*HP HDX DRAGON Owners Lounge, Part 1*

I notice people's RAM WEI score being low. But mine has always been 5.9. I have used a few utilities and they all say my RAM is 667, 5-5-5-15.

I am not sure why my score is so high?



As you can see my bottleneck is my CPU. That will be my next update.

 

Hi Guys!

Are there any new NVIDIA Drivers for the HDX?
On the HP Page (German) i find always the same dated to the mid of the year?
Is it possible to use alternative drivers like Omega or something else?

Thanks so far!!

 

Hi guys.

I bought an hdx9494 on the weekend from Bestbuy for $1600.

I installed a Seagate 7200 RPM 160 GB hard drive and wiped Vista off the stock 320GB drive. I installed Fedora 8. It works very well with the hdx, although there are a few little niggles.

I might upgrade the processor to the X9000. According to the Passmark benchmark, it runs about 75% faster than the T8100 in my hdx.

I am really happy and impressed with this machine. I absolutely love the display and everything else too.

I'm sad that HP has discontinued this machine, but I can't imagine that they were making money on them. Then again, maybe they will introduce an updated model in a few months.

I bought my hdx kind of blind. There is no more marketing info on the HP website. Bestbuy didn't know much about them either. Would anyone happen to have a pdf for the hdx9494 brochure ?

Thanks

 

Haha we'll Vista is native so gotta have that to use the bass, and everything..XP is stable, less glitchy, and I like XP best. As far as Macs OS I am planning on getting a Mac Pro, have been planning for way longer than I've been wanting the HDX, and I figured I'd get used to Mac in some sense before then. Not interested in Linux or Unbuntu really. I read from I think it was either the reviews on HP when it was listed and or review sites comments saying that the moviesoftware, can't recall the name, not Vongo, I THINK muuvee something allows you 1 or 2 free movie downloads..dont know if its ONLY available with Ultimate or not, but I think it is. Not sure.

I'd fill up the hard drives with videos and movies, video games, programs..Some I'll get from my Comcast DVR recordings. But I know video editing takes a bit of room so I figured it'd be a good idea to get a TB. I have a Lacie 7200 500GB External Hard Drive I back stuff up with.

 

Would faster 7200.3 drives have any impact on the performance of Dragon Naturally Speaking?

When do you think high capacity SSDs will become affordable?

I thougth that a recent post on the backlight issue, the "Mura" effect, and a possible fix was really interesting. I hope that poster is still on the case.

 

175.97

http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...&dlc=en&cc=us&product=3743954&os=2100&lang=en

Don't worry, 8800M GTS is in the .inf. Works perfectly.

 

Not likely as it's all about memory and CPU usage. The HDX has more than enough power to run V10.

Depends on what you consider affordable. But figure in two years time the transition from spinning platters to solid state should be in full swing.

 

I have some of that literature, I'll see if I can upload it later. It's in PDf format.

EDIT: here's the links. I uploaded them to megaupload:

HDX info promo sheet: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Z24OWDWG
HDX launch Promo sheet: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=4F8U8MCP

As for going by passmark, I wouldn't.

Have a look at this chart ( http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html) to get a truer glimpse of the performance increase which is MUCH less than passmark's 75% boost. You might want to go for the T9300(2.5ghz) for more bang for the buck as the increase from 2.5ghz to 2.8ghz is negligible (6-13%). Increase from 2.1ghz to 2.5ghz is very good @ (20-25%). And you can't overclock the X9000 in the HDX.

Sure, you can get an increase of about 38% going from 2.1ghz to 2.8ghz, but you'll be paying 2x to 4x as much just to get the extra (6-12%) more over the 2.5Ghz. Just food for thought.

 

Thanks ! Was there ever an hdx9494 specific brochure ?

When I Googled the processor swap, I came across that page. I looked at those same numbers. I actually think the Passmark benchmarks are more indicative of real world performance because those tests have the processor doing things that one does when running an OS... things like decompressing files, opening emails, etc.

The T9500 and X9000 processors have a larger cache than the T8100 does. 6MB versus 3MB. That means there are more "hits" on data in the cache which means the processor doesn't have to go out to RAM to get data to work on.

So the real world speed difference between the these processors and the T8100 is larger than the clock speed alone might indicate. The clock speed ratio would be accurate if the processor was doing computational tasks on a small amount of data that would largely be held in the cache. In real world applications, the data set is larger and more RAM fetches are needed and the 6MB cache processors outperform the T8100 by a wider margin.

As I understand it, the T processors have fixed clock multipliers. The processor runs at a fixed ratio to the bus. The Extreme processors don't have this limitation and thus they can be overclocked in the bios. However, from what I have seen the heat buildup is significant when this is done.

Maybe someone that has done an X9000 processor swap can chime in and tell us what they found for a real world speed increase ?

Thanks

 

Finally got my 9494NR! It's so awesome and so huge! This thing's got some serious wow factor, people at school keep coming up to me asking, "Is that a laptop?" One guy called it a "mothership". I totally love it, now if I could only find a bag big enough to fit it.

 

Can you drop in a t9600, they are kinda pricey right now but I'm curious.

 

Yes. All of the 800mhz FSB Penryns are compatible.

 

I did a search on the t9600 and it is described as 2.8 ghz 1066 FSB. Am I incorrect about this?

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB47

Thanks

 

No. It's just a configuration designation.

Partly true. What's definitely true is the the larger cache and its effect on performance. What's not true is passmark being indicative of real world perfromance because of the way it scales its figures and why they never materialize in real world performance gains.

It routinely grossly overstates the percent difference between computational tasks using obtuse measures as compared to the aggregate of other performance measures which are much closer to real world performance.

In fact, across individual specific metrics of any given type of software easily shows the fault of passmark's benchmark. For instance, a simple encoding of an MP3 doesn't yield the percent difference that passmark would indicate but rather what an aggragate of metrics would. Gaming benchmarks of actual FPS, though predominately GPU dependent, do not yield what passmark would indicate is a percent difference once you pass the CPU/GPU bottleneck threshold. Database sorting doesn't either. Perhaps one of the best tests as to CPU muscle, Wprime multi-threaded test, doesn't yield the percent difference across mobile processors that passmark would indicate.

That's why on this site, it's been agreed that passmark is not to be used in reviews of notebooks as a comparative benchmark of systems. Futuremark benchmarking software, though not wholly indicative of actual real world performance in every situation, is the gold standard. It has proven it's worth in allowing users on this site to make informed relative assessments of performance.


Here's a wealth of benchmarking results you can use to compare. It's a search engine of results. Wprime results, being entirely CPU intensive, can be found here also:

http://www.hwbot.org/init.results.search.do

Do a comparative of the x9000 @2.8ghz , T9300, & T8100.

The X9000 cannot be overclocked on the HDX for 2 reasons.

1. BIOS doesn't support it.
2. The ICS PLL chip that HP spec'd Inventec (ODM) to install is of the fixed variety, so there can be no adjustment of bus timing.

In the HDX, unlike Alienware's or Gateway's 17" gaming notebooks would not yield a significant heat buildup if the X9000 were to be overclocked given that it was designed to run the hotter 65nm Meroms and due its relatively superior airflow and cooling.

There's plenty of info in this site about the X9000's real world performance on other sections like the Sager/clevo, Gateway, Dell XPS, and Alienware forums. Their results would be the same in the HDX. The usual comments are "snappier" , "got more frame rates" , "overclocks nicely" , "quicker boot time."

 

crid meant T9500.

 

What about the X9100? It's a better performer than the X9000. Is this usable in the Dragon?

Thanks

 

It's a better performer for sure, but it's not supported in the HDX. Its FSB is 1066mhz.

The only Penryns the HDX supports are: T8100, T8300, T9300, T9500, X9000. It supports a bunch of Meroms but they're not worth mentioning.

 

You are a devilishly fast typist. I did find this from Lancorp's earlier post.

'...So, the X9100 will work, but not at it's rated speed. It will run at it's multiplier x 800Mhz instead of 1066Mhz."

I'm still wondering if there's a workaround for the PS3.

Many opine that PCs are better graphically than consoles, though far more expensive. Do you think that consoles will catch up and surpass PCs?

Thanks

 

No, if for no other reason than consoles are a fixed point. They decide on the equiptment way before it comes out, then the console stays the same. Where PC's can change as they wish.

The other reason is that it would be too expensive to crank out high end parts in a console, they already sell at a loss as it is.

 

What lancorp is talking about is the theory of what speed it will work at.

FSB in HDX is 800mhz/4 = 200Mhz. If the CPU multiplier is 14 (which it is in the x9000), then the CPU speed is 200Mhz x 14 = 2800Mhz or 2.8 Ghz.

The CPU multiplier in the x9100 is 11.5. So in the HDX, it would run @: 200mhz x 11.5 = 2300mhz or 2.3ghz.

If the FSB were 1066 in the HDX, then it would run at its rated speed of 3.0ghz.


As for consoles vs computers... Best answer is... if PC gaming dies, the console will be the de facto better graphic platform.

As for the PS3 solution, the two I suggested are pretty much the only avenues to explore at this time. There's no other way to get live HD signal content into the HDX. There are other avenues, but you'd be better off buying a big screen TV and hiring a butler to ferry it to and frow given the cost of the other solutions.

 

I put it to him, but he refuses to lug anything around.

 

LOL. Indeed, good help is hard to find.

 

HDX18 is up for sale now in case anyone wanted to check it out:

http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/s...tainment+powerhouse&series_name=HDX18t_series

 

Wow, with quad-core goodness at a reasonable upgrade price. That's just lovely.

 

It is a nice Laptop. The Quad-core is awesome. Only thing that makes it not an option for me is only 9600M and Price. As configured it was $2400+. If it had a 9800M option it would most likely be $2600+. Also a little side note is no 7200rpm drives available.

You can tell they do not want to step on Ailenware's toes. Giving the HDX quad-core but holding off on the little extras needed to make a good gaming rig.

Yes much better than the $900+ price they were peddling for the x9000

 

I picked one up to check it out as a replacement for my Dragon. You cannot beat that price for the QX9300. Dell is charging a $900 upcharge to go from a P8400 to a QX9300 in their Precision Workstation, and Lenovo wants $5300 for a QX9300-based notebook!

I don't know if it's an error in pricing or what, but I'll try one! I can always remove the QX9300 and put it in a notebook PC that DOES do overclocking, and have saved a tremendous amount of $$$. Who knows...

In any case, overclockable or not, I've been wanting a quad core in a notebook for a while!

 

I wonder if the HDX18 chipset will handle 8 GB of RAM as well?

 

Thanks for the response 2.0.

 

I would guess, since it is a newer chipset...I'm hoping anyways!!

 

It's Intel's PM45 (cantiga) chipset. So it definitely does. Gotta love that.

http://ark.intel.com/chipset.aspx?familyID=35515

 

No probs, crid.

 

Drools.....

 

I was wondering about this yesterday !

The QX9300 has a FSB of 1033 MHz versus 800MHz on the stock processors.

Will the motherboard support 1033 MHz ? Or is it just that the processor supports that speed and the speed is set by the BIOS/ board components and it will remain at 800MHz ?

I would *LOVE* a quad processor in my laptop. *LOVE*

What is the power consumption of the Q9300 like ? The BIOS is supposed to allow the adjustment of the processor speed when the X9000 is used. Do you know if it will with the Q9300 ? That would allow one to drop the processor speed when the processing power isn't needed, to extend battery life and keep the heat down.

I know that the OS does this anyway, but limiting the speed in the BIOS might prevent high peak values.

Thanks.

I *LOVE* my hdx9494.

Edit:
"The QX9300 has four cores running at 2.53 GHz, with a 12MB cache at 45 watts."

Power consumption is no worse than the X9000. It consumes 45 watts too.
12 MB of cache ! The T8100 has 3MB.

http://www.ditii.com/2008/08/21/intel-qx9300-a-penryn-quad-core/

 

All the CPU's for the HDX18t are 1066 FSB (T8400, T6500, T9400, T9600 and QX9300). Only the older T-series are 800 FSB. Centrino2 chipset is 1066 FSB so the CPU's are too.

Therefore, YES, the motherboard would run at 1066 also.

The QX9300 is a 45W rated part, whereas the two core counterparts are 35W. Not a huge deal under normal running conditions...probably only a watt or two difference during "normal" work.

I *LOVE* my Dragon too, but the 18.4" looks appealing, considering it's half the weight and QUAD CORE. When I get it, I'll have to make a very difficult decision, I'm sure.

 

As far as I can tell, all the CPUs for the HDX20s are 800 MHz FSB. Am I wrong ? Will the QX9300 run on a 800 MHz board ? Does the board generate the FSB frequency or does the processor ? Will a 1033 MHz FSB processor run properly at 800 MHz ?

Edit: With the X9000, the processor speed is set as a multiple of the FSB speed. I assume that would be the same with the QX9300. Is the ratio editable in the BIOS or is it fixed ? If its fixed, it might run at a multiple to 800 rather than a multiple to 1033. Is that acceptable ?

Thanks

The HDX20s are shipped with the X9000 processor. It is a 45 watt part, so heat shouldn't be a problem.

 

Fixed on the mobo by the chipset. HDX 20 has a 200Mhz quad-rate bus = 800mhz. The multiplier is on the chip. So if the quad core could work without a BIOS update to support it, it would run at a multiple of 9.5 (it's multiplier) = 200mhz x 9.5= 1900mhz or 1.9GHz.

That is if it'll work without a BIOS update to indentify it properly.

 

Not always. It isn't on the X9000. That is how they can be overclocked and the T8100 and others can't be. Not that I am a fan of overclocking.

My T8100 is running at 2.1GHz right now with 2 cores and 3MB of cache. The QX9300 would be running 4 cores and 12MB of cache, a considerable improvement. Under clocking the QX9300 would probably make for really good power consumption.

Any chance the bios on the hdx line is generic and the bios from the hdx18 would work on it ?

Anyone have a bios version ? The bios on my hdx9494 is F.39 and the system board ID is 30E2.

Thanks.

 

My posts should state the FSB frequency on the hdx18 is 1066, not 1033 MHz. My bad. Sorry for the confusion.

The stock T8100 processor has a Passmark rating of 1237. The Quad Q9300 has a rating of 3342, nearly 3x as fast @2.5GHz, assuming that the QX9300 runs as fast as the Q9300.


Here are some Q9300 specs:
http://compare.intel.com/pcc/showchart.aspx?mmID=33881&familyID=1&culture=en-US

I think the hdx20 has one of the chipsets in the chipset list. I'll check further when I get time.

 

The X9000's multiplier is unlocked. But the FSB is fixed on the HDX's mobo. The PLL is fixed and cannot be modified. Therefore, CPU frequency is a function of multiplier v. fixed FSB.

In any event, there's two ways to overclock.

1. change the multiplier of unlocked CPU.

2. mod the FSB.

Actually, they'd end up about the same perfromance-wise. While you bump up the cache, you dropped the frequency. There aren't many multithreaded apps that would take advantage of 4 cores. Most apps are single threaded. There's not much call for multithreading and it's difficult to program a multithreaded app. Intel is ahead of its time. What's more is that there aren't all that many CPU intensive apps. But you would have better multitasking ability than a dual core.

You're better off dropping a T9300 or x9000 in it. Both would provide you with a marked increase in performance with the T9300 giving you the best bang for your buck.

Owning another HP computer, it doesn't appear that they are generic. Attempting it would run the serious risk of bricking your comp. It's less of a risk to drop in the quad-core to see if it'll boot and recognize it. It'll probably work, but report the wrong frequency.

Also that system board ID is a vendor ID. It's for Inventec the ODM of the HDX 9000.

 

So the question becomes, is the QX9300 locked or not ?

I run Linux. I agree that an individual app might not run faster, but 4 apps running at once sure would. And then there is the 12 MB of cache versus just 3MB for the T8100 and 6MB for the X9000.

I'm not sure when I would upgrade the processor. At some point the QX9300 will be a $100 processor. I'm thinking ahead and wondering how to keep my hdx as long as possible since it doesn't appear that HP is making them anymore. I know that is kinda silly, but... If I could bump the processor to a Quad in the future, this machine would last me for a long, long time.

I'd be fine with that, I think.

Thanks.

 

It's unlocked. But you can't access its multiplier in the HDX.

Forward thinking is always a good thing.

I don't think we'll ever see a $100 X9000. Intel didn't make all that many of them and you have to watch out for ES versions (engineering samples with B1 stepping) being sold on eBay. Same goes for the QX9300. In fact, due to scarcity, the price will probably creep up or stay where they are now.

But you will see ~$100 T9300's and T9500's in about 2-3yrs time.

 

Hi, I have an hdx9494nr, and I'm curious about upgrading my cpu from the T8100 to the X9000 (i've seen some other posts saying this is possible).

For those of you who have done this already,

1. where did you buy your cpu from?
2. is there a guide somewhere to do this? (I am actually very tech savy, but have never taken apart a laptop before for a cpu upgrade, and don't know if you still need to do things like use thermal coolant like Arctic Silver 5, actually I dont even know what sits on top of a laptop processor, is there a fan or a heatsink there that needs thermal coolant? If someone wrote a guide (like where screws are to take apart the case instead of trying to find them all, lol) that would be useful. figuring out how to take my x360 apart was a pain because of 1 or 2 screws i couldnt find lol.
3. did you need a bios update for the X9000? and
4. last but actually most importantly (for me!) did you notice a significant increase in your FPS for games like Age of Conan, Crysis , and Warhammer online?

I'm mainly concerned about FPS increase for some games. I see the memory and hard drives are upgradable too. Upgrading the HD would just mean faster load times and not fps too, right? Memory however should increase the performance further but is it a noticable difference that would make it worth it?

 

1. No one in this thread has done it AFIAK. But the usual place to get it is off eBay.

2. The link to the service manual is in this thread. Perhaps on page 100 - Black Knight's post. I've posted it a number of times. But you can get it off HP's website. Click support tab, type in HDX, select manuals. There are also guides on the web about how to apply heatsink compound.

3. You won't need a BIOS update unless your BIOS is pre- Jan '08.

4. From a T8100 you will see some difference but you have to understand that the majority of games are GPU dependent. So once you pass 2 Ghz on the CPU, you won't see any difference in FPS with the same GPU. @ <2.ghz, the CPU becomes the bottleneck. For RTS games you will see some improvement. For gaming, X9000 is overkill since it won't taken advantage of and you can't overclock under any circumstances in the HDX.

5. faster memory will have virtually no impact in gaming. The low latency memory like HyperX wil only yield a 0-2% improvement. And A faster HD will not increase frame rates. FPS is a function of GPU.

 

It appears that T8100 motherboards use the PM45 chipset. It appears the QX9300 can use that chipset.

 

No, all HDX 9xxx use the PM965 (Santa Rosa) Chipset. PM45 is strictly for the Montevina Platform (centrino2).

D/L CPU-Z: http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php

 

Hi,

I bought my HDX laptop 3 weeks ago. Everything was running fine good laptop and everything until today. My laptop switched of by it self than was trying to switch back on then switch off than switch on that stopped. I tried turning it on but only fans working no power light button on, no hard drive activity light on. all lights on but no power but light or hard drive light on. I tried removing battery and still screen would not go on. all i can hear are just the fans running nothing else. please advise what i shud do? im going to ring hp and ask for refund or a brand new replacement bcos i think i got a dug model.

kind regards

student(UK)

 

hello.
i believe this will be my first post in notebook review forums. I bought the HDX 9494NR off of newegg about a month ago. What i wanted to know about is if it is hard to change out the processor in the hdx. Im very knowledgeable when it comes to desktops but have never taken apart a laptop before. Im sure the only thing different is the amount of stuff you have to take out to get to the processor but just wanted to know for sure.

 

It looks like the QX9300 will have an editable clock ratio and it will work with the PM465 chipset.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-2-Extreme-Notebook-Processor.11027.0.html

The hdx20 can be purchased with the X9000 processor right from HP. The QX9300 is from the same family. Does anyone know if the BIOS is the same for the X9000 processor ?

 

Hard to believe isn't it? That's it's just not fully compatible with the HDX 9000.

The QX9300 is 2nd generation Penryn. It's not from the 1st gen Penryn family of which the X9000 is from. 1st gen run @ 800MHZ FSB MAX. 2nd gen, made for Montevina platform, were made to run on 1066mhz FSB. Their respective multipliers and FSB's is what accounts for their rated speed.

In the HDX9000, you cannot, under any circumstances, alter the multiplier (clock ratio) of any extreme CPU. None. It simply cannot be done. Knowing that, we tried to see if the PLL chip (clock generator) which controls the FSB's speed, could be overclocked using SetFSB. Turns out that the PLL made by ICS is fixed also. HP went to great lengths to make sure you can't overclock the HDX. Look back in this thread to around July.

The BIOS is the same for the X9000 and it is for the T9500 on down. The X9000 was first supported in BIOS F.33 when HP released the Penryns for the HDX. But the BIOS will be different for the new Penryns (1066mhz bus) because not only do they need to be registered to the system to recognize their ID, but also their stepping voltages for ACPI purposes. The new Penryns have lower top voltage and different voltage increments than the 1st gen Penryns.

Just like the Meroms (like T7600 or x7900) that the HDX first had, had higher top voltages and different stepping voltages, when the new Penryns came out, the BIOS properly sets the voltage intervals.

Think of it this way, and I would NOT try this, but install BIOS F.06 which doesn't have support for the Penryns. That'll give you an idea of whether or not the Qx9300 or Q9100 will work.

Honestly though, trying it could mean frying it.

 

Replacement for your Dragon...already? I guess the economic woes in the news got nothing on you!

I'd love to see system benchmarks on the HDX18 with quad core if you have the opportunity to run them.