Official Sony VAIO F Series Owners lounge *PART 2*

Click or unclick anything else? Still greyed out for me. No clean install with my laptop, just the fresh.

 

I was being very sarcastic. Oi vey. I've fixed a lot of computers Melody, and usually I don't have the tools to do the job properly! Despite this, I still have never run into issues like that.

Does it surprise me? No. OTOH it sounds like you have some weird luck man. Maybe it's the tools you use to format and partition drives? Bleh.

 

Maybe problems I was dealing with since1992 are far less frequent now with the consolidation of I/O protocols? But they still come up and are recognizable as the same basic issues. However, pre-Vista AHCI/IDE/ATA chipset incompatabilities are still alive and kicking.

 

I started late in the 80's modifying Zenith 286 computers for specialized operations. Back in the days of RLL and MFM drives. Those you had to low level format first (G=C:800). I'm not discounting Melody's words because I've learned to never say "never ". In the earlier times there were definintly problematic chipsets. I still prefer Intel to this day. There really shouldn't be any problems formatting a drive via usb, ide or sata. My rule of thumb in trouble shooting is: When all else checks out then I started looking at what I know it can't be. Then go outside the box. I wasn't going to reply to this but I do think we can all glean some useful info from these exchanges. Now back to the F11... I love mine. I did notice that the light sensor is too close to screen so it does affect the backlit keyboard. Doesn't matter to me

 

can we stop comparing d!ck sizes and get back to topic?

 

Sometimes forum comments remind me of a DJ I was talking to at a party in the mid-80s. He stated, categorically, that stereo didn't exist before the Beatles (Setting aside that those early masters WEREN'T supposed to be stereo or binaural) "There was no such thing as binaural before 1964." So what was I supposed to think of my 1958 Audio fidelity stereo LPs and 1952 Cook twin-spiral? Never mind the binaural experiments of the late 1920s (Which I knew about then as a 78 collector, and which you can now get on CD) And of course some of the gorgeous film multitracks.. "Nope! You're wrong, you don't have stereo records earlier than 1964." We practically got into a fist fight.

Penultimate comment, each person who complained about the mic making a Morse Code noise on the early F11 was called an idiot or some such in this forum, until such a number of posters had the same issue that it could no longer be doubted..Each fellow who has an issue may be a babe in the woods, but get enough people with the same issue, and finally it's accepted by the majority. (The ten or so posters in this forum who have said their F11 died completely also tended to be ignored, or discredited.) I've certainly had troubles with USB-formatted drives, and so have others I deal with, but not enough people IN THIS FORUM have encountered this issue to cause the explanation to pass the threshold of acceptance. ....

Final comment..The best rule of thumb of all..? It "can't happen" -- Until it happens. Ask BP.

 

i am a bit confused on how to install the graphic driver 197.44
what is the exact setup i install after i replace the inf file

 

Run Setup.exe in Computer / (Bootdrive) (C / NVIDIA / DisplayDriver / 197.44 / International

 

I'm pretty sure i found the root of my problem. Took me a few weeks, looked into it further and it was "netio.sys" that was causing it to crash. Thats to google i found a couple of the threads and few people say that zone alarm is the problem so i uninstalled that and havent crashed for over a week since!!!!!!!!

 

Yes Zonealarm can cause all sorts of problems with Multimedia, also some builds of Flash have caused problems most specifically with YouTube. I'm not sure why I was so adamant about hardware failure for Youtube, but general failure in tasks such as DVD playback points to memory problems or a flaky power source, and errors during archiving with WinRar or Winzip point to memory problems and sometimes hard disc I/O..

 

Just an update on tweaking...turning turbo boost on full time, turning C1E and EIST OFF full time:

My computer has been completely stable with these settings and current Sony drivers. I have had no problems and my CPU and GPU temps have not changed at all with these settings. I figure I am done tweaking as these settings make this computer noticably quicker and also produces measurably superb benchmark results which are better than those of the Core i7 920QM mobile processor shown on the benchmark database.

Here was my last set of results:



You can compare these to other benchmark results shown at PassMark Software - CPU Benchmark Charts .

If you download the trial version of this Performance Test, you can then search for and compare with many different systems.

Bill

 

Anyone with this sony vaio model FRYS.com | Sony ?

I know the video card is weak but I would like some feedbacks from people who own this. Thanks!

 

There was a point where those were $100 less.

 

It appears Bill has experienced a substantial increase in performance while disabling EIST, but spending sometime researching this issue- seems others have not. Most, if they are overclocking or benchmarking, seem to side on disabling. Here is Intel's demo which doesn't say too much.

http://www.intel.com/technology/product/demos/eist/demo.htm

Intel EIST - leave it On or Off - Core system - Desktops

Above is a good back and forth on this issue. My Realtemp still shows my 720's EIST option greyed out. Someone has said just go to control panel/ power management/ processor management option - if this is set to 100% it is already off. Not sure about that. Finally, I am not sure this feature comes with the 720. Nowhere could I find a definitive 'yes' to this question.

 

You can enable/disable EIST and Turbo settings using i7Turbo.exe, in the realtemp directory. RealtempGT itself does not access EIST because it is designed for Core, not i3/5/7.

 

Yes, I purchased this about 3 week ago (they had it for 150 off). I am happy with it. I'm not a gamer so the "weak" card is not a factor. I do use Adobe Premiere and Photoshop 8 and it performs quiet well for me. I did put an Intel G2 160 SSD in place of the 500 gig HD. Bottom line: knowing what I know now, I would still buy it.... Oh AFAIC it is quiet..... 5 thumbs up

 

Fishon,

My performance increase is noticable due to all 3 changes...Turbo Boost is now "always on", where before it would turn on and off (via Windows 7???). The EIST and the C1E were both turned off also to get these results.

If I used this machine as a laptop, I would turn it back on. I instead use it as a desktop machine that is portable. Even when I move from room to room, I plug it in. Because of this, I do not need the power savings.

If I were to see an increase in CPU core temps, I would quickly enable these services because heat is the #1 killer of electronics. However, I am not even seeing a 1 degree increase in idle temps when these are both off. I see NO benefit of having them in use.

On the other hand, my benchmarks have skyrocketed by over 18% when I turned the two of them off and checked Turbo Boost "on". Prior to these changes, turbo boost was not always on (although sometimes it was) and my max turbo boost was 2.93Ghz. Now with it off, my turbo Boost routinely hits 3.06Ghz, the Intel design limit. It also spends much more time at higher speeds, yet it still, for some reason, shows it dropping below the 1.73Ghz stated level (down as low as 1.2Ghz) when idling. I would think that this would show that these settings are not truly being used, but the testing I have done shows and PROVES otherwise.

Perhaps the "performance Test 7.0" is flawed. I will say that I can see a slight difference when opening email or websites, but this is typically quite fast anyways. The big differences I have seen are in photo editing, PDF loading and more intensive computing and graphics. It does make a difference in my case.

Run the test on your computer right now, then tweak the settings using the "i7Turbo" program that is bundled with RealTemp 3.40. Run the program again with these settings and see how much quicker the test runs and how much higher the results are!

One caveat...When you run the "Performance Test 7.0", the turbo boost service will automatically shut off. After clicking into the Performance test program, BUT PRIOR TO STARTING THE TESTS, use the i7Turbo program to turn the turbo boost back on.

I hope this helps.

Bill

 

I only see a disable turbo mode feature which is already unchecked. Am I missing something? Your resent posts are great- thanks.

 

Here is what my version of the i7 Turbo looks like:



I have everything unchecked.

Bill

 

Yup that's what I have for the Q720 in my F11, and the radio boxes all work as they should. I'm not sure why Fishon is having problems.

(edit) - unless he's still trying to use Realtemp.exe instead of i7Turbo.exe. I can't uncheck EIST in realtemp, but if I uncheck EIST in i7Turbo.exe, it THEN becomes unchecked in Realtemp, but is still greyed out and not clickable. So i7Turbo WILL allow EIST to be changed, but NOT Realtemp.

 

I should probably also mention that my performance results were acheived with ALL normal services running, including firewall and security suite. These results were not due to overclocking anything, or due to shutting down a ton of services.

Bill

 

Willscary, I like your benchmark utility suggestion because who's the Man?

Out of the box PassMark "Run Benchmarks" w/o any modifications: #1 (graphics set to performance) & #3 (graphics set to let Windows decide - Aero) out of 100 online PassMark results, i7-720QM + GT 330M + 6 GB memory + HDD Seagate Momentus 500GB 7200 + clean install from OEM recovery discs + Vaio_Power Plan Performance, NO "turbo boost on full time, turning C1E and EIST OFF full time" gimmicks, Anti Virus disabled, NO overclocking of any kind and these VAIO_programs installed:







- NO rating gain when disabling C1E and EIST.

- NO performance difference between Home Premium, Professional & Ultimate.

- Every edition of Windows 7 contains all features of the previous edition, eliminating artificial divisions between consumer and business features. That makes the Anytime Upgrade strategy very clean and easy. INCLUDING the F's OEM recovery discs.

- My scores are higher then some identical systems with 8 GB memory.

- Adjust Visual effects in: Control Panel\All Control Panel Items\Performance Information and Tools.

- "It is a misconception that process count effects performance. This is only true if all the processes were in fact all active at the same time. Which has never really been the case" - logicearth

If you want to try to beat the man: PassMark PerformanceTest 7 64-Bit Trial 30 days. Especially if you have a mythic "clean install".

 

any reason why the SSD is at such a premium price in the F series? That is one of the only factors that is steering me away from it.

 

Why? Just buy with a HDD, get your SSD wherever & use the HDD in an external enclosure for backup or in the ODD bay w/ a caddy to assist the SSD.

 

I was under the impression that the SSD for the Fs were relatively cheap? You still have to pay a premium price if you want a decent SSD that's actually fast and reliable. You can do what I plan on doing and get an F with the mechanical hard drive and buy an SSD when the prices come down.

 

Best option is to buy Intel's 40GB ssd and insert hdd that came with vaio into the optical drive bay. Other option is to buy higher capacity ssd and leave the dvd rom but were talking about higher costs this time.

 

Joe,

Nice results. You are leading the Sony Vaio class with the i7 720QM processor. It looks like you said you disabled your antivirus. Mine was running, along with all normal processes, which can and will slow a computer if they are performing an operation while you are testing.

My clean install is not mythical. How can it be? I installed a Microsoft copy of Windows 7 Pro on an aftermarket Crucial M225 256GB SSD. If this is not clean, I don't have a clue what could possibly be considered a clean install.

You have 2 tests showing and one is 28% higher. Something must have caused the difference, whether it was switching C1E and EIST off or disabling your antivirus. Perhaps you had another process running in the background?

Also, one thing that I found right away is that, as I posted earlier, Performance Test turns Turbo Boost off. My first test yielded a core speed of 1.73Ghz when TB was off. The next time I ran the test, I began the benchmark program, but before telling it to "start", I went to i7Turbo and again unchecked the "TurboBoost disable" button (which was disabled by Performance Test 7.0).

I have said in earlier posts that I believe that to truly unleash the speed potential of my CPU, I had to be certain that all 3 of those boxes were unchecked in i7Turbo...to the point that I leave it running in my taskbar at all times now, including while I was testing.

I don't know, perhaps I was lucky enough to get some sort of "wonder machine". Perhaps all the Sony programs you have slow it down. Perhaps Windows 7 is more capable and faster by itself than it is with vendor software. All I know is that my original test was considerable slower in all respects and increased with the changes in TB, C1E and EIST. I can also see that you have 3 tests listed. In order, your speeds were:

CPU 2D Memory 3D

First 3326 164 790 463
2nd 3400 362 804 514
Third 3681 554 1209 548

Isn't this showing progress in ALL aspects?

Bill

 

Here is what is listed in my programs:



My security is all running. Skype is always running also, along with i7Turbo, my printer software and everything that Windows and Sony tell the computer to run. Yes, I uninstall as many processes as possible, so that the computer stays fast, but this is all day every day. I made no changes to my normal machine to achieve these results.

Joe, your results nearly equal those of a stock Core i7 Q820 machine according to the benchmark database. You must have done something correctly to increase your results.

Mine, after tweaks and with all processes, services and normal day-to-day background programs running, rates a higher benchmark than all i7 Q820 machines listed except for a highly overclocked machine running an ATI 5870 graphics card. It rates higher than the average benchmark of all other mobile processors listed...equal to a specialty Q9505 quad core desktop processor using MUCH more power.

I can't help but see that the difference was due to making these changes and unbridaling this horse so she could run free.

How can you say that these changes made NO difference, even though your 3 scores all went up each time you tested?

Bill

 

If you payed for a BD-ROM drive though, that may not be a good option.

 

Well, I can't actually "beat" you because I have more memory and a higher processor, plus I have an Indillinx based Crucial SSD (and I only have the DVD-RW option instead of a Blu-Ray reader or RW), but I thought that perhaps I should re-run my test. I can no longer post tests as I have only the trial version, but I can snip it and post the results here.

Again, all normal programs, processes and services running including security and i7Turbo. TurboBoost turned on just prior to hitting the "start" button on the test, C1E and EIST turned off:



These results are actually slightly LOWER than my last test in all respects other than CD Drive performance, where I had been using a movie DVD and now switched to a data DVD that had been made by this machine.

Bill

 

IMHO, a 40 gig is a little skimpy. I would go for at least an 80 gig. I realize that it is more expensive. I opted for a 160 gig. You will definitely notice a performance increase. There's rumored to be a new Intel G3 this summer and if true this may help to lower prices. "Rotating Rust" is possibly on it's last legs... Of course Fortran was to replace Cobol to

 

I agree with JJ.

I think that the MINIMUM SSD size you should purchase is 128GB. This way, you can load the OS, security and all programs and still have plenty of additional room. Although I can't cite it at the moment, I know that I had read in a few different places that you never want an SSD over 60% full or it will begin to lose performance. You can also see that larger SSDs are quicker than small SSDs.

Personally, I have been installing Crucial M225 SSDs in all of our new laptops and desktops. All of the new drives had been 128GB, as server based workstations do not need any more than this.

For my own personal machine and for my wife, I had bought the newer Sandforce based SSDs, which are supposed to be much faster. However, due to a bait and switch tactic, I returned them and bought 256GB Crucial M225 SSDs instead. These are the older Indillinx based drives.

What was great was that the 256GB drives cost me $579 each, or $2.26/GB. In fact, with 239GB of actual useful space, it came to $2.42/GB. This was a very good deal and my computer is blazing fast, thanks in part to the incredible speed of the drive.

Here are my read/write speeds:



The newer Sandforce drives do have faster R/W speeds, but they cost 30% more. They also have quicker small file read and write speeds, but in my case, everything up to 16MB files is read in less than .25 second, and from there the speeds accelerate rapidly. If the Sandforce are twice as fast, I am not so sure I could even tell the difference. As far as the large files, I have a few larger programs that approach 400MB, but even that will appear in under 2 seconds and be fully operational. If the Sandforce is 30% faster and I save 6/10 of a second loading a large file or program, is that really going to be a huge difference? Not to me.

I fully agree with the use of SSDs for the C drive. They will speed up your perceived system speed more than any other upgrade I have tried, in my opinion.

I hope this helps.

Bill

 

Sorry to interrupt. I am doing a backup of my F11. The 500gb hard drive has 305gb stored on it. It is taking 6hrs , was only half done and now has flashed up that the disc it is being saved on doesn't have enough free space.

This is the 2nd time this has happened, last was yesterday. The backup drive is a 500gb seagate drive , backup via esata. I wiped the drive and formatted it today before running the backup. I ran a backup successfully about 2-3 months ago but I don't know what I am doing wrong now

I just checked the ext hdd and the used space is 271gb with 193gb free. Any ideas ? TIA.

EDIT: I clicked on manage back disc space, slect a backup period to delete. There is 24 May 2010 to 24 May 2010 ! Presumably this means that it completed a backup today and then tried to run and store another backup on top of this without replacing it ? I have not been attending to the F11 during the back, just left it to its own devices which I thought it was reasonable to do.

 

Sorry to hear tausif. Unfortunately, I can not help you. My only thought would to be to plug in the external drive and open it in "My Computer" or "Computer" in Windows 7. I would then delete all files and folders that are shown. Then try the backup again.

Good luck!

Bill

 

Thanks. In a couple of days I'll be able to see it and test it. I hope I will not be disappointed.

 

It may be because your computer is copying the data to a temp folder on the partition your OS is installed on before putting the backup files on your external driver, and there is not enough free space there? I've had that happen to me on more than one occasion while moving files on WinXP. Don't know if it's the same case with Win7 and back-ups.

 

Mango,

How is your OC'ing of the video card going? Do you leave at factory and increase for gaming, or do you have a set OC speed? Have you had any issues with stability at your current speed?

Bill

 

OK, so assuming this is the case , can you bypass the temp folder stage ?

 

That's why you can't add to the results database @ the present, because the result is lower than the one you already uploaded, not because it's a trial version. I know you have "more memory and a higher processor, plus I have an Indillinx based Crucial SSD..." & that's why I like my results below with the $1,350 VPCF115FM with only swapping a 500GB HDD 7200 for $80 & using the OEM 5400 OEM in an enclosure for backup. A win-win move.

I thought I was clear in describing my benchmark conditions in the VAIO_F Series VPCF115FM PassMark 7.0 Performance Test post. We are not testing the security suite here so that's why it's disabled for the tests. The #1 step in scientific experimentation is to try to control the variables as much as possible & if one use Norton anti virus, or an other flavor of Norton, Avast!, Kapersky or whatnot then it skews the results. I optimized my startup, task scheduler, etc with the free Autoruns as I wrote many times. I actually have 2 Autoruns profiles: one for performance & one with all the comforts like air conditioning, entertainment center, heated bucket seats, etc.

I think your "turning C1E and EIST OFF full time" works for you maybe because the memory is the bottle neck because you have a SSD. In my case it's the HDD so that's probably why it makes no difference. I leave the memory & Turbo Boost management to Windows & Intel, all set to default.

If you capture the first result window when the test if finished then you get the hardware details like in the third capture. I raised the bar a little for you guys who would like to challenge the man (i7-720QM, 6 GB, GT 330M 1 GB, HDD 7200 rpm). I can't help it: I have to brag that the closest VPCF115FM result in the top ten that is not mine has a rating 38.3% lower as seen in capture #2. :tongue:







Check this tutorial that includes useful links: Speed up Windows 7 on w7forums.com. I did the step #6 & the following & especially point #7 with the Blackviper link.

 

Joe,

Because of the SSD, my paging file has been turned off (by me), as are prefetch, superfetch and disk indexing. Memory should not be a bottleneck in this case. Also, while you turn your "extras" like security off, my numbers are superb with them running and using resources.

My newest:



This is after overclocking the GT 330M per instructions in the beginning of this thread.

Sure, I could turn off all other programs and services and probably get a higher number, but this number is already higher than any other benchmarked Q 820, no matter what the rest of their hardware is.

Bill

 

I'd like everyone's opinion on a Vaio F for college (as a Computer Engineering/Computer Science major).

My primary concerns are the battery life and weight. Weight I doubt will be an issue because I have spent the last 4 years of my life lugging quite a bit more than 7lbs around with me every day, but I still would like input on that.

So, assuming most of you have experience in a collegiate setting, would the weight and battery life be plausible for college? I have read of one or two students perfectly happy with it, but would like more comments on battery life. How long do you typically get out of it? Would it be fine for college?

For reference (and for suggestions), the current CTO that I am looking at is the following:
i7-720
Win7 Home premium (will upgrade to Pro on arrival)
320GB (7200 rpm) HDD
4GB ram
Blu-ray player
Basic Vaio display (US customer ordering black laptop...)
Backlit keyboard

Thoughts?

 

i usually don't tend to lug it around my campus a lot. it is pretty heavy (but not much compared to the books i carry anyways). battery life won't get you too far. maybe 2 - 2 1/2 hours? i usually keep it plugged in. depends on how you intend to use it on campus.

when i do bring it around, i usually camp out in the library next to a plug so battery life doesn't really bother me any. i wouldn't bring it to class. even for my CS classes, a laptop is not needed and almost always a distraction if you actually do bring it.

overall, i'd say it's serving me well. a bit heavy to carry around sometimes. if you intend on gaming, this laptop isn't bad. if not, i would actually suggest you get a smaller, lighter laptop with better battery life. most anything you'll need to run for your classes can be run on slower laptops easily.

 

OK Joe,

I turned off all other services for testing so that we could be "apples to apples". No security. No Realtemp. No Skype, only windows and drivers:



Bill

 

Tanis,

I love this machine! I was lucky enough to get a 15% discount through Sony Style, so I upgraded to the higher processor and it is an absolute screamer. I like the keyboard and the backlighting. My 1920x1080p screen is fantastic. I have no fan problems or speaker problems or anything else. I use it as a desktop (always plugged in), but I don't mind carrying it. I must say, however, that I am a bricklayer and I am 6'-2" and about 235 lbs. This thing is light compared to stone or a concrete block.

Everyone has their own preferences. I have ALWAYS owned Dell machines. This Vaio has changed me. I never thought a laptop could replace my desktop but I am happy to say that it has...with flying colors!

Bill

 

Thank you both for your input!

Does anyone know (or can anyone guess) at how much extra battery life I would get because of the lack of the 1080p screen (and thus better graphics card)?

EDIT: Also, how easy would it be to upgrade the screen and/or graphics card later?

 

You can upgrade the screen for a few hundred dollars, but the card is built in to the motherboard and may not be possible to upgrade. On the other hand, I have put together 5 F11s with the lesser screen, and they are OK. I can tell you that they have a narrower viewing angle and less vibrant and realistic colors than the 1080p model that I own.

In case you are wondering, I bought mine after purchasing and setting up 5 of these (with 8GB of RAM) for our church. They have all been outfitted with a clean install of Windows 7 Pro on Crucial M225 series SSDs.

All of our machines are plugged in most of the time, but I doubt that battery life would change much, especially if you are not a gamer. You can expectjust over 2 hours of battery life, in my experience.

Bill

 

Do you (or does anyone else) have the 9-cell battery? If so, how long does that last? How much extra weight does it add?

 

I do not have the 9 cell battery.

Bill

 

3 hours on normal use, it lasts a whole morning. I don't notice any weight difference though of course it does have extra cells. Remember that the heavy duty battery props up the back of the laptop.

 

One more question (sorry, a lot of the info I have surfed through here is for the UK models)-

I called a rep earlier today who reported that the US screen is matte, not glossy. Has anyone purchased a US F recently and can confirm this?