KCPTECH

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> Some mods have been using the GPU’s cooling solution to help move heat from the CPU heatsink over to it. But the attempt is not a true solution as all they use is solid copper wire soldered from the heatpipes ends of CPU to the GPU heatpipes ends. The wire helps, but it’s not as good as an actual heatpipe. A heatpipe basically works by having a fluid substance at the heat source, then heating up and evaporating into a gas, transferring the heat to the cooler end of the tube where it cools of course and turns back into a liquid and slowly flows back to the heat source. All laptops have their fan above (away from the user). Having a laptop with heatpipes placed on an upper angle (higher in back) will dramatically encourage the return flow of fluid back to the heat source and thus help move the heat away much faster. Reason why many Notebook Cooling Pads perform so well is not just because of the fans, but the higher angle they are on. So, I would suggest getting a cooling pad where the fans can be relocated right under the laptop fans to encourage cool air intake more effectively, and allow faster fluid return in the heatpipes. This should drop the temps by 12 to 18C. Ideal Cooling pad to check out are the 2 or 3 fan Cooler Master NotePal U2 or U3. The U3 for 19” laptops as well as having 3 fans. They are an all Aluminum structure with quiet 80mm fans that all power offs a USB port. Aluminum is also a natural heatsink on its own as well as static and magnetic resistant. <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> Ideally, thermal paste should be used where the heatsink’s center clamp-down is. General central pressure is usually found in the center clamp-down making the heatsink having maximum contact in that area. This usually being the core processor on the mobo (motherboard) or the GPU on a video card. All other items around this area should use thermal pads as they will more than likely have a visible space in order to guarantee maximum contact for the core component. As a general rule of thumb, do not use metallic based or conductive thermal compound on a GPU as most have visible wafer caps on their surface die. A ceramic based thermal compound is safer, however less heat conductive. If you know exactly how much to put on, you can try metallic based thermal paste. All CPUs today have a heat-shield that protects the glass core and cover the wafer caps. So it’s safe to use metallic based thermal compound on a CPU. Never use thermal pads/tape on a CPU whenever possible. <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> The nVidia GTX-970 will be a little over 300% faster than your AMD HD-6870. Also, the GTX 970 consumes less power than your AMD card, by about 6 watts; so your power supply will be okay. The GTX-960 is around 230% faster than your AMD HD-6870. Power consumption is even lower at around 120 Watts. The GTX970 since being nVidia has proprietary CUDA cores, some 1664. Adobe Creative suite tools for video like Premier and other graphics apps use a feature call the Mercury Engine. The Mercury Engine is a dedicated core language that runs specifically on the CUDA Cores making real-time photo and visual fast. To enable this, you will need to find a file in the CS directory of Premier and other apps called GPUSupport.ini and simply add the name of your card like GTX 970. Adobe Creative Suite originally only includes support listing for the professional Quadro series with CUDA. But the GTX 9800 and up also have CUDA and work fine. There’s a GPU sniffer files to help you find the exact listing you’re your video card. As to the CPU, the AMD’s have always had a cache speed and system memory bandwidth than the Intel Core “I” series. You CPU (6 core 1090T) is about 40% slower at memory executions and transfers than the Intel Core i7 4790 for example. Cost of the GTX 970 4GB cards will put you over $325 US for a decent card. Cost of the GTX 960 4GB cards will be a little over $225 US. Cards to look for are those with an open large fans and a good heat pipe solution. Gigabyte and ASUS make some good models that run pretty cool. ASUS is one of the few that always put their patented power regulation circuits on rather than using the lower level stock design from nVidia. <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->

I'm curious as to what the actual prices on the two CPU's. Where I live, the Extreme 4930mx and 4940mx costs 770 and 810 Euro. And the 4900mq costs 410 Euro. The extreme Cores are 57 Watt, while the mq is 47 watt. An Extreme Core in a laptop can not really clock that much higher than 3.9 and 4.0 GHz respectively do to thermal temperature build up within the laptop. The CPU's maximum heat threshold are 100C. In most cases the Extreme Cores achieve this temp is under half a minute. Extremes have been notorious to throttle down and not recover in laptops. The CPU cooling fan in the R1 series is only 2 cfm whereas the R2 series was improved to 10 cfm. Unfortunately, the R2 fan will not just pop in. You will have to some filing to get it to fit. The Heatpipes will draw the heat, you just need a strong fan to remove the heat from the from the exhaust fins.

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> Desktop drives are optimized to be fast on seeks. These causes higher seek retries but significantly higher performance. AAM is usually set to moderate levels or disabled. If they hit an error, they'll try very hard for a very long time to get your data back. NAS drives are optimized to use less power, cause less vibration, spin slower and always have AAM set to high levels, which multiplies rotational latency. They also do not retry forever to get data back, and just try a few times and then report an error. You can create a desktop drive from a NAS by disabling AAM, although it'll then reach desktop levels of vibration (which you don't care about) or a NAS drive from a desktop drive by maximizing AAM, but you won't get the early retry termination. In RAID-1 you should care about this, as the array may drop a disk for simply taking too long to read. <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> GPU GTX 980 GTX 980M Family Maxwell Maxwell Manufacturing process 28nm 28nm GPU base clock 1126MHz 1038MHz GPU maximum clock 1216MHz 1127MHz Memory 4GB GDDR5 4 or 8GB GDDR5 Memory speed 1753MHz 1253MHz Memory bus width 256-bit 256-bit Memory bandwidth 224.4 GB/s 160 GB/s CUDA Cores 2048 1536 Texture units 128 96 ROPs 64 64 Digital Resolution 4096 x 2160 3840 x 2160 Performance +30% slower <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->

menko2, did you buy a new Notebook or do the upgrade? I'm from across the pond so not familiar with some of the brands you listed. If you did upgrade the 680M to the 980M, you will find it does use a bit more power (about 24 watts idle and 57 watts under load more) than the 680M. But it's performance is almost 88% faster than the 680M. The 900 series are throttled down heavily, so expect some heat if some games are demanding. Consider a cooling pad if so. The CPU from your system 3740QM @ 2.70GHz is actually faster than the 4710HQ. The forth generation offers greater performance on the integrated video for Notebooks and higher clocks for the Desktop version. You should be able to buy a bigger power block for your Notebook. It's no different than upgrading a desktop power supply so you can add greater hardware. Just make sure the mobo (Motherboard) can handle the power requirements.

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> First you can either buy labeled fans (commonly sold in stores) or manufactured OEM fans (sold usually in Commercial Electronics Outlets). The later is the best if looking for bulk purchase of high quality. What to look for in your fan? How will it be positioned (ie horizontal or vertical)? How much air does it need to move? What is the sound pressure (noise) limit? Ball Bearing Fans will out live any fan as it offers several benefits. However, they will produce the most noise. Unlike sleeve bearings, a ball bearing motor can be turned on and off with no issue of metal expansion/contraction from heat as the bearing/s have a grease/oil reserve packed inside to constantly lube as well as transfer heat with little friction. Sleeve bearings however, rub constantly on a machined surface and rely on the perfect balance of the shaft in the sleeve with little oil. In the mechanical world, sleeve bearings must be mounted horizontally so the little oil doesn’t seep out and dry up as well as to avoid shaft wobble which would also wear the bearing surface out faster. Ball Bearing motors can operate in any position. Ball Bearing fans will tend to generate more noise because of the greater mechanical parts within their bearings. Fluid Dynamic Bearings (FDB) came out and is very close to a gravity bearing by using a pressurized sleeve with “O” rings at each end of the bearing to retain the fluid. So the bearing shaft nearly rides on a film of oil making it exceptionally quiet. The only problem is the seals tend to wear out on some models and then the motor becomes a sleeve bearing but with an imbalance do to the space originally made for the oil. Sony was the first to start making these on a much small motor. The best bearing to look for is a magnetic bearing, but these are expensive. The motor shaft tempered aluminum with steel sleeves on the shaft that hover on magnetic journals. These bearings are currently limited to precision devices for aeronautics and space, where gravity can be an issue with lubricated bearings. The number of blades and their curve will dictate the air flow. The more blades, the greater the air generally. Another type of fan is a squirrel cage sometimes called a blower. These are found on some video cards and server CPU coolers. These are somewhat loud, but moves lots of air. Blowers are actually designed to suck up air better than any other fan. The bigger the circumference of the fan rotor (spinning blade assembly), the more air it can move as well. Reason why the push to 120mm to replace the aging 80mm design. As for brands, two companies that will retail reliable fans are EverCool (sold under Startech name sometimes) and Cooler Master. EverCool is the number one choice in the industry of electronics and electrical panels. So they make fine, long lasting units. Evercool lifespan are usually around 8 to12 years. <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->

I've been using Arctic Silver 5 for past 10 years on all custom rebuilds and repairs and have found it to be good solution. Some +20,000 systems have seen its use and haven't failed from it. The paste retains its creamy texture after many years which is a plus as several other thermal pastes tend to crystallize after just a short time (2 to 3 years) of use. However, Arctic Silver 5 is somewhat conductive, so if using it on GPUs make sure not to get any on the small wafer caps on GPU casing. Otherwise, use the Arctic Silver Ceramic 2 for GPU applications.