I want with the same voltage and the temperture is not going to change much. So there is no other reason besides costs that causes the e14 to use slower speeds due to hardware. If it was a software downclock I would not be complaining as those that know their way around a computer can change take off the downclock as pleased. But when they are using cheaper hardware then I have a gripe against them.

HP is known to use cheap parts in their desktops and laptops anyways. Hence usually no one speaks highly of HP in the hardware fanatic world. But I thought they might change because it is a higher end model. Guess I was wrong.

 

Not always true. Especially when it comes to GPUs. Many examples to the contrary exist. But that's another discussion entirely because the yield versus binning bell curve is tighter or flatter for GPUs than CPUs when trying to achieve certain metrics. And since heat has been a major concern with GPUs in light of past debacles and failures, a cooler running GPU binned from the same die would have somewhat more or equal value than one that potentially runs hotter.

Really? I have yet to see a GPU when overclocked not rise in temp in a notebook. It's invariable. Especially since you generally can't change the voltage to the GPU in a notebook.

Something doesn't ring right. First, as far as their notebooks, they don't use "cheap" parts. I should say, no cheaper than what most other notebook manufacturers use. That's because the ODMS they use (Inventec, Quanta, Compal) also manufacture notebooks for other companies. Often HP mixes in superior components in their notebooks. The thing that really sets HP apart is their locked/whitelisted BIOS. A real PITA. Secondly, since the Envy 13, 17 and 15 were out, you sort of knew what to expect. Thirdly, if you "knew" what hardware fanatics say, you would have went with a Sager/Clevo as they are for the most part the notebook enthusiast's rig of choice. Especially when it comes to gaming/GPU choice.

 

I figured it was kind of a fail protest from the start too, since the GPU isn't changeable, it would require an entirely new motherboard, and short of a recall, they wouldn't do that. If it was just them being stingy with undervolting to avoid a "possible" overheat, then certainly there's a way to open up the voltage to let the "enthusiasts" risk overclocking their machines. If anything, maybe somehow someone or some community can convince them to add this option if even possible, then we may have possibilities, but my feeling is this will never happen, especially if it were designed specifically as a 450MHz part.

And yeah, I love my Sager, but the thing is a beast, not really something you want to take with you when you go somewhere. One wouldn't think 2.5 lbs would mean much but it does when it comes to a laptop. It's effectively 50% heavier than this Envy. The reduced GPU performance is the sacrifice I'm willing to make for a smaller, lighter, and more portable machine.

 

I disagree. The assertion is that the notebook should be equipped with at least a 550 Mhz GPU, just as a baseline. There's no logical requirement stipulating that every component of a premium product should be the best, but there is a reasonable expectation that each should be at least on par with fairly comparable hardware.

Having said that, I'm comfortable enough with HP's design choice to keep my notebook. I'm disappointed that they pulled a "sheisty" move; however, I do not believe I can find a more competitive offering at the price I paid.

 

Still doesn't hold water since what exactly does "fairly comparable hardware" mean? It's subjective. Whereas "premium" is objective in that one merely has to look at any particular company's product strata to determine what is their top of the line. The Envy is a premium product. The only reasonable expectation is premium components and/or premium component choices.

Expecting "baseline" defeats the premium argument.

The premium argument has to be set aside in favor of a mere comparative argument which simply says that since competitive products at the size and price point (objective measures) of the Envy 14 employ the 550Mhz version of the 5650, the Envy 14 should. A stronger and more consistent argument.

 

My bet is that if no one had come on here complaining about how the 5650 in the Envy 14 is clocked 100MHz slower than other laptops, the vast majority of users posting in this thread would have never known or cared.

I know I wouldn't, I honestly don't keep up to date on things like "is the 5650 in this laptop faster than the 5650 in this other laptop?"

They're still extremely close in performance.

This is coming from someone who obsesses over knowing about all the latest hardware.

 

A GPU is still a processing unit and constructed the same way. Most of the time they don't look for the lower speeds. Except on a die you can only get a few optimum chips, mostly normal chips and some chips that did not usually meet normal requirements. Those chips usually go to other uses or lowered in price. Well the real settlement for this is someone take out the GPU can see what HP or their distributer did to it. There is no way a card with the same circuitry can't be pushed to identical speeds on the same voltage unless it was a failure card which I believe this is.

I haven not actually overclocked much on notebooks but then again this e14 isn't the best at overclocking. I had stable 500 mhz on stress testing but it failed at gaming. Overall temperature increase of GPU during stress test? 1-2 degree at most. Meaning there wasn't a huge increase of temperature for 50 mhz as there shouldn't be. So for getting to 550 it should be a 4 to 5 degree jump maybe but the card can't even get that high.

Hardware enthusiastic aren't always gamers. Of course they would rather have Sager over Alienware (and frankly who besides people who like tacky laptops, don't), but for simple laptop task they do not choose HP, Sony, Dell or Toshiba either unless there is a laptop that meet their requirements. They would rather go to Asus, Clevo just because they know whats going in are usually half decent hardware. However since the e14 had everything I wanted I choose HP and got burned.


Of course this is not saying I don't love this laptop. It is the best one I have ever used, which isn't saying much since my last one was a 4 year old toshiba. I will keep it and make do with it since gaming isn't my highest priority for a laptop but I still don't like the situation.

 

I'm not sure this argument is worthwhile in the first place. Consumer impressions of quality are always subjective. Just because your concept of "premium" differs from mine, doesn't make either any less valid.

I'd love to get the absolute best components in every product purchase, but I assumed ahead of time that HP would likely skimp in area or two. I just didn't expect they'd skimp in an area so integral to performance.

 

That's very true.

 

I just got off the phone with HP and they said that it clocking the Envy 14's gpu at a lower speed then the Dv6t was intentional. The person I talked to talked to a tech supervisor and they both said that because of the different components in the 2 models the Envy 14 was required to run at a lower clock speed. She said that the components in the Envy 14 were a higher quality then the Dv6 and for that gain you had to sacrifice in the gpu area. They said something about the processor being a higher quality or something but it sounded like a bunch of bull to get me off the phone.

 

Yep, you'll never get a good straight and honest answer from HP. There is likely some truth to what they said. But who knows.

 

I pointed out this forum post and since it isn't "HP official" it isn't reliable and can't be counted on. Also I pointed out the "premium" point and they said that the HP 14 has premium parts but that premium didn't necessarily translate into premium performance.

 

Yeah, 'cause we're all Dell, Apple and Acer shills.

Yep, the premium argument won't work. Only a comparative argument would but there really aren't any comparable systems (price/size) to base an argument off. HP has an out and knows it.

 

Yep I tried the comparative arguement and whenever I mentioned another company they said they know nothing about that computer blah blah blah and when I mentioned their own notebooks they just said it is what it is get over it.

 

Suppose posters here should flood the HP forums then. Seeing as they find their own support forums to be a more legitimate source.

 

I tried posting on their own forums with no response even after several days. I suppose HP honestly doesn't care as long as they see they have an out.

 

So, everyone here is willing to sacrifice some 3D gameplay time on battery for the extra 100 Mhz? The clocking is definitely intentional. With the lower core clock, you can run the GPU at lower voltage saving heat and power. Was this not the downfall of the Envy 15? Hot and low battery life?

 

Envy 15 2nd gen had no heat issues and people weren't expecting a good battery life when buying a desktop replacement laptop.

 

I was looking more at the Gen 1 issues. HP would take some notes and learnings from their previous two iterations. For me, the goals on this laptop were good gaming performance and good battery life. If the design goal was to compete with the 330M, then a lower clocked 5650 would be fine without taking a hit on the battery. The Envy 14 we have to day is HP's interpretation of what they thought we wanted, a balanced experience. The premium moniker is not just about speed, it is about the packaging, features and design. Maybe HP will respond with some type of change but I would expect the same folks to complain abou the extra heat or the CPU slow downs due to the extra heat. Personally, I find the balance to be just fine.

 

So with the unsatisfactory GPU clock, what can we do to raise it, besides MSI Afterburner? And also, will using said prog have the ability to max the 5650MR's potential/capability? Or will we still have to depend on actual hardware changes from teh factory/HP? Sorry if this has already been answered.

 

That's pretty much it unless someone else comes up with a program that can get at other attributes.

Each GPU chip is different and can overclock to one degree or another. But without a hardware change (not going to happen), WYSIWYG.

 

Except most of use have integrated graphics when we want to go for long lasting batteries. Except those poor souls who got i7s.

 

I feel like everyone wants a magical laptop that somehow runs crysis 2 on ultra, with zero heat, no fan noise, but is also .5 inches all the way around and weighs 4 lbs. I second the notion that if this thing was clocked 550+ and had heat issues this thread would have been titled " HP ENVY 14 Overheating Issues Poll (SEND LETTER TO HP) "

 

Then you haven't been reading all my banter(rant). I want a 14inch 2010 laptop that'll play SC2 on ultra on bnet (up to 8player real melee map gaming, not playing mass or evolves ums maps). Also want said laptop to be able to handle PCSX2 and Dolphin, which E14 is already confirmed to handle satisfactorily. Weight doesn't matter, cuz I'm 5'4" and am a male, so I shouldnt be complaining about carrying ONE textbook-weight equivalent computer. Heat/fan noise shouldn't matter if said heat is being spit out of at least 2 vents, and noise is REAL noise, not fakie noise pretending to blow stuff.

If you've been reading the story of my life, lolz, "They just don't make 'em like they used to." Those demands you listed, agreeably are magical. However, my demands are the same demands that I had in 2008, a year after I bought my dinolaptop, which shouldn't be too dramatic since it's 2010, nearing 2011. You're right tho about ppl who want a Crysis machine which'll fit in their backpack and have 3hours of battery.

Anywhoo, time to bust out hiphop rapper mode: Much <3 to those who've been patient and have shared their knowledge/experiences with all of us, and for making these threads possible. Shout out to my boyz: 2.0, Magus, Bronsky, htwingnut and LaptopNut. Word to my brothas in the MSI forums, gamerleet and IKAS V.

And, Tha good ol' bird to HP and Blizzard for making nothing as fantastic as they used to.

 

You know what we'd really appreciate? We'd really like it if you investigated the issue a little further.

We know for a fact that, for those who are able, running the GPU at 550 Mhz yields a minimal difference in heat output. We're talking less than 5 degrees in many cases. Considering a nice 5 degree bump still places the Envy somewhere below the 80C range, I believe this is a reasonable sacrifice for more performance.

Let's not forget that HP could have just as easily included a stock 5650 and underclocked it to 450 Mhz. Unfortunately, that appears to not be the case.

 

I still peg this as voltage issue

 

Not really. Its a chip issue. Since our voltage is the same as the dvst, which is at 550 there are only 2 reason. a) It is software controlled or b) it is gimped hardware.

We determined its not a because most of us can't even overclock to 550 which should be doable if the chips are the same. I personally can't even get to 490. I got so pissed I stop bothering.

So that leaves it to option b) which is HP using a cheaper chip.

With all the tests it is pretty much determined that heat was not the issue since practically OC a GPU 100mhz isn't going to produce that much heat and practically this shows in people's OC results that the temperature difference is probably 5c which is nothing.

So to the people that care, this only shows HP used a cheaper chip, no ifs and buts. Why they did it is a mystery but I frankly think anything they say right now is just a excuse.

 

Shoot, this ain't no mystery to me. Nor is it a new issue. HP's been steadily going down in quality. Every time I visit BB or Frys, which isnt that often, every HP I touch is suckier than the next. Flex here, flex there. "Gimped" plastic here, gimped plastic there. Mushy, mushy lid, etc, etc.