Robbo

Hi,

Thanks for All,

I did My Alienware Main board BIOS recovery , I just Follow the this Link BIOS Recovery in case you brick your M17x R3

But I need to modified some STEP Like this:-

Download the BIOS you wish to restore to, in my case Support | Dell US file name is AW17A11.exe

Download the BIOS editor application Phoenixtool256.zip v2.56 from - https://www.sendspace.com/file/vebtct or Download Phoenixtool256.zip

Use double click the bios EXE file (ie AW17A11.exe) to extract the BIOS exe to get the *.fd file in C:\Users\yourUSERname\AppData\Local\Temp\xxxxx.tmp and load it into the previous application(Phoenixtool256). It will tell you what the recovery file name needs to be. (Don't use Winrar to extract this BIOS exe You will never get *.fd file)

Original Bios filename was VAS00A11.fd

In my case, the A11 recovery filename was VAS00X64.fd

Copy the file to a usb stick formatted FAT/FAT32 (I use 512 MB old USB STICK FAT32)

Unplug the battery from your Alienware

Plug USB stick into any USB port (because there is no eSATA port)

Hold the "END" key on the internal keyboard and while holding plug in the Power cable. The fans will kick up and it will start reading the file and initiate the reflash.

In My case There was NO beep But Alienware Main BIOS was flashing I have waited around 5 Minutes then Machine Automatically shut off and reboot about 1 time.

So Crisis recovery Process was Succesfully DONE for Main bios.

BUT STILL my GTX880m is DEAD with BAD flash ie NO BEEB NO POST NO Display.

I just Wonder During Crisis Recovery System is using ALL USB PORT ie ALL USB having POWER.

For That I try to use BLIND FLASH but Still NO LUCK (In Autoexec BAT file i have use nvflash -6 BIOS.ROM) where BIOS.rom is my STOCK vbios file name.

Now I am looking for Another option to recover my GTX880m VBIOS:culpability:.

Thanks

I don't think you understood my post, it's nothing to do with your system BIOS, so I was saying that by you trying to reflash your SYSTEM BIOS that you weren't going to get anywhere for the reasons I explained. So, I'm not surprised you're back at square one (at the same point as before). Have a read of my last post (post #4388), those are the options that are open to you. It's a pain for you I'm sure, I'd be very frustrated in your position, but there are solutions & they're summarised in my previous post.

@svl7, would it be worth summarising somewhere at the beginning of this thread which systems are known up to this point to be incompatible with the various vBIOS you have created? That way people won't repeat the unfortunate experience of Anil Kumar.

Yeah, its definitely a heatsink defect but ICD works around it with an extra dab at that one corner. Makes me miss my Alienware since gravity works against the video cards in this machine while the M17x had the heatsink sitting on top of the video card.

I'm betting that the heatpipes are part of the problem because the back end of the heatpipe assembly has no screws to hold it down so it literally relies on the 3 screws for the plate of the GPU mounting assembly and the 4 screws that tighten down the GPU heatsink to hold up the back end... I might look at modding that later on.

Well I guess it wouldn't hurt to try to support the heat pipes in the areas you talk about, to take pressure of the mounting system, but heatpipes aren't very heavy so I would be surprised if that makes a difference (would have thought the 4 mounting screws would be enough to support that weight, plus the additional 3 screws you mention - mine only has the 4 mounting screws for the GPU core & no more). You have a different laptop to me so the leverage & force on that area might be different, not going to hurt trying to support it some more I guess.

I flashed my 670MX ski with SLV7's bios last summer and they worked great, after a few driver updates over the last year I recently ran 3dmark11 and my score was much lower 12600 gpu score to 8900 now. I ran Metro: Last Light benchmarks and I noticed that after 20-30 seconds the video card was throttling like crazy based on heat points. I am still able to OC and over volt my card to the same levels as before but before there was no throttling. I have gone back to older versions of the drivers and still see throttling. Any idea what to do?

If it's based on the GPU's getting hot, then you could repaste to prevent them throttling. Strange that you say the latest drivers would make that happen. I don't think that is controlled in the drivers, I think the temperature throttling point is set in the vBIOS. I think it's 87 degC, that's what is says in NVidia Inspector for the one I'm using (never gets that hot though, so don't know for sure if it would throttle at that temperature). How hot are your GPU's getting? (And in my experience the driver doesn't make the GPU run hotter or colder either).

- - - Updated - - -

People have said that its hard to apply but I find if I push the plunger and let a bead form at the tip of the applicator and then tap that on the die and press the plunger until the blob I want is on there, it sticks to the die and then I just have to carefully tie up the string that it trails off with. Its certainly not MX-4 but since the heatsink does the spreading for you through the pressure, its not that difficult to apply. The problem with the MX-4 is that even when the heatsink was tied down to the point I was stripping the screws, when I would remove the heatsink it barely made contact as evidenced by how little was on the heatsink.

I'll probably be repasting my CPU though and I'll likely use MX-4 for that as I used ICD the last two times and its just a pain to work with when you don't have a square surface. My last application was a line across the center of the die edge to edge and its still hot so I doubt it spread over the entire die properly.

Ah, that definitely sounds like a heatsink mounting manufacturing defect to me (on the GPU). I'm sure you know that the heatsink surface needs to sit flat against the GPU core, and from what you've described it sounds like there is a gap in some places where it's not making contact. The heatsink should make contact with the GPU even if there is no paste applied - the paste is there just to fill in the microscopic gaps & holes in the heatsink and GPU surfaces (because paste transfers heat better than a tiny air gap where those microscopic holes would be).

That's a sick mod. I would do that to mine if I could get a replacement bottom cover for mine with no questions asked from xotic which may be easier said than done so let me know how you fare with it. Hard mods like that make me nervous to say the least when dealing with warranty issues. You would think they would applaud enhanced cooling but it just doesn't work that way.

It would be nice to be able to run my 880s at 993 without seeing 93C though, especially the secondary since the primary stays around 89 to 90 under the same load.

Well about 10 different tries with Mx-4 all ended up with higher temps by 2-4C than ICD so I gave up on it. Still have a bunch though (was like a 20g tube lol)

Yeah, that's cool, IC Diamond is supposed to be one of the best, but I don't think it's because of the thickness though - it's just higher performance. With it being thick it's harder to apply and do a good job of applying it, but if you do manage to do a good job of it, then it works well.

If your heatsink doesn't apply much pressure you actually want a thin paste, not a thicker one. The heatsink needs to be able to squash the paste into all the microscopic nooks & crannys (and allows the heatsink to sit as close as possible to the GPU core), and a thin paste enables that to happen at a low mounting pressure. Thicker pastes are better for higher mounting pressured heatsinks - like desktop applications rather than for notebooks. MX4 would be ideal for notebooks.

Although I don't know if that will help Anil Kumar. He has a 120Hz Alienware, so the IGP is disabled, and his 880M won't post due to the flashed vBIOS. Any changes to the system BIOS isn't going to magically fix that conundrum - it can only post using the dedicated GPU (and that's borked). If he had IGP that was functional (Intel HD4000), then he would be able to recover it, but 120Hz is not supported by Intel HD4000 hence deactivated in system BIOS. I think he's stuck. Soldering or finding someone else to flash his 880M, or return to Dell saying that it's just stopped working (without providing the details!). That's my understanding of it. (Some independent computer shops can flash vBIOS to cards as a service I heard.)

Hi mate

Thanks for the reply, my temps on the gpu are static under load at 68c. I will have to check my memory clocks I see what they are doing.

I alway check the temps mainly, I'm new to this so learning as I go

Thanks a lot

Ian

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With temperatures that low, then I'll be surprised if you're seeing any throttling, unless it's for power reasons: either the power adapter or mainboard being inadequate or limited. Chances are you're fine with the stock vBIOS for your purposes, considering you're not wanting to overclock. If you're not seeing a constant 850Mhz (max boost for 780M) on the core when you're gaming then you can benefit by using the modified vBIOS which runs it by default at 850Mhz.

hi guys,

Just looking for a bit of advice from the more experienced users on here. I have AW17 with 4900qm processor and a gtx780m gpu.

if i was to install the bios mod rev2 what would it do for me in the way of performance if anything, i'm not an overclocker or into benchmarking, i just play games.. would this mod reach new levels of performance for me?

Thanks in advance

Ian

Ah, for the 780M, that could be a different story. Might be worth flashing the vBIOS even if you don't overclock, but it depends whether you're seeing throttling at the moment or not. Do some gaming & monitor your GPU core & memory clocks (and temperatures) using a monitoring program, like GPUz. If you're experiencing throttling, then the modified vBIOS could help. If you're getting throttling due to high temperatures though, then you'd need to sort that out, no point flashing the modded vBIOS if it's the fault of your temperatures.

hi guys,

Just looking for a bit of advice from the more experienced users on here. I have AW17 with 4900qm processor and a gtx70m gpu.

if i was to install the bios mod rev2 what would it do for me in the way of performance if anything, i'm not an overclocker or into benchmarking, i just play games.. would this mod reach new levels of performance for me?

Thanks in advance

Ian

It's unlikely to improve the performance of your GPU unless you overclock, the GTX 770M (you made a typo I think) is a cool running card, especially in the AW17 so you're unlikely to get any kind of throttling with the stock vBIOS with that particular card. There's no point in flashing it unless you want to overclock the core beyond the +135Mhz limitation in your case I would think.

A long shot idea related to the poor performance seen of the 880M with the latest drivers. I know I don't have the 880M, but this might be relevant. I ended up having to reset my CMOS today (which also reset my system BIOS) in an effort to reflash my 670MX that I bricked today. I managed to reset the CMOS & reflash it with svl7's vBIOS, but I noticed that GPU performance was down 10% across the board at any given overclock. This was strange as GPUz was reporting no throttling & 100% GPU loads during benchmarks, but global wattage consumption measured by my KillaWatt meter was down 20W from peak. I eventually narrowed the problem down to me not having disabled the IGD in the M17xR3 BIOS - I had just enabled the PEG as the main graphics adapter, rather than completely disabling the IGP (even though it wasn't present in Device Manager). Anyway, after disabling IGD in the BIOS my KillaWatt readings are right back up to their normal peak values & so are the benchmarks & game performance.

As a long shot I wondered if this was somehow related to poor performance seen with 880M and latest drivers (I'm on 340.43). Wondering if IGP's need to be disabled in systems to see the best performance. A long shot I know, but I just thought I'd put my experience here as it might be part of a puzzle, then again maybe not! (It just felt like some of the restrictions seen with the 880M and the latest drivers).

(Will provide benchies & screenshots so you can see the fruits of your labour!) ;-)

Yeah, that's cool. I've requested from svl7 an extension to the 670MX vBIOS that I'm using (and that he provided) so I can use 1.1V and over 1200Mhz on the core. Hoping he can mod it for me. I should be able to get 1200Mhz on my 'measly' 960 cores! ;-) (reckon my GPU would consume just a shade over 100W with that overclock given my current KillaWatt readings)

Speaking of the need for dual 330W AC adapters, this pulled over 530W from the wall as shown on my Kill-A-Watt meter.

Catzilla Computer Benchmark - Mr. Fox Online Result: 11059

When GTX 880M SLI gets fixed it should do this good or better. Hopefully, it will not be a long wait.

I have to say that that is very impressive the amount of power that it can draw, and given what you said about the latest A18 offering being castrated to 330W, then I can see why you're fervently pursuing NVidia & Dell with their 880M & A18 fiascos! Long live tweakability & power to the user! ;-)

Hi svl7, any chance of expanding the voltage & core Mhz limits on the Clevo 3GB 670MX vBIOS? It's this one that I'm using of yours: Clevo 670mx - 3GB - 80.04.58.00.03 - 'OC edition'_rev02.zip

Could do with voltage up to 1.1V, and Core Mhz slider up to a little beyond 1200Mhz. Many thanks if you can provide one, and I'm sure they'd be a beer in it for you! :-)

(Currently it's limited to 1.05V max & +542Mhz on the core, up from the stock 600Mhz and 0.925V)

@Robbo, finally installed Prema Bios Mod and with Fn+1 shortcut found out the top speed of the GPU fan (3600RPM vs 2800 while gaming), so i guess i have so headroom available! Going to try the 680M vBios!

Still, any one know which one to use? Clevo 680m - 80.04.33.00.10 'OCedition' revised_01 or Clevo 680m - 80.04.29.00.01 'OCedition' revised_01? What are the differences? Is there any change log?

One of the differences is listed at the start of this thread in Post #2. Search the page for 80.04.29.00.01 and you'll see what I'm referring.

Personally, I wouldn't put much faith in the next mobile GPU from Nvidia. If this is the kind of practice they use these days, then I'm out. I've not spent over 3k to just get stuck with a throttled intel 4600HD. I will try anything at this point to resolve my problem.

Very frustrating for you I can imagine! I hope they don't put as many 'controls' on the next gen - part of me thinks NVidia are doing this to limit overclocking for 2 reasons: 1) to decrease failure rates & warranty claims 2) (in future) to make sure flagship GPU performance will not be achievable by overclocking of lower models, thereby creating more of a distinction between their models & potentially maximising their sales & profits of high end models. Hope some of these strange constraints aren't seen on next gen - especially in mid high end range. (I like the idea of buying mid high end models & overclocking them to stock flagship performance, hopefully that can be a possibility still in the next gen)

Ah, so looks like the 880M issues with the latest 340.43 driver are not fixed then by disabling secure boot! I'm done following this issue and trying to summarise solutions found in different places on the net - there's just too many inconsistencies to be found in many different areas, especially as I don't have an 880M. I feel like I'm just adding to the confusion! ;-) Hopefully 880M problems will be fixed soon, and failing that new GPU's to be released around the corner!

All credit goes to Mr. Fox for this one but try disabling secure boot. It apparently fixed all the issues that were plaguing another user. I'm on my phone or I'd link you to the post on NBR. I'm going to disable secure boot myself.

As for temps, adjust your target down to 87C. It won't have a huge impact on performance for most situations but can shave off a few degrees. I'm not happy with my temps either and I repasted so many times that I stripped my screws and had to order new ones. Heat is just going to be there I guess unless I get the balls to try Liquid Ultra.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

Ah, cool, I didn't realise you were referring to the fix for the overclocking problems (overclocks not being applied) brought about by the latest driver 340.43, but it clicked when I read this post in notebook forums:

User Nightdex:

"Word of warning guys. If you update to this driver and you own an 880m and also want to over clock. Disable secure boot for good. Secure boot restricted slv's vbios for the 880m on my AW 17 with this particular driver. I went through a ball ache and a half to resolve the problem.

Edit: see my posts from last night in John's 880m review thread for more info. I ran some tests to show that I managed to get my 880m over clocking nicely again. I'll add more results as I go along."

Nvidia 340.43 Beta out now. - Page 2

So does look like 880M users can use the latest driver as long as secure boot is disabled.

As long as my my card still works I am leaving it alone. No way an I updating drivers.

Sent with love from my Galaxy S4

Haha, yes, must feel like walking on egg shells!

Wow, these 880M cards seem like a right mess, and also seems like NVidia's latest beta driver (340.43) just makes it worse based on what you're saying. What a cluster f*ck! Can anyone else substantiate that 340.43 driver breaks overclocking on 880M cards? Perhaps the advice should be not to uprgrade to 340.43! Although, it's not really workable keeping your GPU on old GPU drivers. What a mess.

hello im sorry this has probably been answered 100 times in other articles but you guys here actually read and answer this forum and you guys are my go to for answers so that being said i just ordered a new 120hz 3d display for my m17x r3 i have a gtx 780m i know the 3d wont work but will it be able to output the 120hz frame rate or will it still lock to 60hz?

Yep, you'll be good for 120Hz, but only if you disable the IGP (Intel Graphics Processor).

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for the info. My Clevo wont allow me to max the fans using the Fn+F1 shortcut (disabled by Clevo in P170EM), and i can't seem to find any place that I can manually increase the fan in HWinfo64, will check better today after work. Any guides or alternatives (for now, not considering the Prema BIOS).

Google how to manually set fans in HWInfo64, they'll be loads of info.

Hi guys, quick question,

I have a Clevo P170EM with a 680M, it plays games just fine, but in some situations it could use the extra kick in performance to improve fps from the 40-50 range to 60+. I usually overclock it the maximum it allows in the core (stock bios) and be done with it. It runs flawlessly with some games pushing it to over 85º (currently with hot weather with AC trying to refrigerate the room) while other it hovers in 82º. I don´t know if the fan is already at max speed and can't seem to find that out, any software that can read this information accurately?

Having this temperatures in mind, is it safe to update the bios to Clevo 680m - 80.04.67.00.01 'OCedition' revised_01.zip? From what I've read, this will only unlock the core frequency, the same overclock should be safe and I can slowly try to push it forward?

Thank's for the support guys!

85 degC is kinda warm for a GPU, but at least by flashing a vBIOS that doesn't increase the voltage, then that's pretty safe I think, just work to keep it under 90 degC. As for working out max possible fan RPM I used a program called HWInfo64 to manually push both my CPU & GPU fan to it's limits, I then used the monitoring software in that same program to view what the fan RPM was at max forced RPM - this I concluded to be my max possible fan RPM. I then closed the program (and rebooted to be on the safe side) to make sure that normal fan control was restored to the system (ie no longer controlled by HWInfo64), and proceeded to monitor fan RPM when gaming. This enabled me to work out that I get max fan RPM on the GPU at 65 degC in my case for my laptop. Therefore, I knew I didn't need to implement any kind of extra fan control. You could use the same process to work out what your max fan RPM's are & how your system controls them in relation to GPU temperatures.

I wouldn't be restricted to this version: Dell 680m - 80.04.5B.00.02_'OCedition'_revised_00.zip based on my current vbios? the ID is what I'm looking at that's confusing me

Yeah, I'd stick with a vBIOS that has the same version number if you can help it, and plus I think you'll be able to get your desired overclock on stock voltage, so you may as well use that one and see how it goes as a first step.

EDIT: based on what Mr Fox has just posted, then looks like you'll be OK flashing the ones with increased voltage. But I'd still stick with my previous advice as a first step & flash the one you linked, as you'll probably not need increased voltage to get those clocks.

What Dell vbios should I download if I want to attain 915 core (958 boost)/ 1125 memory for my 680m SLI config? I want it to be stable under load while controlling temps. My current vbios is below:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]11864[/ATTACH]

Also I plan on flashing an unlocked A10 bios and doing the dual 330w psu mod this week. Any help would be appreciated, you guys are awesome!

I think you might be able to attain those clocks at stock voltage, or the 1V version. Try them & see how high you can go with stability & good temperatures.

Lol, from his post saying this is what an 880M should be able to achieve I figured he had a reasonable overclock heh. Yeah the Clevo cooling isn't adequate enough to push the voltage and see what these can do.

Plus I don't want to mess with anything with that looming nVidia super throttle issue when the driver crashes...

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

Yeah, that's right, he just meant from a benching point of view using the unlocked vBIOS, as long as your cooling is good enough. It's a point of reference for other 880M owners. If they can hit the same 1125Mhz core then it should score the same as his result. Your score seems fine to me though.