HP ENVY 14 - GPU Clock and Undervoltage POLL

wow results from the poll shows that more than half of those who have received their envy 14 thinks that it is a let down and mine isn't even here yet. darn.

 

5Deg C is not "nothing." Taking into account ambient temp, using notebook on a soft surface, and duration of use, it could turn into something much more significant.

Until you can provide concrete proof and not allegorical/anecdotal proof that the GPU used is in fact "cheaper" the best you can say is that the chip used is a HP design choice. Especially considering the heat issues they have been having with previous generations of Pavilions in this size range that used full power GPUs.

 

Just to chime in on the voltage, I would not believe a piece of software versus a reading from voltage meter. It could simply be misreported so all of the claims of a lower quality chip may simply be bunk if the GPU is running at a lower voltage.

As for the DV6T - how much fan noise does it have? Is the E14 quieter? There are other variables at work aside from simple clock rates. It is all about the overall experience.

• Cool versus fan noise
• clocks versus heat
• voltage versus heat
• GPU capacity married to CPU capacity - why have a GPU clock and be CPU bound or vice versa?
• more power or more battery?

And, 450 is NOT underclocked, it is at manufacturer spec. Until the voltage is truly validated, I believe that complaints of a lower quality GPU are premature.

 

I agree about it being a balance overall. It is most likely not a lower quality GPU but just clocked lower. I'm sure there were design considerations taken into account, but it still seems odd that other HP lines have the same GPU clocked at the "normal" 550MHz.

Fan noise, voltage, and heat as issues are easily rendered moot by the fact that (a) GPU and GDDR speeds are significantly reduced, meaning voltage and resultant heat are much lower, when using the Windows desktop and (b) it has switchable graphics for i3/i5 CPU's. When gaming or using intense 3D apps, fan noise and heat are always a compromise. The Envy 14 runs remarkably cool as it is when fully maxed out. Even overclocking my GPU temps haven't exceeded 80C when at 550MHz.

The CPU is absolutey not the bottleneck here compared with the GPU either. Many systems run i5 CPU's with HD 5850 or HD 5870 graphics without a problem. It all depends on the game too. Most games are GPU bound anyhow, except for a select few games and Supreme Commander and Battlefield Bad Company 2 come to mind.

But to be honest, I don't know that most games would perform much better at a higher clock speed. With overclocking mine, I might get 1 or 2 fps better in Bad Company 2. It won't let me run any more bells and whistles at the higher clock either. So it is what it is. GDDR RAM overclock is usually what makes the most significant improvement anyhow, and most here can't seem to clock it more than 850MHz, so there'd only be a minor improvement there too.

 

Guys, this is not an Envy 14-specific issue. The 5850s on the Envy 17s are also underclocked. My memory is 100 mhz underclocked, as is my main GPU unit.

Of course, I cannot access Overdrive in the Catalyst drivers to correct the problem, either. It's fairly ridiculous that we're suffering a 10-20% graphics performance decrease because the stock voltages, GPU, and memory settings are not up to ATI's own specifications!! This is ridiculous. This needs to be fixed ACROSS THE BOARD for all Envy notebooks.

 

try msi afterburner 1.6 (and set unofficialoverclocking = 1 in the msi afterburner.cfg file in it's directory)

it might work for you. works for the envy 14s

 

I can confirm that MSI afterburner does work. But then again, YMMV because these cards probably didn't past the factory QC for 550/800Mhz so it might not be able to reach that speed stably. My core clock gets pretty close (545Mhz) and my memory clock is slightly overclocked as well.

 

With less core voltage, the GPU will not clock as high. It is not a QC issue so much as a design consideration.

 

Some GPUs will fully clock to the 550 spec without a bump in voltage, others will not. Temperature is more of a function on the amount of electricity being pushed and not so much the clocks.

I agree with the assessment on the CPU and GPU interplay and also definitely agree on the balance aspect. Would you rather have a nice cool, reliable gaming experience at 1 or 2 fps lower or run your system hotter? I prefer a little lower and cooler, personally. The GPU clock item does not really bug me in the least.

But, those looking at specs would certianly have to question why HP would single out a single model , the premium Envy, for the clock drop and not do the same on their other systems. Seems an odd choice in that respect.

 

So as verification, if one is able to OC the 5650 via MSI Afterburner to the spec 550mhz, will this thing finally be able to handle games properly? (e.g. SC2)

 

Depends on what you are doing within the game. Some components of the GPU get stressed out more with differing DX10/11 rendering methods. Some of the newer games may not be stable while others will be fine. Use a program like furmark, 3DMark or like to find a stable setting.

 

5 degrees is nothing unless you are already 90 degrees. But from what we seen, it is not. And unless you ambient is in the 50s, it is not going to be that high. Yes ambient is important but it affects the clocks and mine is barely going past 74 on full stress in 35 degree weather. I can deal with 79. Hell soft surfaces doesn't even matter much for the 14 as the vents are on the back and side. Duration for use? I stress tested the gpu for 2 hours with 485/800 and max temp was 69 with 25 degrees ambient. Thats no high at all. There is nothing about temperature is is preventing HP from using a higher clock.

LOWER CLOCK IS CHEAPER HARDWARE. How is that not understandable. No one designs the identical card for lower clock. There are those that got the good part of the pcb and those that aren't so lucky. If you look at the desktop market, yes some have lower clocked counterparts but those also have usually passive cooling but also the cards were designed by the company to run at those speeds. The only thing defending HP is that we can find out that HP designed their own 5650. But since HP does not have a hardware front and I doubt they did make the card from scratch. Aka unless we figure that out HP USED A CHEAPER AND CRAPPIER CARD. The best ideal hardware is one that runs cool and with lowest voltage while retaining a higher clock. We have already proven the cards don't run that hot even on overclocked so what other design choice is there. There is nothing you said defending HP makes sense. Cooling choice is out of the issue. Design choice is stupid as who will design for a higher end laptop to underperform a simliar but cheaper counterpart? Sure I can't find solid proof as I don't have another laptop with a 5650 and can open it to dissect but amazing what a little common sense and technical knowledge can do for you. This is turning into the arguement with me saying god doesn't exist and you shouting prove it.

 

>_>
What you said isn't fact, happyxix. At best, it's a bunch of well-reasoned assumptions based on facts.

 

It handles SC2 properly, no overclocking needed.

 

Again, clocks are not the source of the heat, voltage is. Clocks are how good the silicon tolerance is with respect to that voltage level.

I do not believe that rule holds with laptop GPUs. I think you are attempting to compare the practice of speed binning of the GPU chips for desktops which is completely different. With laptops, the GPUs will run at ALL the spec'd clocks depending on how much voltage you feed them and that is the choice of the notebook manufacturer. If you want a lower TDP, lower the voltage. If you want a higher clock, increase the voltage with a hit to TDP. Pretty simple concept and why AMD has the clock specs at 450 to 650 for the same GPU. Check out the specs and you will see the tolerances that are not prevalent when defining desktop GPUs.

From http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEBOOK/GRAPHICS/ATI-MOBILITY-HD-5700/Pages/hd-5650-specs.aspx

Engine clock speed: 450-650 MHz
Processing power (single precision): 360-520 GigaFLOPS
Polygon throughput: 450-650M polygons/sec
Data fetch rate (32-bit): 36-52 billion fetches/sec
Texel fill rate (bilinear filtered): 9-13 Gigatexels/sec
Pixel fill rate: 3.6-5.2 Gigapixels/sec
Anti-aliased pixel fill rate: 14.4-20.8 Gigasamples/sec
Memory clock speed: 800 MHz DDR3/GDDR3
Memory data rate: 1.6 Gbps DDR3/GDDR3
Memory bandwidth: 25.6 GB/sec
TDP: 15-19 Watts


Now, compare that to the 5970 - it has no range, just a simple specification since it also has a specific voltage.

Engine clock speed: 725 MHz
Processing power (single precision): 4.64 TeraFLOPS
Processing power (double precision): 928 GigaFLOPS
Polygon throughput: 1.45 billion polygons/sec
Data fetch rate (32-bit): 464 billion fetches/sec
Texel fill rate (bilinear filtered): 116 Gigatexels/sec
Pixel fill rate: 46.4 Gigapixels/sec
Anti-aliased pixel fill rate: 185.6 Gigasamples/sec
Memory clock speed: 1.0 GHz
Memory data rate: 4.0 Gbps
Memory bandwidth: 256.0 GB/sec
Maximum board power: 294 Watts
Idle board power: 51 Watts

 

Exactly HeavyH20.

GPU binning is not the the same process as CPU binning. There are other metrics at work and a different classification bell curve.

 

Right, which gets back to the original point that we should be able to increase the voltage to get faster clocks, if HP or some talented individual can unlock the vBIOS.

Except I don't recall ever seeing a GPU named the same with different clocks. Why not call it an HD 5630, 550MHz HD 5650, and 650MHz HD 5670 which would definitely avoid confusion when buying a laptop.

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/alienware-m15x/474717-m15x-ati-5870-mod-174.html#post6482227

I think I may try this. Anyone think it'll work???? Why not set the voltage to 1.1 volts in 3d mode at 550 MHz core and 1000 MHz ddr5? That is well within the 5850m specs.

 

On at least High-everything settings?

 

Risky. Mobile 5850/5870 are Juniper, 5600 are Redwood. Since the utility is supposed to only support Cypress, I guess it might work. The risks of reading the vBIOS should be relatively low, but flashing is a whole other story.

I know I wouldn't do it

(It also will most likely void your warranty)

 

I used to modify the BIOS on my NVIDIA based cards to get the OC rolling but I have been out of that hobby for a few years. Last one was a phase cooled QX with triple 280GTX. Expensive hobby. But, I digress. I wonder if there is a way to do a similar modification to the laptop based GPU since it is a discrete piece of silicon?

Now, if HP was thinking, they would have relased some type of user based overdrive selection so that the user could make a decision on how hard to GPU needs to work. It is not really an OC since it is withing stock operating parameters so it should not affect any supportability. That would be my definition of a premiere product. But, wait, ATI had that in the Catalyst Overdrive don't they? Just need HP to unlock that ability.

 

Turn off reflections, your FPS will double.

I'm not sure why everyone is pining to run at high or ultra to be honest. I don't see the benefit. I can run on a mixture of high and medium with reflections off though. If you're admiring the scenery too much then you're playing the game wrong.

 

Yeah, 450MHz and 550MHz isn't as big a difference as you'd think in terms of performance. It's noticeable if you're paying attention, but levels that kill the GPU at 450 WILL kill the GPU at 550. The last campaign level and giant custom maps will drop your FPS no matter how much you overclock it. If you want flawless gaming performance then you shouldn't be looking at the 5650.

It plays perfectly smoothly at medium/high as htwingnut said. Going higher is possible but it's a little laggy when scrolling. In an actual game though, I don't even notice the difference in appearance between ultra, high and medium because I don't have time to look at the scenery. I usually keep it on medium just to keep the fan quieter.

 

If you're admiring the scenery, then you're a veteran at the game, and have been staring at boring 2d pixelated pictures for 10 years, haha. Ask dookie11 what it feels like to finally be able to look at a NICE looking rts game.

 

Dookie, what does it feel like to finally be able to look at a nice looking RTS game?

 

I recently ordered an envy 14 with the i5 450 (i5 520 is not worth another $100 for same clock speed and slight turbo boost increase) 4gb ram, 500gb hard drive and the lesser 13xx x 768 screen. I must admit i'm ticked that the 5650 is clocked lower. However, although I nearly returned the envy, I still feel it is a comparatively good deal, and want to clarify some miconceptions with other laptops.

People have been comparing this to the Sony Z, which contains a gt330m. However, aside of Sony's pompous and uncomparable pricetag, the gt330m is a worse card than even a 5650 clocked at 450mhz. (in fact, on notebookcheck, compare the crysis high fps between a 450 clocked 5650 and even the gt335m; the 5650 still performs better, though i did not take note of which processor was used in each case)

People have also compared this to the mx11. The envy 14 gets better 3dmark scores than the $900 version of the mx11 (which has the c2d). I've read the i5 actually performs worse than the c2d on single core games, because it is a low voltage version, only clocked at 1.6ghz (lower than c2d). I'm not sure about the i7 620 version (also low voltage), but it should perform a little better. Nonetheless, even with alienware's back to school savings of $194, the i7 version is $1099. The envy 14 I purchased was $989 before tax, shipping and all that nonsense (includes $100 student savings). This includes a larger screen, a processor clocked at 2.4 ghz, metal casing and solid build, a superior keyboard, a slot load cd drive, gigabit ethernet (mx11 has slower ethernet) and comparable battery life at 4 hours (as compared to the more power hungry i5 or i7 versions).

Here is a link to some 3dmarks a user found with overclocking the sony z and mx11:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sony/473593-sony-z-m11x-3dmark06-scores.html

The Envy, from what i've read, will perform at least as well as the sony z if slightly overclocked, and definitely the mx11.

While I am not trying to defend hp, there are alot of non-gamer perks to make up for the lower clock speed in this laptop. The acer 4820tg and lenovo ideapad might contain the same card at a faster clock rate, but they are def of overall lower quality when it comes to casing. Also, because I intend to use this computer also for law school note taking and test taking, where speed is everything, an excellent keyboard is important to me (my asus x83v had a piece of keyboard). the envy 14 has a notoriously good keyboard with backlights. The acer and lenovo have rather average/less responsive keyboards. Envy 14 and Lenovo have about the same battery life; Acer longer at about 5 hours with websurfing. They are also about the same price as my build. Performance on the Acer is not necessarily better as notebookcheck got a 3dmark 2006 score of 6719 (perhaps because it only has an i5 430): Notebookcheck: Review Acer Aspire 4820TG Timeline X Notebook. Not sure about Lenovo.

Also, Asus laptops in the same price range offering better video cards have had substantial overheating and crashing issues.

Overall, it sucks that the 5650 is clocked at 450mhz and I would rather just pay another $100 for a regularly clocked one, because alot of other things make the Envy 14 a worthwhile deal, as compared to laptops in the same price range. However, if you purely bought the laptop for gaming, I could see why you might opt for an alternative notebook, but the envy is not meant only as a gaming notebook.

That said, I will certainly be trying to overclock the gpu when i get the laptop .

 

Good luck with that. Many people can't get stable overclocks beyond 525 Mhz.

I agree with your assessments on the comparable offerings. While disappointed with the GPU decision, the Envy 14 still strikes me as an all-around better deal.

 

I agree with everything you said but that right there.

Video cards are ALWAYS differentiated by a letter or two to signify various clocks. This is hardly a "gonna get one by". This is the manufacturer that labels these cards. It's standard practice on both laptop and desktop cards.

 

Almost every one of their competitors came out with a standard spec 5650 in a 14.1" frame. Hell, Acer has a 13.3" laptop with it. Not one of them are gimped.

What you MEAN to say is that they are the only one to do so in a combination WITH a 16:9 screen.

 

I haven't posted in this thread in a while, but I wanted to say that I have been able to get pretty stable results OCed at 550 Mhz. Lucky, I guess!

 

NV#1
560/870

NV#2
510/950

They have almost the same 3dmark scores but #2 cant go stable pass 530... Weird.....

 

I can get 570/830, but I clock at 560/820 just to be safe. It garners about 2-3 fps extra on avg in Bad Company 2 over stock clocks, and temps are reasonable <75C usually.

 

I've been following this thread for awhile.

Just for my two cents, I've overclocked so far to 525 successfully and it allows Bioshock on all settings but Vert. Sync to run perfectly. I tried 550 and after about an hour of COD4 the entire system crashed. IDK if it was the OC or not.

But besides that honestly I think people need to calm down about the laptop not meeting expectations or such. This laptop is pretty much a MBP 15 for 3/4ths the price?

I'm totally happy with it. I've configured everything for my usage and happiness and thats what I feel a new computer should be about. Making it your computer. Not fussing over how the manufacturer messed it up.

Games look fine without the effects too. And they detract in Multiplayer games.

Battery Life is 4 hours on Wifi. 6 without. HP didn't lie to us. They just ran their test and we ran our own.

I'm honestly really happy with my laptop. I go all the style of a MBP without having to pay the hefty price or go OSX.

 

2 to 3 FPS beyond what result? If we are talking moving from 15 to 18 FPS, then that is significant. If we are looking at that increase from 60 to 63, then the gain is effectively zero. Just wondering what you saw before and after.

 

It's hard to measure. I'm basing it on my visual and FRAPS running results with certain scenarios. I guess I should really say maybe 10% FPS boost at best. Things seem to run smoother.

 

Hi guys,

Can someone please confirm what Drivers are being used and if this kinda of scores are based on a fresh build? i can't even get 500/800 on default drivers/builds. Hope i didn't get a dud.

 

my latest are 570/840 on 10.7 drivers

i keep it at 560/820 as that already runs everything pretty smoothly

 

What are you guys using for the stress testing?

 

Most people are using 3dMark06, I believe.

 

I wouldn't worry too much about OC capability. I would prefer a system with no other external defects.

That said, on #1 - it was a fresh install with default drivers, while #2 was on stock.

 

I just got my envy 14 (i5 450) and I am pretty happy to say I overclocked my GPU to 550 core, 825 memory and played 2 hours of MW2 without any problems and a peak temp of 74 degrees (I also used a crappy belkin laptop fan though to help cooling, so that prob knocked off a couple degrees). I tried going 575 core, 835 memory afterwards and it almost immediately crashed, lol.

I ran MW2 at 1366 x 768, 2x aliasing, vsync on, shadows OFF, shaders on, depth of field on, the rest all on max, except "soften smoke edges off" (that seems to help slow down during smoky parts of the campaign. It easily appeared to run 45+ FPS the majority of the time, with some below 30 dips occasionally during very hectic and scenic scenes filled with smoke and 60+ when indoors (I didn't use FRAPS because I don't feel like installing it right now). Turning shadows on def doesn't make the game unplayable, but the FPS hit is noticeable and doesn't seem worth it to me. I'm going to try SC2 and Crysis Warhead later.

With this setting I also hit a 3dMark06 score of 7567, which is MUCH higher than at stock speeds: stock Envy 14 gets 6187, although that is at 1280 x 1024; I ran mine at 1280 x 768 (I didn't purchase mark3d so I can't change the settings). The Acer Aspire 5820tg with i5 430 gets 7398 also at 1280 x 768 to put it in perspective, albeit at stock 550, 800.

Definitely not bad. I could probably push the GPU a slight bit more, but I don't feel the need now and don't want to abuse my new computer too much. I'm surprised I was able to push the memory clock so much because that was always what made my old 9600m gs crash if I pushed it even 1 mhz over 500.

 

Overclocked my 5650 to 530 core, and 950 memory. 3dmark06 score of 7774. While I'm a little disappointed my core couldn't get up to 550, I'm quite pleased that my memory is able to go above and beyond =)

 

I have overclocked my card to 666 core and 1100 for memory. I'm wondering a was mine an exception? anyway I am pleased that in 3d mark06 i am getting a much higher score than the stock clocks. In games I am getting much smoother framerates and in one games 30 more fps than the stock clocks!!

 

yeah yours is the exception.

what're you ocing with, just msi afterburner?

 

666/1000 and stable ??? that must be one of the rare ones. I cant get mine pass 510/950 stable, but iam still happy with the results

 

OCed to 750/1500 and its stable. I get 80 fps on ultra on sc2

 

1500Mhz from 800Mhz is just about impossible.

You'll need to get screenies up for that

 

hahahhaa i almost laughed when i saw that!

SCREENS OR GTFO!

my OC: 550/830 and stable.. idk if i want to push it farther im not sure...

 

whats the purpose of overclocking a GPU if I may ask does it make gaming better? does it wear life down? and also can u turn it on and off? for gaming etc.

 

yes, yes and yes. Normally u get a FPS boost, which makes the game smoother. Since you are technically pushing the GPU beyond the normal limit, it does wear down the GPU... Though, i wouldn't worry to much about that since most people replace the laptop in a few years