New NP5790 - Too hot!

Hi guys,
I just got my NP5790 yesterday, (specs below) patched windows, installed Norton and patched it (Vista says it isn't compatible), and then installed NHC. Yikes! Simply browsing the web and on startup, my hard drive is at 47°c, and my CPU is ranging 73 - 80°c!

If I try and DO anything, like install software (I installed MS Office next), HD went to 58°c and CPU cranked up to 99°c before shutting down. I don't have anything unusual installed, what I've listed is all I've installed, and of course the notebook is free of bloatware.

Any ideas please? I'm an average user who's built a few desktops in the past, but not a guru by any stretch of the imagination.

Thanks!
CJ

Sager NP5790: 2.4 GHz T7700 / 2 GB DDRII 800 MHz RAM / 100GB 7200rpm SATA 150 HDD / Nvidia GeForce 8700M GT / 17" WUXGA

 

Are the fans running? If not then either Sager does not think too hot or fans not working. Also try a different app to monitor temps. At 99C did it shut itself down or did you? It does sound like a problem but I don't have this notebook so can't help. The best thing to do might be to call and tell them the problem and see what they say.

Fans,Fans, Fans! it should not hit 99C ever!

 

what about your graphic card performance? do u think its adequete for architects

 

also try to uninstall the norton and install the kaspersky vista edition..

 

Yes the fans are working fine. I think perhaps NHC isn't monitoring correctly (I am running 32 bit Vista, not 64) because the laptop doesn't feel anywhere near that hot to me... my Toshiba shows cooler temps and feels WAY hotter to the touch.

I don't know about the GPU, NHC doesn't monitor it, nor the fans. Is there another program I might try?

 

I just downloaded Speedfan. At idling, NHC shows my CPU at 79°c, and Speedfan shows it at 59°C on core 1 & 2. It doesn't show my fans though

So... NHC is probably faulty, at least on my pc?

*Follow up
After a few minutes, Speedfan reported the same high temps, and the laptop again shut itself down. It acts like there's no thermal gunk on the CPU?

 

hm...are you blocking your vents (on the back) or your intake (on the bottom)?

remember to use it on a flat and cool surface.

 

Make sure you are using it on a cool and flat surface.... preferably a notebook cooler
- Zalman ZM-NC1000

 

i'd say contact the supplier immediately

 

we can't jump to conclusions now...let him try the suggestions he has and let's see how it goes.

 

I have the laptop on my desk, there's absolutely nothing blocking the fans and they are working.

I have an Antec laptop cooler pad which I tried, it doesn't make any difference. I also have a laptop "stand", which elevates the laptop off the desk, that doesn't make any difference either. Actually, it runs a bit cooler without either of them.

Flat on the desk, on boot it's at 48, and will stay there until I open an application, then it jumps into the mid 60's. If I try to do something like defrag, or install software, it goes ballistic and into the tupper 80's and 90's, and shuts down.

I'm thinking 60 is as hot as I should ever see this CPU? Either way, I can't do anything on the laptop without it overheating and shutting down, other than surf the net. Even Outlook pushes the CPU up into the 70's.

An earlier post mentioned removing NOrton... now I've used Norton forever and have never had a virus, so I'm rather fond of it, but is it possible it could cause this? I don't see how?

 

I recommend to open the notebook [just the bottom panel] to see if the copper heatsinks are secured down onto the CPU and GPU.

if they are loose in anyway, then that would cause overheats like that.

 

Gophn, would I void my warranty by doing so? I uninstalled Norton, didn't make any difference. This is most frustrating, after waiting all this time to get the darn thing. Plus, if I have to send it back, I'll have to cancel the order, because we're in an RV park and due to leave in a couple of weeks.

 

no, you will not void your warranty by simply opening up your laptop.

 

it wont void your warranty... its just opening a panel.

 

Okay I opened and the copper heatsinks are firmly attached, I did try and give them a bit more, but they were locked down pretty snug. However... I'm not entirely certain BOTH fans are running. The one on the outside edige is definitely blowing out the back, but I can't feel anything from the other. Would it be safe to power on the notebook with the bottom off and the laptop on it's side to check this? If it isn't running, can I replace that or will I have to send the laptop back to Sager?

Sorry... I've built desktops, but never cracked open a notebook before, I'm glad I survived it.

Oh... I also noticed, if I'm running on battery, then plug in the power supply, the CPU temps instantly jump around 8 degrees, then keep creeping up, or so it seems.

 

If one of the fans do not spin up.... then it might be stuck or defective.

Did you contact your vendor about this yet??

They might give you some last minute advice/suggestion before they will tell you to send it in.

 

anything like the D901C with FN+1 to turn the fans on max?

 

I bought it direct from Sager, and yes I emailed them this morning. I can't call, we're parked in our RV in the boondocks with no cell phone reception (satelite internet).

I don't see a Fnc. option to turn the fans up, nor any fan settings in the BIOS. Actually there isn't much functionality in the BIOS period, that was a bit disappointing.

Would it be safe to turn it on with the bottom off to see if that 2nd fan is working?

 

At the moment, [for new notebooks] only the Clevo D900C has the Fan Toggle (Fn+1) built-in.

The M570RU should have an updated BIOS and maybe keyboard firmware to enable that functionality as well.

 

I took the bottom back off and powered it up, the large fan on the gpu side is not working. I don't know if it's dead, or the plug in on the MB. I guess at this point I'll have to wait for Sager to get a hold of me. Would that fun not working cause my extreme temps?

 

Did you start it up all the way?

All the fans in the 5790 took a quick whirl when you reach the point where vista is loading and you see the progress bar.

and just a FYI, the 2nd fan kicks in almost every 1-2 minutes then turns off and then turns back on after another 30 seconds, etc...

 

Pardon the slight hijack but..
every 30 secs?? wtf..I rather it be a constant max fan. Its the start up noise that would be the most annoying and noticeable.

Is there a bios version + keyboard firmware to enable fan toggling on the 5790?

 

Yes I let it boot all the way up, the large fan never comes on at all.

 

Just in case, run a benchmark that will tax both CPU and GPU (like 3DMark06).

If the fan does not come on....
Then I would report that to Sager... definitely a defect.

 

If its not working at all, I'd suggest you RMA it.

There will be a bios update to enable fan toggling...but at the moment you can't do it...

 

RMA it, it isnt worth the testing. the fan should be working out of the box.

 

Okay, thank you everyone for all the help, I really do appreciate it.

 

I decided to go ahead and test the fan a bit further. I loaded up my embroidery software (sorry guys ) because if it doesn't stress the laptop to the limit, nothing will. Sure enough, the 2nd fan DID kick on when the CPU temp reached 60° celsius. So the fan does work. However, it shut right back down, and the temp continued to climb until (you guessed it) the thing overheated and shut down.

I think I'm just going to return the laptop. Whatever the problem is, I think the chip has overheated enough times I don't want it.

Opinions?

 

RMA, definitely, considering the money you paid, you should not have to do this.

 

Yeah, I agree. I emailed Sager for an RMA, and formatted the laptop so my info and programs aren't on it. what a bummer

 

its unfortunate... but is statically expected.

Sorry that you had to be 1 of a 1000.

 

CJ, would love to know about your experience in RMA'ing the thing with Sager. Please keep us up to date on how long it take and any hurdles along the way.

 

Thanks Gophn. I'm very disappointed, but heck it's just a computer, I can think of far worse things to get worked up about, LOL.

Dit_Xi, I certainly hope they won't give me any trouble. I requested an RMA for a refund, not a repair since we'll be traveling in our RV for the next month or 2, I'll re-order when we park someplace again.

 

Sager sent me an RMA # today, along with this side note:

"Please note that any software that has had shrink wrap removed or been opened is now your property and will be deducted from the total of your purchase amount, should you require a refund."

How bogus is that? Now I'll have to pay for the OEM Vista Ultimate cd that will be unusable as it was activated to the machine?

 

Yea that does suck... but is expected with all retail computers.

If the software (like the Windows Vista), is activated... then it cannot be returned to the vendor.

What I would recommend is to keep the Vista Ultimate disc and its COA (Certificate of Authenticity) sticker... usually placed under the notebook or on the shrink wrap of the Windows disc. It is your property now.

You can technically re-use it on another computer, just call Microsoft if prompted during the next Activation and say you replaced you're defective computer with a new one.

... OR....

you can get the system replaced (rather than getting refunded) and there should be no extra charge... the OS [it's license and activation] should migrate over to the replacement system with no issues.

 

They activated the software, I didn't. However, Daniel at Sager responded to my asking what the price deduction would be by saying that if my Vista disc wasn't scratched, I wouldn't be charged for it, so that's good. I really wish they had a fix for the heat as I'd rather just keep it.

 

They can... just get an exchange for a new unit... rather than waiting for them to repair the old one.

They have a 30-day full satisfaction guarantee... so they can consider it am refund/exchange rather than a warranty job.

And your new unit should not have the same issue... or you should go by a lottery ticket because the odds are staggering (1/1000² if you get another defective unit.

P.S. An OEM is not supposed to activate the software for you. The End-User must agree the terms and then activate it themselves.. so if any retailer that does that & gives you grief... they are liable, not you.

 

I can't... we won't be in the RV park for more than another 2 weeks, and I've no clue where we'll be headed from here.

 

Oh I see. Well, if you can get your RV to City of Industry, CA [or other locations of the Sager resellers].... you can do your business personally at the location.

Wait.... two more weeks?? Why dont you get it expressed shipped... Sager might be willing to do that both ways if you tell them your situation.

 

Hey Gophn, I hate to tell you, but the odds are still only 1/1000 given that he has already received a defective unit once. The odds don't improve any on the second attempt. The odds are 1/1000² of the next two units he tries both being defective though.

 

I think he means thats the odds of getting 2 defective units in a row...

 

He implied that the state of the 1st unit somehow affects the probability of the 2nd unit being defective. This, if not a brief lapse of thinking, shows a fundamental lack of understanding of probability. Flip a (fair) coin once and get heads, the next flip is no more likely to be tails than if you had never before flipped the coin.

 

bazald you are ma men but you are wrong.

Take two "identical" events A and B that are independent. That is one happening does not interfere with other you have by defintion.

P(A | B) = P(A) - This is the probability of any of the two events happening.

The case at hand is the probablity of both events happening while independent:

P(A & B) = P(A)*P(B) = 1/1000*1/1000 = 1/1000000. This is becouse they are independent otherwise it would not be equal to the product.

Taking your example, you are less likely to take 2 heads on two throws then one head on any of the throws, even thought they are independent. Two heads on two throws = 1/2*1/2 = 1/4. One head on any of the throws = 1/2.

Trance
PS: Indeed someone is lacking something.

 

Sorry Trance, but Bazald is correct for the case under discussion in this thread.

You would be correct if no observation had been made yet. In that case, the probability of two independent failures would be the square of the probability of a single failure.

In this case, however, we're looking at the probability of a second failure given that one has already occurred. Since we've already observed a failure in the first trial, the probability of failure in the first trial is 1, and the probability of failure in the second trial is 1/1000, the independent probability of failure.

1 * (1/1000) = 1/1000.

Yes, you're less likely to get two heads on two independent throws, but if you've already gotten heads on the first throw, the probability of the pair of throws both being heads is 1/2.

David

 

it IS hard to understand
because 2 unrelated events, still can be related

you can get 1 fault in 1000 attempts, by average
that means, for attempt 1, you have a chance of getting a fault: 1/1000
for attempt 2, you have a chance of getting a fault: 1/1000
HOWEVER, if your average is 1/1000, to maintain the average, you SHOULD have a slighter chance of getting a fault (which you don't, because attempt 1 and 2 are unrelated)
funny how this works, isn't it

 

In this case the odds of getting two defective products are 1/1000*1/1000 that is what Gophn said and is correct and that does not change over throws unless you change the semantics of the variables.

1 * (1/1000) = 1/1000 - You can't do that, as you are changing the meaning of variables. If you are not and if had'nt got a defective product in the first try your formula would always ouput 0, that is he could never get a defective product ever since the first try? No it means that he could never get two defictive products.

A - getting a defective product
A & A - getting a defective product and getting a defective product.

P(A) is the probability of getting a defective product.
P(A & A) probability of getting a defective product and getting a defective product.

P(A & A) = P(A) * P(A) in this case 1/1000*1/1000.

"In this case, however, we're looking at the probability of a second failure given that one has already occurred."

If that was what bazald ment then he is correct, but that is not what i've implied for gohpn statment, so i jumped in and said that his argument was wrong considering the implication.

What thought we were arguing is gohpn statment and that is what is the probability of getting two defective products and that does not change over time. It is not hard to understand. The probability of getting a defective product is different then getting two defective products and that is what understood from Gohpn. So does that mean that on the second try you are less likely to get another defective product then the first one? No. It means that you are extermly unlucky (or lucky) to get another defective product becouse the odds of getting two are very low.

Trance
PS: I know it look strange but getting one defective product is different then getting two defective products even when you already got one Think if the pour guy got another defective product. He was one that met the 1/1000000 probability, not simply the 1/1000 becouse matched it twice.

 

Point is, the original poster already got the 1/1000 failure the first time. Her probability of failure for the initial purchase _is_ 1 (or 100%) because it's already happened. So yes, you can do 1*(1/1000) for the probability of failure for her initial purchase + replacement unit.

Bazald's point was that the fact that she's already gotten one defective unit doesn't make it less likely that she'll get a defective one next time. She probably won't, since the odds of getting a defective unit are low, but it's not less likely to happen the second time than it was the first.

David

 

The point is:

* The probability of two defective units is 1/1000000 for any two trials (extremly unlucky if you match this). Gophn point as I understand. And the case at hand as we on the way to the second attempt. Correct

* The probability of getting a defective unit for any trial of one is 1/1000. Also the case at hand but less accurate IMHO according to the context. Bazald's case I believe as these are independent events ( "Flip a (fair) coin once and get heads, the next flip is no more likely to be tails than if you had never before flipped the coin" - Bazald.). Correct

* Your case is ( I believe, I'm not sure) , that NOW and in the CONTEXT of this thread since we got a defect on the first unit, the probability of getting two defective units is 1/1000. Correct but you loose information by adding some regarding the startup chances, so less accurateijn generic terms. By adding information as you are doing it that does not change the more general probability of getting two defective units as I believe Gophn was using and Bazald seamed to wrongly think it was invalid in the light off new information IMHO. In the end if we get two defective units we would have matched the 1/1000000 (really unlucky)probability rather then simply the 1/1000 (not so unlucky) if we get no more defects.

Trance
PS: I rest my case, but I liked the exchange of semantics and mathematical interpretation of reality. The only problem I have with Gophn statement is were did he got the 1/1000 estimate as my d900c (Clevo) is going for repair too So if the users owner of this of this are anyway representative I would say that it is the probability is somewhat higher (some other guy also got it to repair).

 

ok.... when did you guys start discussing about statistics?

... I started it didnt I? .... geez.

My 1/1000 was just a general statistic on how uncommon it was to get a defective new notebook.

You guys are funny... I can go over the Standard Deviation graphs... and do some chi-squared...