*** Official Sager NP9877 / Clevo P870TM-G Owner's Lounge! - Phoenix 4 ***

I don't have advice - except to treat all computers as disposable. (but ideally, not as disposable as Apple would like) But I would like to say I can feel your agony. I didn't HAVE to get a new computer now but I WANTED to for many months. I went with AW even though it had issues (I have them all resolved, for now). Had an order in to switch to the 8700k or 8086k in a Clevo, but then saw the 8-core was coming, so it made no sense to pay top dollar on a CPU that was about to be dethroned. So it looks like I am sticking with AW. If I really feel like I need more performance in 6-12 months, I am fine taking 30% loss on selling it. It's more the time of setting up a computer, especially with all the software I have use of that needs clean re-installs on a new system.

It sounds like it's not waiting for the CPU itself, but waiting to see how well Clevo supports it, right? I know the current motherboard will accept it but it doesn't seem like the current design will be enough to cool it?

I was thinking of building a desktop too, but when you really need/want a laptop, you want a laptop, right...

 

I was a desktop jockey for years, but then started traveling for work (about 70% overnight travel for roughly a decade). I switched to laptops out of necessity to continue my hobby.

I haven't needed to travel as much for a few years now and started thinking about ditching laptops. I've had some crazy awesome laptops that were real beasts, but the past few years things have been getting pretty goofy. Everything is either a crippled, anemic and anorexic BGA piece of crap now, has cancer firmware, or all the above. Quality control is in the toilet, and the manufacturers are going out of their way to block upgrades and force people to buy a new trashbook every year or two to keep up with performance. The P870 notebook family is really about the only option left that is actually worth a darn and mostly upgradeable, but it has it's limitations as well. Some of the limitations are due to laziness in engineering, and some are clearly acts of evil, implemented to complicate the upgrades and make Clevo more money selling new laptops because upgrades are being made such a pain in the butt. But, they're not as evil as the BGA turdbook builders.

About a year ago I started selling off all of my laptop stuff to pay for the journey back to desktops and I have no regrets. I now wish I would have done it 2 or 3 years ago. I purchased a refurbished HP ZBook 15 with a 4800MQ and an extra-crappy Quadro K1100M GPU for $369. That's a huge deal for me for a number of reasons, including my hatred for HP. But, honestly, it does what I expect it to (web, email, office apps, etc. if I need to take a business trip) and the CPU is still more powerful than most of the quad core BGA trash CPUs. The pleasure I have derived from my desktop journey in the past 11 months has been great. So, unless you're only home on weekends and expect to do a lot of gaming and benching on the road 4 to 6 days a week, just skip the laptop thing. You won't really save any money if you build a truly wicked desktop, (that's a money pit as well,) but you won't have any of the asinine nonsense to put up with. Most things are plug and play and you can focus your money, time and energy on using it more so than modding it to make something work that was not intended to work. I got a lot of pleasure from modding my laptops, but I am enjoying the desktop more simply because I get to overclock the crap out of it without having to resort to things that seem like acts of sorcery to get the results I want.

At least for now. The nonsense will probably end up ruining everything for desktop lovers sooner or later, (hopefully much later,) as the Redmond Retards are on a command and control Kamikaze mission to destroy everything that enthusiasts hold dear.

 

If only I was sure of being in the US for long and or I could lug the desktop around with me and then back to India I would shift to it from a laptop in a heartbeat. All the advice, very sound and sensible for a desktop, sadly is not going to be my choice in the US.

 

A guy has to do what a guy has to do. Whatever is best for your situation is the right decision.

That's why I shared my little life story about my tech journey.

 

I run mine at 5ghz on all cores all day long everyday with no issues at all. Temps are about 70c or so when running balls to the wall with fans on high. Not sure what makes you think this thing is limited to 4.3ghz. Thats kind of ridiculous.

 

Don't fret over the CPU so much, for 4k content creators/benchmarkers the new 9900k OS great, everyone else will do well with the 9700k.

 

How you know your CPU is running all cores at 5 GHz at the same time? Check with some tool that push your CPU @100% load (I use prime95 which is worst case) and check the clock speed with a Real time tool, like HWinfo64, you'll see how your CPU's clock can't stay at 5 GHz in all cores, unless you rises the power limit to 200W wich your system won't be able to cool down

Enviado desde mi G8441 mediante Tapatalk

 

That is not true. They can and do if you use the right options and disable the dynamic power conservation settings. The high watts only happen under load. At idle the watts are very low in spite of the high clock speeds. I have been running all of my CPUs with all cores at full turbo clock speed with c-states disabled 24/7 for years.

 

I can keep mine at 5ghz under prime with nice temps on all the coooaarsss. But then again I rarely care to use prime as it's fairly unrealistic for what I do. Come to think of it given the temp issues regarding the 8series , it was TIM releated just like with the 7700k's. Odd temp sensors that would show eratic temp spikes and or jumps. Looking at the cpu funny would cause the CPU temp to jump instanty 20°higher then back to an idled temp outrageously quick.
If my slicer apps run,Warframe,Bf1, and other random games at temps I'm happy with at the speed I'm happy with- I overlook prime anyway lol
Given the appropriate airflow, the TM1 heatsink was supposed to be able to cool 250w or something . I have extra copper and a different fan set up though. So hell I could be wrong on the wattage=cooling capabilities of it stock lol.

 

Because benchmarks show the right performance numbers and the clocks don't dip when monitoring them. With me I use fully liquid metal for every contact, have a good sample CPU and a taller IHS.

 

IMO locking all clocks at max multiplier is kinda placebo effect and highly power inefficient. Lets sayd you have two CPUs, one is a six cores @4 GHz the other one is a six cores @5 GHz. Now you have a light load which requires 8 GHz of proccessing power. In CPU1 one you'll be using 8/24 = 33% of CPU total capacity ... on CPU2 you'll be using 8/30 = 26,7% CPU total capacity... both CPU's perform the task in the exact same time, the only difference is one CPU is struggling a bit more than the other one.

Now when you're pushing both CPU @100% work, the CPU2 will in fact be faster than the CPU1 but at one cost, using more watts (if both CPUs use the same technology). So at light loads there is no sense on using high clocks speeds, you'll just be producing more heat and burning more watts.

No freaking way. Post a screenshot of your system running Prime95 with AVX enabled, there is no chance in hell you'll reach 5 GHz on all cores at decent temps. A user posted a desktop screenshot of the 8700K running @4,7 GHz on all six cores burning over 200W with almost 90ºC.

I bet a good CPU sample and liquid metal helps a lot. Though benchmarks tend to use high cpu usage for a short period of time, unlike video encoding or rendering.

 

It does not actually work out that way. The clock speeds are independent of core load. It does not use a lot of power at idle even with a super high overclock. Everything is snappier, too. Because you are not having any lag or latency boosting into Turbo Boost from a higher c-state or lower clock speed, everything feels nice and crisp.

You can look at it sort of like leaving a traffic light gently, accelerating gradually through the intersection like a normal driver; or, revving the engine to a high RPM, then dumping the clutch and smoking the tires to the other side of the intersection when the light turns green.

 

Want learn something new?

"This paper discusses a new power saving theory which it calls, "Race to Idle". There is a lot to be said for letting a CPU run as fast as possible so it can spend as much time as possible in the C3/C6 sleep states. The faster a CPU gets any task done, the longer it can spend in one of these reduced power sleep states where the real energy savings are found. A slow CPU is an inefficient CPU."

A good binned cpu can make a big difference in temp as well in Power consumption. Not uncommon that you can shave off 40w load with a good chips. Seems you neither take account for: power consumption rises with temperature (because of I2R losses). And with high overclock you can use negative avx ratio offset. It's in the bios for a reason.

From websites who bin processors...

 

Interesting information. Is this lag from Turbo Boost a known issue? I think I don't get to notice this lag or maybe I just got used to it. Is there an objective way measure this nice and crisp feeling at higer clocks?

When I test locking all the cores at x47 at idle the temperature is a bit higher than when using turbo boost.

I always want to learn new things ... though the paper was removed from the website.

My point is with light loads the clock speed between 4 GHz and 5 GHz is not relevant because you're not using the whole cycle of work of the CPU.

A simple example of a theorical CPU would explain my point. This CPU can handle 2 operations per second (this is a pretty slow CPU ), this means the cycle of work of this CPU last one second. Now let's shrink this cycle of work by half, now this CPU can handle 2 operations per 1/2 second (this is overclocking)... now you have a brand new CPU that can do 4 operations per second. A light task could be pictured in this example as a task that requires only 1 operation, the default CPU would do the task in 1/2 second, the overclocked CPU would do that in 1/4 second, but at the end of the day both CPUs made only 1 operation in one second (assuming no new tasks were asked to do). That's why in theory when the load is light you won't really notice any difference even if you overclock as high as 1 GHz.

It's not the same if the load is high. In the above example a load that requires 4 instructions, in the default CPU you'll need two cycles to complete the task while in the overclocked CPU you'll need only one cycle, hence the overclocked CPU would be ready to take new tasks after just one cycle.

In both cases the overclocked CPU would do the task faster, though in the high load case the next cycle is locked for the default CPU with the current task and in the other case with light load the CPU cycle would be mostly free.

 

All points I mentioned help equally. Dialling it back a little would help save a fair amount of power still though.

 

But please also remember your temps can vary by motherboard as well. As your default voltage may not be the same as mine, or Mr.Fox's , Papasun, Meakers etc- based on your chips need per it's binning.
And a fair amount of voltage is overly used in stock settings for the CPUs. And like everyone stated above, the faster you can knock out a task the more efficient it can become. It takes more voltage as set to default to handle certain tasks than it would a properly OC'd cpu with a negative offset of voltage. Not to mention more time which can build said temps given the overly applied voltage per longer time running task.
Agreed on the cstates as well.

 

Hey @Ultra Male I just got my system from HIDevolution yesterday and I’ve heard you’re the best when it comes to tweaking Win 10 to be better.
If you have time in your schedule let me know, I’d really appreciate it.

 

Race to idle does require you allow turbo to kick right back down however. Some like Mr fox run at a fixed speed which does defeat that.

 

That's how I run mine aswell. I was just talking about how the voltage default could consume more than the overclock.

 

Since the 9900k is so thick and the reports on delidding etc say it just reduces by ~8 degrees from its 90 degree of more temperature, what should I get with my laptop. Is it 8700K or should I go for 9900K if there isn't a huge price difference then either is fine but I want to go with something which clevo can handle. Yeah I know I have to wait for announcements by clevo but in the meantime what do you guys think ?

 

Wondering this as well. I want to purchase the Clevo P870TM-G, with the i9 9900K, but before making such a hefty investment, I was wondering if the laptop has enough cooling capacity to not cause the processor to thermal throttle.

 

I am certainly not going to be the first to try unless there is a way to exchange that cpu with 8700k in the first few days/week (which I doubt). Would have to see someone more experienced get it on a clevo.

Btw where do I keep track of clevo news on new releases and also its naming conventions for chassis ? Is there a thread for that in nbr ?

 

Might depend on whether the default settings for 9900K are full power, or "Linus mode"...

 

Why not consider the 9700k? For gamers this is the obvious choice to me.

 

Can you confirm that the 9700k is not capable of HT? In ark from Intel it states that is 8 cores 8 threads

Enviado desde mi G8441 mediante Tapatalk

 

Check out the latest tech articles but yes 8 core 8 thread.

 

HT means double amount threads vs.cores. See... 8 cores 16 threads

 

I'd go with the 9900k just for the HT feature. I'm mainly a gamer but sometines do video encoding and 8 vs 16 threads would make a big difference

Enviado desde mi G8441 mediante Tapatalk

 

That's why I said as a gamer but most of the time 8/8 is better than 6/12.

 

I have Clevo's P870tm-g - lately, suddenly, without any cause I can know of, 3 out of 5 usb ports stopped working - middle on on the left side, right side one, and one in the back.
Now they don't provide power, and connectivity at all - not only while im in windows, but also in bios (tested with backlit keyboard, both in bios and windows).

I did the bios reset (fn+d while powering on) and also took out battery for some time and plugged it back in.

Did anyone experience anything like that, ever? I assume there's one usb controller, so if it was it's fault, no usb would be functioning?
Is BIOS re-flash worth trying? (I've heard of some "deactivated, or "sleeping" usb ports, but well.. I'm no expert)

 

What do you have plugged into them normally?

 

I have not been using them at all, but im sure they were working - at least the right-side one, as I've been plugging wireless mouse receiver there.

My reseller says either BIOS flash will help (he's testing new version now) or I will have to RMA it, and they may have to replace motherboard...
But this is really crazy.
Even if this was caused by a faulty device plugged in there once, why would it fry most ports, but NOT the one said device was connected to?

 

T minus 72 hrs until SL launches 9700k..

need at least a 5.4 sample COME ONNNNNNNNN!!

 

Quick question on Ram. Are 32 gb sodimms going to be available soon ? Does clevo present models allow for it ? Is it dd4 or is 5 coming in ?

 

Depends on the power circuitry supplying the ports.

 

All USB3.0 ports have separate power IC's (Sylergy SY6288 series in DM chassis), if none of these give power it is unlikely that all ICs died. It could be related to firmware or some IC's in the enable chain (P2808B0 enables all USB3.0 power in DM series). First a firmware/BIOS flash might solve this issue.

 

i believe so. companies like eurocom already offering 128gb with 4x 32gb sodimms. hella expensive tho. also recommended to wait for HIDevolution to offer it because it comes with prema bios

 

Yes, it's just the CPU that's the deciding factor so they are supported

 

What? To anyone who pur chases said RAM?

 

It's a very niche offering and most people would not need that amount.

 

Based on the reports that are coming out of 9900k being very hot and rtx 2080 Ti having issues and also 2080 itself I am thinking that waiting for the newer cpu and gpu is going to be fruitless and I might as well get the 1080 and 8700k now. Is this advisable ?

I have another question. I was planning to get some hardware esp the ram modules and ssd etc during the black friday and keep it safe so I can use it when I get the clevo machine ( whether 8700 or 9900k). Can someone please advise on the following

• How do I choose RAM modules ( I am hping to get 32 gb module ) so that it is compatible with the clevo machine whether it getts 8700k or 9900k ?
• What other hardware can/should I buy during blackfriday and keep it for later use. I was thinking of getting a 1tb or more ssd and maybe an m2 but I need to know what else?
• Also how do I know compatible hardware would fit wit the chassis so please let me know accordingly.

If predicting parts for 9900k for something is difficult I hope atleast someone can give me specs for 8700k and also where to get those items from . Thanks

 

@woodzstack


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Most of the tech press are not finding out of the ordinary failure rates with the 2080ti/2080 when drilling their sources.

Buy SODIMM DDR4 non ECC modules and you are good to go really. You are not going to have much choice at 32GB. Note that prices are going down for ram in general so buying now for later makes little sense.

 

I didn't quite understand the sentence. Please rephrase.

I have to get one module atleast and if I get on black friday as any laptop would need one module bare min. I will get rebates (which will most likely be matched sometime late next year even if prices keep going down). Or should I get 16gb modules and get 2 of those ie will that be cheaper ? Also don't I have to match frequency or something with the motherboard or something to make sure the ram is compatible ?

I was thinking of getting corsair vengeance or Gskill ripjaws so which one would be a good choice ?

Finally based on the reports of 2080 and 9900k should I go in for 8086 an 1080 now or wait it out more ? What is your view or what would you do ?

 

Failure rates are being blown out of proportion.

 

Got it!

Views on the other questions please ?

 

OK, all you Über-beast owners... time to take off the chains and let it run wild and free...

@Donald@HIDevolution

 

Nice, I wonder how much efficient are the 9th gen Hz compared to the 8th series

Enviado desde mi G8441 mediante Tapatalk

 

I think @Johnksss has already posted some benchmark examples with stock and mild overclocks with his Clevo. Not sure if I would call it "efficient" as much as "powerful" but I will defer to Brothers @Johnksss and @Talon (ASUS desktop board) since they are the only people I have noticed yet that are spanking a 9900K in this community.

 

More cores with same clock speed... Higher power consumption. 9th gen is a refresh of 8th gen Coffee lake chips.