Jump to content

Khenglish

Scientia Potentia Est
  • Content count

    1796
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    61

Khenglish last won the day on March 29

Khenglish had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1146 A Truly Elite Reputation

About Khenglish

  • Rank
    1st Base is Overclocking
  • Birthday 04/11/1989

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    student at RPI
  1. Is my modded inf correct?

    The driver does not install without modding the .inf? Usually desktop cards have their entries in nvdisp.inf.
  2. [HARDWARE MOD]980m to Desktop 980 core upgrade

    Ram size doesn't matter. Desktop 980 is only 4GB anyway. As for the vBIOS rewrite, I don't know how you're going to manage that. The kepler boards used a resistive strap device ID. I don't know how this would work with the 980 core. I'm guessing you'd just remove the strap resistors and hopefully then the core would report.
  3. Looking to part out a P157SM

    Awesome, my "new" laptop will now no longer have missing pieces.
  4. Looking to part out a P157SM

    $70 for the drive is a bit steep for me, so I'm thinking of bidding instead of buyout unless you want to relist. I'd probably never burn a blu-ray, and there are "new" (old but unused) 12.7mm burners on ebay for less. I have had 2 optical drives die so use definitely matters.
  5. Looking to part out a P157SM

    Yeah the HDD/SSD drive caddy would be good to have and I see you listed it. Mainly I want the optical drive bezel. The P150EM bezel does not match at all. The bracket for the single screw to hold the drive in would be helpful as well, although I could make that out of copper flashing. And hell, my optical drive is getting flaky, so the whole optical drive would be nice if you're willing to part with it, especially if it can read blu-ray. idk if you want to relist the caddy with the other parts included or just make another listing, so I've held off buying it for now.
  6. Looking to part out a P157SM

    If you put them up on ebay I will 100% buy them if they're cheap enough. Also this is the link to TI's page if you want to use that: https://www.techinferno.com/index.php?/classifieds/category/2-notebooks-and-components/
  7. Looking to part out a P157SM

    Do you still have the battery and optical drive caddy? I picked up a P157SM-A frame and have everything but those. The battery doesn't need to work. I just need the shell. As for the optical drive all I really need is the bezel, but the fully caddy would be nice to secure the SSD.
  8. Does my m17x R4 meet the 980M requirements?

    The 980m does draw more power than the 7970m, probably around 50% more. The 7970m draws no where near 100W, while a 980m really will draw 100W. Doesn't the m17x R4 already come with a 240W power supply? You should be fine as long as you don't raise the 980m's power limit. Manually updating drivers means you need to change a setup file for the driver which says that installing a driver for your GPU/laptop combination is OK. Since your laptop was never released with the 980m Nvidia does not have it in the list of approved combinations. The modification is easy to do. J95 wrote a guide on how to do the modification here:
  9. Meset only enables flashing the ME FW. You can flash the bios without running meset. Have you tried just flashing the bios?
  10. Due to a stupid accident by me, I acquired a 980m with a chunk knocked out of the core. Not wanted to scrap a perfectly good top end PCB for parts, I wanted to replace the core. You can see the gouge in the core to the left of the TFC918.01W writing near the left edge of the die. First I had to get the dead core off: With no sellers on ebay selling GM204 cores, my only option was to buy a full card off ebay. With no mobile cards under $500,I had to get a desktop card. And with this much effort involved to do the repair, of course I got a 980 instead of a 970. Below is the dead 980 I got off ebay: You can see for some reason someone removed a bunch of components between the core and PCI-E slot. I have no idea why anyone would do this. I tried the card and it was error 43. PCB bend seemed to be too little to kill the card, so those missing components had to be it. GPUs can be dead because someone removed or installed a heatsink wrong and broke a corner of the core off, so buying cards for cores on ebay is a gamble. This core is not even scratched: Preheating the card prior to high heat to pull the core: And core pulled. It survived the pull: Next is the 980 core on the left cleaned of solder. On the right is the original 980m core: Next I need to reball the 980 core, and lastly put it on the card. I am waiting for the BGA stencil to arrive from China. It still has not cleared US customs: https://tools.usps.com/go/TrackConfirmAction?tLabels=LS022957368CN When that shows up expect the core to be on the card in 1-2 days. So some potential issues with this mod besides me physically messing up: I believe that starting with Maxwell Nvidia started flashing core configuration onto the cores, like intel does with CPUID. I believe this because I found laser cuts on a GK104 for a 680m, but could not find any on two GM204 cores. In addition, Clyde figured out device IDs on the 680m and K5000m. They are set by resistor values on the PCB. The 980m has the same resistor configuration as the 680m for the lowest nibble of the Device ID (0x13D7), but all of the resistors are absent. Filling in these resistors does nothing. Resistors do exist for the 3 and D in the device ID. Flashing a 970m vBIOS on my 980m did not change the device ID or core configuration. If this data is not stored on the PCB through straps or the vBIOS, then it must be stored on the GPU core. So I expect the card with the 980 core to report its device ID as 0x13D0. The first 12 bits pulled from the PCB, and last 4 from the core. 0x13D0 does not exist. I may possibly be able to add it to the .inf, or I may have to change the ID on the board. With the ID's 0 hardset by the core, I can only change the device ID to 0x13C0, matching that of a desktop 980. An additional issue may be that the core may not fully enable. Clyde put a 680 core on a K5000m and never got it to unlock to 1536 CUDA cores. We never figured out why. Lastly, there was very tough glue holding the 980m core on. When removing this glue I scraped some of the memory PCB traces. I checked with a multimeter and these traces are still intact, but if they are significantly damaged this can be problematic for memory stability. I think they are OK though, just exposed. Due to Clyde's lack of success in getting his 680 core to fully unlock I am concerned I might not get 2048. If I don't at least I should still have a very good chip. Desktop chips are better binned than mobile chips (most 980s are over 80% ASIC quality, while most 980ms are below 70%). In addition this 980 is a Galax 980 Hall of Fame, which are supposedly binned out of the 980 chips. Having a 90%+ ASIC would be great to have. The mid 60s chips we get in the 980m suck tons of power. I want to give a special thanks to Mr. Fox. This card was originally his. He sent me one card to mod and one to repair. I repaired the broken one and broke the working one. The broken one is the one I've been modding. Article update: SUCCESS! Core finally reballed. If the mount is poor I will be very very angry... Card cooling. New brain installed. So it actually works with the 980m vBIOS. I tried modding too soon. I just needed to reinstall the driver. I only ran a very lightweight render test because right now the card is only running on 2 phases. I'm pulling the phase driver from my 980m now to get the 3rd phase back up. Follow the rest of the discussion here:
  11. Due to a stupid accident by me, I acquired a 980m with a chunk knocked out of the core. Not wanted to scrap a perfectly good top end PCB for parts, I wanted to replace the core. You can see the gouge in the core to the left of the TFC918.01W writing near the left edge of the die. First I had to get the dead core off: With no sellers on ebay selling GM204 cores, my only option was to buy a full card off ebay. With no mobile cards under $500,I had to get a desktop card. And with this much effort involved to do the repair, of course I got a 980 instead of a 970. Below is the dead 980 I got off ebay: You can see for some reason someone removed a bunch of components between the core and PCI-E slot. I have no idea why anyone would do this. I tried the card and it was error 43. PCB bend seemed to be too little to kill the card, so those missing components had to be it. GPUs can be dead because someone removed or installed a heatsink wrong and broke a corner of the core off, so buying cards for cores on ebay is a gamble. This core is not even scratched: Preheating the card prior to high heat to pull the core: And core pulled. It survived the pull: Next is the 980 core on the left cleaned of solder. On the right is the original 980m core: Next I need to reball the 980 core, and lastly put it on the card. I am waiting for the BGA stencil to arrive from China. It still has not cleared US customs: https://tools.usps.com/go/TrackConfirmAction?tLabels=LS022957368CN When that shows up expect the core to be on the card in 1-2 days. So some potential issues with this mod besides me physically messing up: I believe that starting with Maxwell Nvidia started flashing core configuration onto the cores, like intel does with CPUID. I believe this because I found laser cuts on a GK104 for a 680m, but could not find any on two GM204 cores. In addition, Clyde figured out device IDs on the 680m and K5000m. They are set by resistor values on the PCB. The 980m has the same resistor configuration as the 680m for the lowest nibble of the Device ID (0x13D7), but all of the resistors are absent. Filling in these resistors does nothing. Resistors do exist for the 3 and D in the device ID. Flashing a 970m vBIOS on my 980m did not change the device ID or core configuration. If this data is not stored on the PCB through straps or the vBIOS, then it must be stored on the GPU core. So I expect the card with the 980 core to report its device ID as 0x13D0. The first 12 bits pulled from the PCB, and last 4 from the core. 0x13D0 does not exist. I may possibly be able to add it to the .inf, or I may have to change the ID on the board. With the ID's 0 hardset by the core, I can only change the device ID to 0x13C0, matching that of a desktop 980. An additional issue may be that the core may not fully enable. Clyde put a 680 core on a K5000m and never got it to unlock to 1536 CUDA cores. We never figured out why. Lastly, there was very tough glue holding the 980m core on. When removing this glue I scraped some of the memory PCB traces. I checked with a multimeter and these traces are still intact, but if they are significantly damaged this can be problematic for memory stability. I think they are OK though, just exposed. Due to Clyde's lack of success in getting his 680 core to fully unlock I am concerned I might not get 2048. If I don't at least I should still have a very good chip. Desktop chips are better binned than mobile chips (most 980s are over 80% ASIC quality, while most 980ms are below 70%). In addition this 980 is a Galax 980 Hall of Fame, which are supposedly binned out of the 980 chips. Having a 90%+ ASIC would be great to have. The mid 60s chips we get in the 980m suck tons of power. I want to give a special thanks to Mr. Fox. This card was originally his. He sent me one card to mod and one to repair. I repaired the broken one and broke the working one. The broken one is the one I've been modding.
  12. So back when I got my P150EM, one of the deciding factors on getting it was that due to optimus/enduro, the battery life was respectable. I wanted the top hardware while still having some mobility. Over time though, the battery became more and more worn out, to the point where I hardly got over an hour of life out of it. New batteries are stupidly expensive, and Clevo used cheap cells for it in the first place. I wasn't paying $100 for a mediocre replacement battery. I decided to pay $50 for top end cells to boost capacity by 30% and get over 6h of battery life. I figured that this could get messy, and luckily a friend let me have his nearly dead P150HM battery for me to have some spare parts. So I swapped the cells, while destroying the plastic battery shell in the process, and got a battery that worked just like it still had the old cells. Figuring I needed to reprogram the EEPROM on the battery pack, I started removing the glue all over the EEPROM chip to get it in my programmer. I stupidly forgot that I was working on a BATTERY, which meant that it was ALWAYS ON, and poured MEK over it, blowing a fuse. After getting pissed off and giving up for a few months, today I gave it another go. I got the EEPROM chip out and started taking guesses at how to reprogram it. If I guessed wrong, good thing the fuse was blown so I don't melt anything. I figured out that battery EEPROM contains the capacity info in terms of mAh for a pair of battery cells. I searched for the default 5200 mAh (1450 in hex) and found it. I then raised this to 6800 mAh (1A90 in hex). It was a success! Nominal battery capacity was now 100640 mAh total. So now I knew I could probably program things right after enough tries. It was now time to get the battery operational again. I bridged the fuse, and the battery came back to life. Sort of. It would charge when off, but not on. It would run, but windows reported no battery drain (infinite energy!?!?!?!?). In short, the battery EEPROM was not being updated at all as the battery state changed. I was under the impression that if Ilet it charge, it would not stop until overvoltage protection kicked in, and if I let it discharge, it would not turn off until the system BIOS detected an undervoltage scenario, which is far below the safe discharge voltage of the battery. I figured for the time I'd just let it be and try to get the EEPROM right. Next was looking for the wear capacity. This is the capacity left in the battery as it ages. Using hwinfo64, I got the wear level, converted it to hex, and found it in the EEPROM. I then changed it to only 5% wear instead of 74%. I left some wear because I did let the cells sit for a few months, and I was directly soldering to the cells, which isn't really good for them due to the heat from the iron. This was a success. Current charge % correctly dropped as well. So now I needed to get the battery charging right. My only option was to rip apart my old, but fully functional P150EM battery. I found that the fuse was actually really weird with 3 prongs, and only 2 prongs were supposed to have 0 resistance. I had soldered all 3 together on the P150HM battery. I switched the EEPROM chips and boards, then hoped it would work and not require me to run and get the fire extinguisher. It worked! The battery is now charging properly as I type this. It also discharges right too. It looks like the laptop will try to overcharge it a bit since the current charge % was a little low vs reality, but that should just give it a little extra wear, with the charge % being calibrated properly at 100%. I'm not sure how I'm going to get that back in the shell... Continue discussion in original thread here.
  13. So I didn't like that the memory on my 980m only clocked to 6.4 GHz after raising the voltage to 1.48V from 1.35V, and wanted my memory to run even faster. I knew someone with a spare 970, so we made a deal where I buy the card, and if it still worked after I switched all the memory chips, he'd buy it back (for reduced amount if it could no longer do 7GHz, but at least 6GHz). Long story short, he bought the card back and I got faster memory. MSI 970 4GB Lightning original memory: Samsung K4G41325FC-HC28 (7GHz rating, 8GHz max overclock) MSI 980m 4GB original memory: Hynix H5GQ4H24MFR-T2C (6 GHz rating, 6.4GHz max overclock) Both cards are GM204 chips. The 980m has one less CUDA core block enabled than the 970, but it has the full 256-bit memory interface and L2 cache with no 3.5GB issues, while the 970 is 224-bit with 1/8th of the L2 cache disabled. Both cards are 4GB with 8 memory chips. I highly suspected this memory swap would work because video cards read literally nothing from a memory chip. There is no asking for what the chip is or even the capacity. They write data to it and hope they can read it back. Memory manufacturer information read by programs like GPU-z isn't even read from the memory. It's set by an on-board resistor. I also had changed multiple memory chips in the past, so was fairly confident I could physically do the job. I started with just one chip switched from both cards. This meant both cards were running a mix of memory from different manufacturers and of different speed ratings, but same internal DRAM array configuration. Both cards worked. Here is a picture of the 980m with one chip switched over: Now how did the cards react? The 980m behaved no differently. No change in max overclock. The 970 though... I expected it to be slower... but... 970 with 1 Hynix chip, 7 Samsung (originally 8 Samsung) 7GHz = Artifacts like a crashed NES even at desktop 6GHz = Artifacts like a crashed NES even at desktop 5GHz = Artifacts like a crashed NES even at desktop 2GHz = Fully Stable, 2d and 3d I didn't try 3GHz or 4GHz, but yeah, HUGE clock decrease. I shrugged though and kept switching all the memory figuring that as long as it worked at any speed, I could figure out the issue later. With switching more chips through 7/8 switched there was no change in max memory clocks. What was really fun was when I had 7/8 chips done. My GDDR5 stencil got stuck and ripped 3 pads off the final Samsung chip. Needless to say there was a very long swearing spree. Looking up the datasheet I found that 2 pads were GND, and a 3rd was some active low reset. Hoping that the reset was unused, I checked the 970's side of the pad and found it was hardwired to GND. This meant the signal was unused. I also got a solder ball on a sliver of one of the GND pads that was left, so I was effectively only missing a single GND connection. I put the mangled 8th chip in the 980m and it worked. Net gain after all of this... 25 MHz max overclock. Something was obviously missing. I figured I would switch the memory manufacturer resistor, hoping that would do something. I saw that Clyde found this resistor on a k5000m, and switching it to the Hynix value from Samsung had no effect for him. He found that for Hynix on the k5000m the value was 35k Ohms, and for Samsung 45k Ohms. I searched the ENTIRE card and never found a single 35k Ohm resistor. Meanwhile the 970 also worked with all 8 chips swapped, at a paltry 2.1 GHz. Then I got lucky. Someone with a Clevo 980m killed his card when trying to change resistor values to raise his memory voltage. His card had Samsung memory. He sent his card to me to fix, and after doing so I spent hours comparing every single resistor on our boards looking for a variation. Outside of VRM resistors there was just a single difference: On his card (his is shown here) the boxed resistor was 20k Ohms. On mine it was 15k Ohms. I scraped my resistor with a straight edge razor (I could not find a single unused 20k resistor on any of my dead boards) raising it to 19.2k, hoping it was close enough. And it was! Prior to this I also raised the memory voltage a little more from 1.48V to 1.53V. My max stable clocks prior to the ID resistor change were 6552 MHz. They are now 6930 MHz. 378 Mhz improvement. Here's a 3dm11 run at 7.5 GHz (not stable, but still ran) http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/10673982 Now what about the poor 2GHz 970? I found its memory ID resistor too: Memory improved from 2.1 GHz to 6.264 GHz. Surprisingly the memory was slower than it was on the 980m. I expected the 970's vBIOS to have looser timings built in to run the memory faster. As for why the memory was over 100MHz slower than the 980m, 980m actually has better memory cooling than the 970. With the core at 61C I read the 970's backside memory at 86C with an IR thermometer. The Meanwhile the 980m has active cooling on all memory chips, so they will be cooler than the core. In addition, the 980m's memory traces are slightly shorter, which may also help. The 980m at 6.93 GHz is still slower than the 8 GHz that the 970 was capable of with the same memory. I'm not sure why this is. Maybe memory timings are still an issue. Maybe since MSI never released a Hynix version of the 970 meant leftover timings for an older card like a 680 were run, instead of looser timings that should have been used (I know in system BIOS tons of old, unused code get pushed on generation after generation). I don't know, just guessing. Talking to someone who knows how this stuff works would be great. I still want 8 GHz. Some more pics. Here's one with the 970 about to get its 3rd and 4th Hynix chips: Here's my 980m with all memory switched to Samsung. Sorry for the blurriness: So in summary: 1. It is possible to mix Samsung and Hynix memory, or switch entirely from one manufacturer to another, with some limitations. 2. There is a resistor on the pcb that is responsible for telling the GPU what memory manufacturer is connected to it. This affects memory timings, and maybe termination. It has a large impact on memory speed, especially for Hynix memory. This resistor value can be changed to another manufacturer. It is not guaranteed that the vBIOS will contain the other manufacturer's timings. If it does they may not be 100% correct for your replacement memory. 3. If you take a card meant for Hynix memory, you can mix Samsung memory of the same size if it is a faster memory. If the memory is the same speed, the penalty for running Samsung with Hynix timings may hurt memory clocks. 4. If you take a card meant for Samsung memory, you cannot mix any Hynix memory without MAJOR clock speed reductions without also changing the memory manufacturer resistor. It is not guaranteed that the vBIOS will contain the other manufacturer's timings, or if it does 100% proper timings for your specific memory. 5. For Kepler cards the Samsung resistor value is 45k, and for Hynix 35k. For Maxwell cards the Samsung resistor value is 20k, and Hynix 15k. Next up is changing the hardware ID to be a 980 notebook. Clyde also found HWID to have an impact on the number of CUDA core blocks enabled. In about a month I can get a hold of a 970m that someone is willing to let me measure the resistor values on. It has the same pcb as the 980m. Does Nvidia still laser cut the GPU core package? We will find out. Full thread can be found here: https://www.techinferno.com/index.php?/forums/topic/9021-hardware-mod-gtx980m-hynix-to-samsung-memory-swap/#comment-134361
  14. So I didn't like that the memory on my 980m only clocked to 6.4 GHz after raising the voltage to 1.48V from 1.35V, and wanted my memory to run even faster. I knew someone with a spare 970, so we made a deal where I buy the card, and if it still worked after I switched all the memory chips, he'd buy it back (for reduced amount if it could no longer do 7GHz, but at least 6GHz). Long story short, he bought the card back and I got faster memory. MSI 970 4GB Lightning original memory: Samsung K4G41325FC-HC28 (7GHz rating, 8GHz max overclock) MSI 980m 4GB original memory: Hynix H5GQ4H24MFR-T2C (6 GHz rating, 6.4GHz max overclock) Both cards are GM204 chips. The 980m has one less CUDA core block enabled than the 970, but it has the full 256-bit memory interface and L2 cache with no 3.5GB issues, while the 970 is 224-bit with 1/8th of the L2 cache disabled. Both cards are 4GB with 8 memory chips. I highly suspected this memory swap would work because video cards read literally nothing from a memory chip. There is no asking for what the chip is or even the capacity. They write data to it and hope they can read it back. Memory manufacturer information read by programs like GPU-z isn't even read from the memory. It's set by an on-board resistor. I also had changed multiple memory chips in the past, so was fairly confident I could physically do the job. I started with just one chip switched from both cards. This meant both cards were running a mix of memory from different manufacturers and of different speed ratings, but same internal DRAM array configuration. Both cards worked. Here is a picture of the 980m with one chip switched over: Now how did the cards react? The 980m behaved no differently. No change in max overclock. The 970 though... I expected it to be slower... but... 970 with 1 Hynix chip, 7 Samsung (originally 8 Samsung) 7GHz = Artifacts like a crashed NES even at desktop 6GHz = Artifacts like a crashed NES even at desktop 5GHz = Artifacts like a crashed NES even at desktop 2GHz = Fully Stable, 2d and 3d I didn't try 3GHz or 4GHz, but yeah, HUGE clock decrease. I shrugged though and kept switching all the memory figuring that as long as it worked at any speed, I could figure out the issue later. With switching more chips through 7/8 switched there was no change in max memory clocks. What was really fun was when I had 7/8 chips done. My GDDR5 stencil got stuck and ripped 3 pads off the final Samsung chip. Needless to say there was a very long swearing spree. Looking up the datasheet I found that 2 pads were GND, and a 3rd was some active low reset. Hoping that the reset was unused, I checked the 970's side of the pad and found it was hardwired to GND. This meant the signal was unused. I also got a solder ball on a sliver of one of the GND pads that was left, so I was effectively only missing a single GND connection. I put the mangled 8th chip in the 980m and it worked. Net gain after all of this... 25 MHz max overclock. Something was obviously missing. I figured I would switch the memory manufacturer resistor, hoping that would do something. I saw that Clyde found this resistor on a k5000m, and switching it to the Hynix value from Samsung had no effect for him. He found that for Hynix on the k5000m the value was 35k Ohms, and for Samsung 45k Ohms. I searched the ENTIRE card and never found a single 35k Ohm resistor. Meanwhile the 970 also worked with all 8 chips swapped, at a paltry 2.1 GHz. Then I got lucky. Someone with a Clevo 980m killed his card when trying to change resistor values to raise his memory voltage. His card had Samsung memory. He sent his card to me to fix, and after doing so I spent hours comparing every single resistor on our boards looking for a variation. Outside of VRM resistors there was just a single difference: On his card (his is shown here) the boxed resistor was 20k Ohms. On mine it was 15k Ohms. I scraped my resistor with a straight edge razor (I could not find a single unused 20k resistor on any of my dead boards) raising it to 19.2k, hoping it was close enough. And it was! Prior to this I also raised the memory voltage a little more from 1.48V to 1.53V. My max stable clocks prior to the ID resistor change were 6552 MHz. They are now 6930 MHz. 378 Mhz improvement. Here's a 3dm11 run at 7.5 GHz (not stable, but still ran) http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/10673982 Now what about the poor 2GHz 970? I found its memory ID resistor too: Memory improved from 2.1 GHz to 6.264 GHz. Surprisingly the memory was slower than it was on the 980m. I expected the 970's vBIOS to have looser timings built in to run the memory faster. As for why the memory was over 100MHz slower than the 980m, 980m actually has better memory cooling than the 970. With the core at 61C I read the 970's backside memory at 86C with an IR thermometer. The Meanwhile the 980m has active cooling on all memory chips, so they will be cooler than the core. In addition, the 980m's memory traces are slightly shorter, which may also help. The 980m at 6.93 GHz is still slower than the 8 GHz that the 970 was capable of with the same memory. I'm not sure why this is. Maybe memory timings are still an issue. Maybe since MSI never released a Hynix version of the 970 meant leftover timings for an older card like a 680 were run, instead of looser timings that should have been used (I know in system BIOS tons of old, unused code get pushed on generation after generation). I don't know, just guessing. Talking to someone who knows how this stuff works would be great. I still want 8 GHz. Some more pics. Here's one with the 970 about to get its 3rd and 4th Hynix chips: Here's my 980m with all memory switched to Samsung. Sorry for the blurriness: So in summary: 1. It is possible to mix Samsung and Hynix memory, or switch entirely from one manufacturer to another, with some limitations. 2. There is a resistor on the pcb that is responsible for telling the GPU what memory manufacturer is connected to it. This affects memory timings, and maybe termination. It has a large impact on memory speed, especially for Hynix memory. This resistor value can be changed to another manufacturer. It is not guaranteed that the vBIOS will contain the other manufacturer's timings. If it does they may not be 100% correct for your replacement memory. 3. If you take a card meant for Hynix memory, you can mix Samsung memory of the same size if it is a faster memory. If the memory is the same speed, the penalty for running Samsung with Hynix timings may hurt memory clocks. 4. If you take a card meant for Samsung memory, you cannot mix any Hynix memory without MAJOR clock speed reductions without also changing the memory manufacturer resistor. It is not guaranteed that the vBIOS will contain the other manufacturer's timings, or if it does 100% proper timings for your specific memory. 5. For Kepler cards the Samsung resistor value is 45k, and for Hynix 35k. For Maxwell cards the Samsung resistor value is 20k, and Hynix 15k. Next up is changing the hardware ID to be a 980 notebook. Clyde also found HWID to have an impact on the number of CUDA core blocks enabled. In about a month I can get a hold of a 970m that someone is willing to let me measure the resistor values on. It has the same pcb as the 980m. Does Nvidia still laser cut the GPU core package? We will find out.
  15. Admin Note: Please post T|I 2.0 bugs and feedback in this thread. So I don't know if you guys are done yet, but here are my thoughts on what I see so far: 1. I had saved https://forum.techinferno.com/forum.php for TI.This link is now broken and thus many people may still think the site is still down. 2. The banner at the top is too large. It can be compressed to take much less vertical space while still having the same functionality. 3. I hate automatic new lines after paragraphs. If I wanted a second new line I would have put in the extraordinary effort of pressing enter a 2nd time. 4. On the main page the font of section titles is too similar to the thread section titles. This makes it harder to tell the sections apart. 5. Shoutbox is missing. I always get a welcome back thing in its place instead, even when visiting the website multiple times on the same computer. 6. Loading is faster. 7. Search function seems to work better. I found the old one to be worthless and I would have to use google to find threads. 8. On firefox there is an annoying browser popup about notifications for this website. 9. It looks prettier.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.