Clevo Overclocker's Lounge

I had problems with mine when i got it, but then I did not understand why windows 7 didn't work on it. I got it right when it came out and got rid of it a few days later. If I knew now what i didn't then....things might have been far different. lol

 

My P870 was supplied with SAMSUNG SM951 when I ordered. Was not sure if I should choose NVMe ssd's or not. But after some thinking I decided to replace the SAMSUNG SM951 with 950 Pro(you know this from pm). 950 Pro was not very much more expensive than if I chose SM951. No regrets on this today. The other options they offered me such as Samsung Evo ssd from Multicom was worse. They had small selection and as well expensive. 950 Pro was finally the only decent choice I could do.

 

Yes, from all I can see the 950 Pro is an excellent option for NVMe and that is what I would ultimately want. However, I am not willing to pay $300+ for a 512GB SSD. I simply cannot justify that cost in my mind based on what little capacity I get in return for it.

I should probably just wait for prices to self-correct and begin to drop as the NVMe technology further matures because I have no problem whatsoever with the performance of the affordable X400 drives. If the day comes when I can buy a 950 Pro for close to the same cost per GB as an ordinary M.2 SATA SSD, then I can upgrade at that time. I would not have a problem paying the price of the Intel NVMe drive that brother @Johnksss@iBUYPOWER just tested. I think that is appropriate pricing and represents good value. But, not if it has the problems that Brother @D2 Ultima mentioned. Poor durability would negate the affordability factor. If I were to spend a lot of money on an NVMe drive right now, only to be disappointed with the outcome, I would be very upset with myself for not following my gut and avoiding it.

 

You all on the other side of the globe, is god blessed with many choices Here at home, not so much to choose from. I had to choose what was usable from Multicom. Even ordinary low end 2.5" ssd and M.2 was pricey. I did not have many choices. Ordering on Internet are sometimes more expensive than buying here. When I ordered the machine, it had to contain at least SSD + Hdd. It would have been foolish by me to receive an SSD that I don't want, and on top of this had to pay a high price for it.

 

Not sure if they would let me give the drive back if i went ahead and forced wrote the max tbw to the drive.....Just to see if it was really the max or if it would go further. And not enough people had the drive it self for very long to even gage it's longevity. September is not long enough and no failures reported with those that do have them....Only time will tell.

 

And then i enabled CSM in BIOS as well. The option right under UEFI. (At least in the P870DM-G Prema BIOS)

If i do not format it as UEFI-CSM and do not enable CSM support in the BIOS , then either the system refuses to boot off of the drive or it ends in a black screen with the blinking cursor. Once it boots, USB and NVME both work because of the slip-streamed drivers. There was one instance where i had to manually load the nvme drivers, other than that it worked just fine.

 

let me add to this.

Spoiler: I wrote another book gg

Another reason why I dislike M.2 form factor (and why I push for 3D V-NAND) is because the amount of memory chips they use in mSATA and M.2 is lower than in SATA 3. This means the drives, even with the same basic config (let's say 850 Pro vs 950 pro) would last longer in SATA 3 formats. Now, you won't get the high speed for sequential and 500K in SATA 3 that you do in M.2 NVMe, but if longevity and reliability is what you want, M.2 is *NOT* the way to go. It's also why I only consider 3D V-NAND and MLC in M.2 formats, unless buying a simple drive for games or storage (and even then, 850 EVO with 3D V-NAND is still the minimum option I would consider).

If the X400 are TLC drives, I'd say don't even waste your cash.... and after a quick google search, they do. TLC M.2 no 3D V-NAND? Trash, waste of $$ especially for an OS drive. TLC drives don't keep their speeds long under extended loads and M.2 is even worse of a form factor for this. I wouldn't look twice at those.

Also, when watching drive speeds, remember that "random" read/write has two "acceptable" classifications. 4K and 4K QD32. 4K is what most data access uses (about 80% of what you might do on a drive); 4K QD32 is something else. And 4K QD32 is FAR higher than 4K. For example, my mSATA non-NVMe Plextor drive (which I no longer use for certain reasons I won't get into; you're getting an older picture) already achieves a rather high speed for 4K QD32:


Then all these drives that list "300K IOPS random or 4K read/write" are talking about that 4K QD32 number. Your best bet is to check an actual review that does a full bench like this and lists proper numbers. Watch a SM961 crystal disk mark picture for comparison:


See how the 4K read isn't even double mine, despite being a NVMe drive? Yeah. That's the stuff you want to look for.

 

@bloodhawk CSM is disabled from what i can see, but not use.

@D2 Ultima
I think you misunderstand my friend. This is just an inexpensive storage solution for holding data. We totally understand what is top of the line and what is bottom barrel. What has good 4k reads and what doesn't.
And you are killing me with the crystal bench example. You do know where you are going wrong at right??

NO?

Let me show you.
I went ahead and used the SAME version class you used vs the newer versions that are out now. Notice anything different?
Intel 600P 512GB

So going by that, your msata drive is in fact not faster my friend, but in fact slower.

This is why I always want full discloser when doing testing...Way to many ways to flub results in one direction or another.

Now if you do a recent test and you show your msata is winning, then i'll respectfully agree!

 

I never said my mSATA drive was faster, but that the newer drives aren't even double my speed (in 4K random read, at least). Going by your benchmark here where he 3.0.1 bench has lower scores than the 5.1.2 bench, my mSATA drive might actually score higher. In fact, let me check that right now.

I can't find 5.1.2, but I can find 5.2.0. Want to run 5.2.0 for me? Here's my 5.2.0 run:

Scores are pretty different. Whether it's because the drive is more filled or because it has some errors, I don't know. Some are higher than before, and others are lower. But either way, the 4K still isn't even double this.

Also because it was fun for some reason I benched my Crucial MX200 randomly as well:

Spoiler

 

If you guys want to compare scores, you should give AS SSD Benchmark a try since it actually gives you a score based on your speeds and latency.

 

The number of NAND packages has nothing to do with the number of NAND dies in each.

 

my mSATA non-NVMe Plextor drive (which I no longer use for certain reasons I won't get into; you're getting an older picture) already achieves a rather high speed for 4K QD32:<---- You know that is a pretty bold statement when talking about SSD's. The rest is just fluff and bragging rights.
Although I move more big files than small ones, so i kind of over look this for the most part.
Windows 7 this time. I was loading some programs.


And yes, scores are all over the place. That's why i hate graphs even more, because you can't tell how it was ran.

 

They are stacking a lot of dies inside each package now (so the 4 package 2TB 960 pro is no faster than the 2 package 1TB 960 pro)

The 850 evo M.2 in some cases was faster than the 2.5" drive too.

 

I'm inclined to agree. When dealing with 4k read/write, they are all going to be fairly close no matter which one is used.

Some old version on had in my benching files


Latest Version

 

I think due to the slightly more modern package tech it was the 4K it had the advantage in but I would need to go back and double check all the figures to be sure.

Either way it's safe to say the form factor is not hurting performance unless the 2.5" drives starting pairing controllers and internal raiding them.

 

Well this was to point out that advertising, which says "4K random read/write is 300 IOPS" or more, is talking about 4K QD32 (which even in the 5.2.0 bench, you can see was 359 IOPS read and 288 IOPS write on the plextor; which is a much older drive and not anything special all things considered). On the contrary, the 4K read was 38 IOPS and 49 IOPS for you, and 31 IOPS for the plextor, which isn't even double the speed.

Hence why I was saying originally, don't buy into the marketing fluff that they state. They can say 4K random read/write is much faster, because they're talking about 4K QD32, but oftentimes they'll compare it to a much older drive's actual 4K (non QD32) and say how they've improved. But older drives are much closer to them than people realize, EXCEPT in sequential numbers. But since so few things use sequential, it's not a massive selling point. I mean, it probably is for you with what you specifically do, and I'm not saying no to that. Just dispelling the "myth" that NVMe is *that* much faster in everyday operation.

Sequential? Yes, by far, not even a contest. 4K random? Not even double most older drives. 4K QD32? Similar situation.

I'm not bragging about any of my drives; I have no reason to do so. I only used them as a reference to point out the way that marketing lies. There's sincerely no deeper reason behind it all.

 

Ok. You lost me. @Mr. Fox & I were talking about nvme pricing. I gave him a cheaper version of a nvme drive that would be faster than the sata 3 drives that was recommend to @Phoenix. Something that had faster reads and with a reasonable price. That wasn't top of the line both in speed and price
Then came all this other stuff about iops and 4k and junk this and that, buy samsung and so forth. When he would have been content with 2 x400's.

No one is buying into any marketing fluff here. And if it works for that person then that is good for them. No need in trying to sell them something they do not want or need.

The bragging was a joke about sequential read speeds when benching ssd's. The part in bold was the subject.

And this just got blown way out of proportion i'm afraid.

Definitely thanks for the info, but in this case..... We were only looking for a basic inexpensive solution to storage. Nothing more. x400's were thrown out and I threw out 600p's because it was cheaper and faster.
I get what you are trying to put forth and nothing wrong with that at all. Just really not needed in this situation is what i'm getting at.

 

Ah, okay.

This always seems to happen with you and I... we'll end up talking about two completely different things. It's cool.

 

Yep, but still.... I did get some things out of it of course.

Edit: Look back at the as ssd bench marks i posted. Check the differences between versions.

 

Yes I noticed; even with my own bench. It was interesting. It explains why some websites would bench 3.x.x and 5.x.x as well for CrystalDiskMark. Good to know.

 

Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now that's fluff!

Edit: Side note
I gave some time to trying to boot with 15-16-16 and it will not boot for nothing in the world.
14 anything was a 100% no go. I think it has to be flashed to an XMP profile for that to work.

 

Hmm. Thaiphoon Burner and Prema mod maybe? I wonder if these sticks are just not good enough? Maybe some Samsung ones would work? Hey @Meaker@Sager what do you say

 

I have Thaiphoon Burner, just haven't did anything yet. And the highest I think we can go is 3200 unless the bios is coded for higher or prema unlocks some hidden settings preventing it from going past 3200. I'll have to look at that later today. And most memory run today is set to XMP, with a far lower default stock setting, because they would get way to many rma's from people saying it doesn't work. The minute they put it in and tried to boot. Not all systems cope with memory the same way, unfortunately.

 

The G.Skill 3Ghzram uses Samsung modules.

 

Prema said I believe 3333MHz is the highest this board will go. I don't know about adding XMP profiles to Thaiphoon; I was merely asking if that was what was necessary. And yeah, I know. I've been shying away from many MSI board recommendations on the desktop side because they do not handle highly clocked RAM very well, I've seen. I wonder how laptops will handle it? This will be an interesting thing to see.

I look forward to your results! =D

Well.... meow. Hope laptop RAM gets close to desktop RAM soon. I've seen 14-16-16-36 3000MHz quad channel modules and 14-14-14-34 3200MHz dual channel. I think laptop users could do with better than 16-18-18-43 3000MHz!

 

Well it will do 3000 15-17-17-38 plus the stock voltage is lower.

 

Yes, exactly... your explanation is perfect. At this point in time for me it is totally about value and bang for buck. I have have had 4 Sandisk X400 512GB M.2 (2 in my P750ZM and 2 in the P870DM that I sold) and they are great because the are very affordable and run like an SSD is supposed to run, and as Sandisk advertisements say they should. In daily use I perceive zero difference in boot time or functionality compared to other SATA SSD drives or the NVMe drives that I had in the Sky X9. My benchmark scores (not drive benchmarks) improved on my system running X400 which leads me to believe SATA versus NVMe drives played no important role in overall system performance. I paid $114 each for 512GB X400 M.2 SSDs, so that is my price range benchmark.

So for me it is all about value and durability. If my system is going to feel the same and bench the same, then I don't want to spend anything extra for NVMe bragging rights. I would prefer to spend less money for the same experience, have more capacity, fewer hassles dealing with NVMe compatibility problems (limited BIOS configuration options to even function), etc. I can easily ignore the higher SSD benchmark scores if the benefit is having double the storage capacity per dollar spent. After all, that is what drives are for, LOL.

And, I hardly ever find myself moving files around from one drive to another. I have never had to ask myself why something is taking so long to copy or felt frustrated by slow transfer speeds with X400 or other SATA SSD. So, "normal" SSD performance is all I need. I can spend the money saved on something that makes a more important part of the system run faster, just keep the money in the bank, pay bills, or something else, like taking my wife to the movies and dinner.

Sort of. I am not a Samsung SSD fanboy. They are good, but I actually feel the X400 is a better value. Good warranty, much lower price, and no perceivable difference in daily use performance. I am not willing to pay extra for the luxury of having a Samsung label if I see no benefit to the extra cost, but I think avoiding Intel SSDs if they have an abbreviated lifespan is a good idea.

 

Well, you know I'm not a fanboy of any brand. But I was mistaken in what you wanted them for, I suppose. If this is the case, then you do what's best for you, and I suppose you already have. It's all good here =D

 

No worries. We're all good. That's why when Brother @Phoenix asked me if he should get two X400 1TB SSD I responded that he should do whatever he thinks is best. Even though I am satisfied that they get the job done for me at a very reasonable price, they may not be what someone else wants. I'm just a weirdo in some ways. If someone shows me how it will improve my overclocked CPU and GPU benchmark scores, there is a reasonable chance I might spend money on something. If it won't, then chances are not so good that I will consider opening my wallet for it. Plus, I almost always learn something new, or confirm my own suspicions, from reading your forum eBooks, so that's awesome, too.

 

Definitely no hard feeling here!

 

Haha I should probably write these eBooks in some consolidated place more often. But then I'm just so lazy T_T.

 

What do you guys think about single 780W AC Adapter for P870DM3? More or less the same size as current 330W just 780W. Perfect for Overclockers.

 

Awesome. That would be fantastic.

 

I say. I have the cash in a paypal account right now. How much and when?

 

That sounds phenomenal! Too bad I've decided to start a desktop build for the first time in over a decade...

@Papusan - I actually owe a bit of an apology on you pointing out the LD phase that runs 300W@-30C. It's about the only phase producer still manufacturing and there are some decent reviews. Only a custom or finding a used cooler express 2013 that can use two evap heads would treat you better. I'm staying with a decent water build with a ****ty video card until the 1080 TI comes out, then add phase and water chiller over time (may have to get some advice at some point after I get those from you and @johnksss)...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Guys... check it out: Feedback to Clevo R&D Team: What's missing or broken in your Skylake laptops?

 

When you are ready....I will go over all that with you. I have a phase that i rebuilt myself. I have a water chiller that I purchased, because I was lazy when it came to actually going out and building one. I have a LN2 60L tank in my garage. I have two Kingpin pots. All easy attachable to a 5960X/3600Mhz ram/Rampage V Extreme setup. No case.

Prep work is King!! else you will fail before you even get started.

If you want to start easy, do the water loop and add a water chiller. That way you can start getting use to condensation and how it works.

 

Thank you for that. I figure I need to learn to crawl first (my first water build, then the chiller like you mentioned) before I learn to walk and run. So far, I've got a 6700K from Alex@ro with decent voltage on its way, going to grab an Asus maximus viii extreme, some 4000 trident z, an evga 1600W platinum PSU, and a corsair 900D case to get me started. Thinking of the ek or bitpower monoblock (still looking for a compatible chipset/southbridge block), the koolance ram 33 blocks (which will help more after the waterchiller), two black ice Nemesis 360 GTX (still debating depending on if I stick with the 900D as my case because a caselabs would be better with the future planned additions), and a swiftech mcp35x2 with reservoir mounted on top. I'll deal with the 1080 Ti block after release...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

All good bro If I see something who is usable, I will always show it

 

We need this for FAR many more notebooks to be honest.

 

Indeed... having one 780W AC adapter would be so much nicer than two 330W AC adapters, even if it was as large as two 330W adapters stacked. One cord, no AC-100 converter box... sounds really sweet. An elegant and convenient solution. As long as it doesn't cost and arm and a leg.

 

Please, Mr. Fox. You, me, @Prema, @Papusan, @Johnksss@iBUYPOWER, @jaybee83, @Phoenix, @iunlock and many others know, without a shadow of a doubt, for a perfect fact, without fail, that you will buy two and use a converter with them for your overclocking. Probably build an interface out of liquid metal and some super-advanced chilled water liquid cooling system with your A/C vent blasting directly at your radiator, pulling 1200W benching 3DMark 11 with your two 1080s at 2300MHz and your 6700K at 4.9GHz fully kitted out with a custom edition Prema mod.

 

I have to say....We are doing pretty damn good with not even breaking 500W

 

The firmware not really letting it go much further than 480W may or may not be playing a role in that...

 

True.
The reason why I brought it up was that...For being under 500W, we were able to beat at least 80 to 90 percent of the desktop's in our class. 6700K/1080 SLI on air or water.
That is actually saying alot.

And with you unlocking the bios, that can only go up.

 

I think it's fair to say that notebook components are both more electrically efficient and have better thermal dissipation than desktops, just because manufacturers are forced to work with a smaller thermal envelope. In the end it's good for all of us

Good to see notebooks one-upping desktops with just 500 W of power. Nice to rub it into the face of the snobs at the PCMR subreddit.

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

 

That's the best part. I always buy front row tickets to watch Notebooks smash Desktops in the 1/4 drags.

We've come a long way...


::iunlock::

 

I'll probably pick one up in case I decide to do sub zero ambient this winter (if it ever gets cold! Still hitting 80s during the days)! I was concerned running haswell at 5.1 and overclocking the video card as being too much for a 330 watt...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

I can hardly wait to see how much power 1080 SLI can gulp down once Brother @Prema reverses the firmware castration. It's probably gonna be at least 700W with a wicked overclock. I am so excited. Should be amazing. 480W is about right for a single GPU beast. Our minimum power requirements should pretty much mirror a desktop if and when everything works correctly. I'd like to see 6700K pulling another 25-50W as well. I think the EC has some kind of tree-hugger cancer this is holding back the CPU.

 

Exactly ... As you prob already saw it seems with sli enable the cpu is limited to 40 pathetic watts. Dumps to 3.6ghz under significant load.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk