Jump to content

Khenglish

Scientia Potentia Est
  • Content Count

    1799
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    63

Everything posted by Khenglish

  1. 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.
  2. Update: Moral Hazard used MESET.EXE on his clevo to force a dump and flash, but did not gain BCLK control. Update 2: SUCCESS by kasar on a Dell xps 15 (L502X) here! Unfortunately he needed to disable the ME region lock by desoldering and flashing the BIOS chip though. Update 3: SUCCESS by me on Clevo P150EM here! Mod relied on Clevo-only program to unlock ME region. Update 4: SUCCESS by Rhadamanthis on MSI gt780 dxr Update 5: SUCCESS by Akimox on HP 2570p here! At the hardware level, all 6 and likely 7 series laptops support overclocking. The problem is OEMs disable this ability except on laptops like the m18x. Clock configuration is NOT controlled by the BIOS. It is controlled by the Intel ME FW (management engine firmware), a BIOS extension. Only a few bits must be changed from a overclocking disabled ME FW to make it an overclocking enabled ME FW. Gigabyte accidentally leaked an intel utility that can read the ME FW, edit it, and write the new version back to the flash ROM, along with all the necessary documentation to make the correct changes. This flash ROM contains not only the ME FW, but the BIOS, flash descriptor, and 2 other regions called the GbE and PDR. There is one problem, which is that all laptop manufacturers (except ASUS) disable read/write access to the flash ROM. The read/write locks are contained in the flash descriptor. The security settings in the flash descriptor can be ignored by setting a special flag on BIOS startup known as the flash descriptor override, which enables read/write access to all regions. This override is used when you run a BIOS update. At this time there are methods to enable the flash descriptor override for HP and Clevo systems only. After setting the override and rebooting you can dump your whole flash image, edit the ME FW, rebuild the image, and flash. It is possible to flash either the ME FW region only, or the whole image. Obviously flashing the whole image is risky since you will also be flashing your BIOS, so I suggest just flashing the ME region. 6 series are more tolerable of corrupting the ME FW than 7 series. 7 series cannot run without a functional ME FW. 6 series can run without one as long as the BIOS detects that the ME FW is corrupt, and thus refuses to run its settings, however, the laptop can sill be bricked anyway if the BIOS thinks the ME FW is functional while it really is not, and attempts to run the inoperable clocking settings. Some of you may be aware of fwupdlcl.exe which can update the ME FW without enabling the flash descriptor override. This does not work for our purposes since it does not perform a full flash. It does not overwrite the hardware config portion of the ME FW, which is where clock configuration is done. However, if someone could figure out what this program does to write its partial image, it may be possible to use that knowledge to flash a full image. So here's the Intel Utilities and docs: 6 series chipset Link removed since the leaked FITC builds invalid images. Use the ME8 FPT and documentation for now. 7 series chipset: http://www.mediafire.com/?iwscmnadf5icnxq (thanks to kasar) MESET.exe to unlock Clevos: http://www.mediafire.com/?465pknsgc2z83s8 ME_Port by svet to unlock MSIs: https://www.dropbox.com/s/spmvxmz9pal1j6l/ME_Port.com BE CAREFUL WHEN USING FPTW64! It will happily overwrite your BIOS without any warning if you enter the wrong command. Even if you do things properly, still be prepared to have a dead ME FW and whatever the consequences of that may be. Although it is unlikely, trying to enable overclocking through my suggestions can kill your motherboard. There are a few combinations of mistakes that can be made which will most certainly do so. You have been warned, so don't blame me if you do. Also if you do, do NOT go RMA your laptop and make your manufacturer pay for what you caused. You took the risk, so you pay for the necessary repairs even if under warranty. If things go wrong I will do everything I can to help you recover, but please accept responsibility for trying this. Ok now that all that is out of the way so people can't justifiably yell at me. Back to how to try this. 1. Enable your flash descriptor override. Clevo users can use MESET.exe. MSI users can use ME_Port. HP users can use the keyboard sequence "WIN+left_arrow+right_arrow" during POST (got this info from Tech Inferno Fan). ASUS users don't have to do anything since they don't have the lock engaged. The rest of you guys are at this time out of luck. 2. So you'll first need to dump your ME FW image. This is done by running fptw64 in windows or fpt in DOS. It needs to be run in a cmd window with admin rights. The command to do so is "fptw64 -d imagename", where imagename is whatever name you want for your flash image dump. Prema found out that at least on Clevos, attempting to dump only the ME FW leaves out the clock control segment, so you need to dump the whole flash image. Note that you're also getting the flash descriptor when you dump everything, so you can edit it to not require the flash descriptor override to do any flash image reads and writes. 3. Now you need to change some bits to enable overclocking. By some, I mean you probably have to change quite a lot. The good news is that the settings on 6 and 7 series systems seem to be identical. When I edited my image, I followed the intel docs in the ME8 download. I've linked my original overclocked MW FW for comparison. You only need to make changes in the "ICC" section and subsections in FTIC. You can edit the ME FW as part of an entire flash image, or by itself. I edited it by itself, but have since then done several BIOS mods and flashing the whole image worked out fine. My modded P150/170EM ME FW: meoc.bin This image is just for reference to make sure you didn't miss anything. Don't just flash this ME FW. It might work, but there has been issues with flashing someone else's ME FW on HP and Dell systems and others may be affected. Dump and edit your own, or ask me to and I will if I have the time. Some manufacturers have additional changes. When it doubt read the manual or ask me if something should be changed or not. The Utility for editing the images is FTIC. This program has a GUI so it does not have to be run from cmd. Open your image and open the overclocking enabled image. Settings that are different from FTIC's generic 6 and 7 series file will be highlighted in yellow. What you need to edit is the ICC profiles under ICC Data. You can have up to 8 profiles. I think active profile changes depending on if you are say plugged in, on battery, on standby, temps are too high, etc. I don't really know how you identify which profile(s) much be changed, so I think you should just change all of them to make sure that if the flash works and you don't get overclocking, that you know you didn't miss something and that overclocking is impossible, so you don't waste time thinking about it and trying things. The number 1 thing to check that I found to make sure things don't go bad is your "clock source select" under "FCIM/BTM specific ICC registers". If it is 0x00011A33, then your laptop uses the PLL built into the PCH and you can keep going through trying this mod. It will be 0x00011A34 for enabling overclocking. If it is something else besides these 2, STOP NOW. This means that your PCH's PLL is not being used, and that instead an external PLL is feeding the PCH clocks to distribute. If you set your laptop to use the PCH's PLL, I think the PCH will get both clocks and you'll get a laptop with unintelligible clock signals. That would be bad. After making the changes you need to rebuild the ME FW image. You will then have a full image, and if you reopen this new image in FITC, FITC will create a new folder with the MW FW all by itself. You can use the full image or the MW FW image to flash. 4. Now the fun exciting part where we do the flash. I recommend doing it in DOS. The command to flash the ME FW only is "fpt -me -f filename", where filename is the name of your flash image. Don't forget the .bin extension. If you are flashing the entire ROM then you do need to leave out the "-me". If flashing the ME FW only and used the "build compact image" option in FITC, you should get a warning that the flash image is smaller than the total ME Region area that the flash descriptor says you can use, so the area after the file length will not be changed. This is OK and flash anyway. The image FTIC creates is not padded at the end, which causes the warning to occur. If you built a full image it is padded, so you don't get this warning. 5. You can now use Intel XTU to overclock. If you already installed it, you may have to reinstall it. BCLK can be changed in windows and takes effect immediately. Remember guys, this is risky stuff, especially if you have a 7 series laptop. If you're careful though everything should turn out fine.
  3. As the title says, I'm looking for a dead GK104. It doesn't need to be dead, but it won't look too pretty when I'm done with it, and I don't want to pay what a live card warrants. The reason is I think I found the laser cuts that disable cores on my dead 680m, but need a non-680m to compare with to verify this. If this is confirmed then I know what to look for on maxwell cards, possibly unlocking 980m and 970m cards. I spent a lot of time trying to see if Nvidia no longer did laser cuts, and came to the conclusion that they still do, so now I want to see if I can find them. Acceptable cards: k3000m, k3100m, k4000m, k4100m, k5100m, 675mx, 780m, 880m, 680, k5000, or anything with a GK104 that has a a different CUDA core count than the 680m. What I suspect are laser cuts are the 5 small squares in a group on the left side middle of the packaging. Without the insulating coating removed they are invisible, while all other markings are visible through the coating. I believe these laser cuts break a ground connection that would otherwise pull signals to low voltage in an underlying layer. I want to see another card first though before looking for them on my 980m. Also I did quite a bit of damage to this gpu by sanding off the protective coating (look at the edges). A chemical means would likely be preferable.
  4. Khenglish

    1080ti fell apart. Can I repair this?

    Those caps are completely unnecessary. You can throw them in the trash and forget about them. They insignificantly reduce voltage ripple on the 12V line and you have way more than you need. A laptop GPU will have around 4 15 uF caps, and you still have 6 330 uF caps for the same purpose. I am more concerned about what damage from bending happened to the card due to the extreme force required to rip the heatsink in half. That should require well over 100 pounds of force, and very likely destroyed the card.
  5. Checksum must be correct or card will not work. For moisture removal heat the core to 100C for at least 5 hours. The old chip is fine because heat from regular use will remove moisture.
  6. It looks to me like your gk106 may have popcorned. It looks like the chip packaging is bulging in the lower right corner at the diagonal capacitor in the last image you linked. Did you prebake the chip at all to remove moisture? If it's not popcorned then you should try to match the hardware ID in vBIOS to what the card now calls itself. I found in optimus mode that you can have them mismatched on maxwell class GPU, but not if the card is the primary GPU. Have you tried the dGPU as primary? If you haven't yet, trying it may give you a blank screen with no way to get the iGPU back to primary without a BIOS flash via programmer. A blind normal flash or cmos battery removal often does not reset all bios settings.
  7. 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.
  8. Khenglish

    Is my modded inf correct?

    The driver does not install without modding the .inf? Usually desktop cards have their entries in nvdisp.inf.
  9. 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:
  10. 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.
  11. Khenglish

    [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.
  12. Khenglish

    Looking to part out a P157SM

    Awesome, my "new" laptop will now no longer have missing pieces.
  13. Khenglish

    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.
  14. Khenglish

    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.
  15. Khenglish

    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/
  16. Khenglish

    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.
  17. Khenglish

    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:
  18. 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.
  19. Meset only enables flashing the ME FW. You can flash the bios without running meset. Have you tried just flashing the bios?
  20. So I managed to pull off upgrading a graphics card by changing the processor core on the card, while keeping the same card. The card is an 11 year old Mobility Radeon 9600 Pro Turbo, found in the Dell Inspiron 8600. I replaced the core with one from a Desktop 9600XT, which is similar, but has a low K dielectric in the interconnect stack for much higher frequencies, and has better z compression. I did not know how to test if the improved z compression had an impact, but the maximum stable overclock improved from 360MHz to 553.5MHz. So who cares since performance still sucks you say? True, the performance went from abysmal to slightly less abysmal, but there were several major findings: 1. The original core was clearly marked as a Mobility Radeon 9600, while the upgraded core was marked as a 9600 XT. This means that despite core markings, parts can be interchangeable, even between mobile and desktop cards. 2. No BIOS or hardware ID change was required. The new core simply worked. 3. Windows and the BIOS noticed no change. 4. The new core clocks 53.75% faster than the old core. So in short, the upgrade worked with no hitch, and performed exactly as a card built for the new core would, and no extra work was needed besides physically switching the core. This means that much more modern core swaps, such as from a 980m to a 980 core for 33% more CUDA cores, would likely work with no extra effort besides switching the core out. The card Prior to the final bake in the toaster oven: What the card looked like in January. I posted this thread on the card you see below: Benchmarks. CPU is a Dothan Pentium m at 2.4GHz. 3dm01 stock 11928: 3dm01 max stable overclock original core 13056: 3dm01 slightly unstable overclock (mem too high) new core 15029: 3dm03 stock 3160: 3dm03 max overclock old core 3538: 3dm03 max overclock new core 4289: 3dm05: Generic VGA video card benchmark result - Intel® Pentium® M processor 1.80GHz,Dell Computer Corporation 0Y4572 3dm06: Generic VGA video card benchmark result - Intel® Pentium® M processor 1.80GHz,Dell Computer Corporation 0Y4572 So the plan now is to try a core swap on something more modern. I will next try a GF114 core from a 560 ti onto a 485m, which is supposed to have a GF104 core. If that works, next is a GF108 core to a GF117 core on an NVS 5200m, which is a full node die shrink of the same core. I also might throw a 4870 core onto a 7970m with a dead core (BGAs appear to match. filtering on the backside of the cards are identical). If that works with a 3 generation gap, then pretty much anything will. I also want to find a Tonga core to put on one of the 2 dead 7970m that svl7 sent me.
  21. GK104 and GM204 share the same BGA so physically a 980 core would be compatible, but constructing a vBIOS for the card would probably be impossible. A gtx 770 core should work. You may lose LVDS display output though.
  22. Khenglish

    Clevo P150EM - Battery Cell Upgrade Success

    Where do you see $50? The lowest I see is mid $80s. At the time it was difficult to find anything under $100.
  23. 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...
  24. Khenglish

    P170hm unstable gpu on factory clocks

    The 580m has 4 weak power phases that are barely adequate for the card. You may have lost one or 2, which is why it's ok when underclocked, but not at stock. Unfortunately it's difficult to test if they're working right.
  25. Khenglish

    Heatsink upgrade for P170EM

    Thinking back, the 8970m heatsink is actually the very best. The 980m heatsink is missing part of the radiator over top of the memory/VR heatpipe, while the 8970m heatsink is not.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.