Jump to content

14" Dell Latitude E6430 - Performance Upgrades and System Mods


Recommended Posts

Hi Timohour.

I used the same settings as suggested by the newbie guide regarding the UFI variables and the TDP.

I'm almost sure it is a 90W Dell power brick, I will make sure later. Maybe this affects only a specific part number....

The Throttlestop settings were the same and were used while doing the TS Bench 1024M test.

In my setup I use a 3740QM @ 3,9Ghz 4 cores, 16GB 1600 Cas10 and as a eGPU a GTX 750 2GB. Just in case you want to update the specs in the board.

 

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Tempest said:

Hi Timohour.

I used the same settings as suggested by the newbie guide regarding the UFI variables and the TDP.

I'm almost sure it is a 90W Dell power brick, I will make sure later. Maybe this affects only a specific part number....

The Throttlestop settings were the same and were used while doing the TS Bench 1024M test.

In my setup I use a 3740QM @ 3,9Ghz 4 cores, 16GB 1600 Cas10 and as a eGPU a GTX 750 2GB. Just in case you want to update the specs in the board.

 

Thanks.

 

Check that your limits are in place with throttlestop (TPL)

 

Spoiler

wGvk212.png

 

Also check your PSU. I assume you already know that but check your bios to see which Dell PSU you have connected or check the A on your brick.

Edited by timohour
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, timohour said:

 

Check that your limits are in place with throttlestop (TPL)

 

  Hide contents

wGvk212.png

 

Also check your PSU. I assume you already know that but check your bios to see which Dell PSU you have connected or check the A on your brick.

 

I checked and its the same Package Power Limits settings. All I did was power the laptop down and use the other power brick and see the results. And they were very different. Maybe its a faulty power brick, but the hole thing looks too similar to what Dewos reported on page 13 of this post.

I will double check if its really a 90W power brick, I know for sure its from Dell.

My other power brick is branded by NGS and its also 90W but I'm able to achieve much better results with it. I'm not limited to 46W and 34 multi at best...

Edited by Tempest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Tempest said:

 

I checked and its the same Package Power Limits settings. All I did was power the laptop down and use the other power brick and see the results. And they were very different. Maybe its a faulty power brick, but the hole thing looks too similar to what Dewos reported on page 13 of this post.

I will double check if its really a 90W power brick, I know for sure its from Dell.

My other power brick is branded by NGS and its also 90W but I'm able get much better results with it. I'm not limited to 46W and 34 multi at best...

I am quite sure that it is either an 65W adapter (19.5V 3.34A) or a faulty one rather than a 90W . It sounds strange to me cause I never had such issues with my Dell 90W adapter.

 

If possible pls post your BIOS version too. You can find it on the first page of your BIOS.

Edited by timohour
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bios version is A16.

So I guess I also have a faulty adapter, just as Dewos.

I will try to post a picture of it. I might have never found out, if I didn't upgrade to a 3740QM.

My storage: 1TB SSD & 750GB HDD odd caddy.

Thanks again Timohour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tempest said:

The bios version is A16.

So I guess I also have a faulty adapter, just as Dewos.

I will try to post a picture of it. I might have never found out, if I didn't upgrade to a 3740QM.

My storage: 1TB SSD & 750GB HDD odd caddy.

Thanks again Timohour.

please upload the photo if possible. Is this the adapter that came along with the laptop or just a Dell you purchased online?

 

It sounds weird to me that 2 different PSUs failed to provide enough power unless they are fake or not official. Does the bios says 90W adapter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Tempest said:

I can read 90w in the BIOS.

It looks like its an original adapter but I bought the E6430 from a seller on eBay so... I don't have another one to compare.

 

That's strange cause this is indeed the original Dell adapter. I don't have my 90W around but compared to the 130W I got with my dock they are very much alike.

 

Spoiler

APTfSbE.jpg

 

If you happen to get another Dell 90W adapter, could you please test with that too?

Also could you install the Dell Feature Enhancement Pack  as described on the Battery Life Tweaks and set your scheme to max power and test if it throttles too?

Is this limited to iGPU devices only? Doubtfull cause  Khenglish (E6530 dGPU) explains here that

 

On 5/6/2015 at 0:15 AM, Khenglish said:

There's a bug in the latitude BIOS that prevents proper TDP management with an xm cpu (both sandy and ivy bridge). TDP settings only function properly when the BIOS does not detect the power brick ID.

 

I never encountered such an issue with my 3720QM, I just had problems after some minutes of full load. but could it be an issue on newer IB cpus (XMs and 3740QMs)???

What were your temperatures when throttled @ x34?

Edited by timohour
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, timohour said:

I never encountered such an issue with my 3720QM, I just had problems after some minutes of full load. but could it be an issue on newer IB cpus (XMs and 3740QMs)???

What were your temperatures when throttled @ x34?

 

Temperatures had no effect. When using an approved power brick, CPU TDP on an xm cpu would be limited to the long power limit of 55W at all times. When using an unapproved power brick, The short term power limit would then work, allowing up to 68W, and full x4 turbo multiplier.

 

Raising the power limits using IFR only worked when using an unapproved power brick. Using an approved brick would always clamp power draw to 55W.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow what a great forum!  I had just picked up an e6430 3740qm, 8g, 5200m, etc...  You guys have really confirmed that it is the best deal out there for me, Thank You.  However when I received my e6430 in the mail it would not power on, no leds or anything.  Power supply and battery are good, and there is power going to the motherboard, so must be something wrong with the motherboard, I have one on order.  Only thing I could find that looks like a fuse is closed so that's either a good fuse or a bad cap.


After I get this up and running I'll be looking at replacing the screen and these two look like the best options out there (same dimensions with only 0.2mm thicker)

 

1: http://www.panelook.com/N140O6-L02_Innolux_14.0_LCM_overview_2027.html

2: http://www.panelook.com/LP140WD1-TLA1_LG%20Display_14.0_LCM_overview_5220.html

 

The first one looks to be better but has 9S6P WLED, does anyone know if that will cause a problem vs stock 8S6P WLED?

 

Also if you look at the contrast ratio's the first is 650:1(typ) and the second is 500:1(min), any clue how the measurements are made when stating typical and minimum like that?  Which would have better contrast or would they be about on par?

 

Also My e6430 came with 1366x768 so will I need a new LVDs cable to go HD+?  I suppose I could just check, what am I looking for (Part # JTC08)?

 

Keep up the good work.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, scutterflux said:

 

... Also My e6430 came with 1366x768 so will I need a new LVDs cable to go HD+?  I suppose I could just check, what am I looking for (Part # JTC08)?

 

 

Keep up the good work.

 

 

All info gathered on cables on this post.

 

Part no for HD+ cable is JTC08 or CYM5C the latter seems to be the one for the E6530 but it fits the E6430 too and it is reported working here.

 

I didn't find any notable upgrade for my screen that came original with my E6430 (900p) but there is an eBay seller who claims that an 1680x945 screen is compatible with the E6430.

 

On 15/1/2015 at 0:48 AM, timohour said:

The only notable screen (that I am aware of) in the 14" TN panel category is the Thinkpad X1 Carbon (gen 1) screen and its price is too high.

 

but it may need some modifications (check here for the successful implementation on the T430).

 

Spoiler

Keep in mind when you order a screen that the seller can send a compatible screen if the phrase "exact" or something similar is not noted on the description.
If you are seeking for a specific screen model, ask from the seller to send you  the specific part no or you may receive a compatible one...

 

Edited by timohour
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't find specs/info on the carbon x1 screen (TLE2), but the (TLG1) looks good if it performs similarly but with only 45% gamut but 300nits.  The big difference is the panels I listed should be drop in replacement (no modifications provided the connectors are in a similar location),  the second one I listed (LG) is the common recommended upgrade for the XPS 14 L401x, also a notable TN panel, but the first one (n140o6-l02 Dell Studio 14z TrueLife) still looks like the best specs to me with highest contrast, viewing angles, and gamut, -50nits...

 

I'll check back in few weeks or so with updates.

 

Update* TLE2 in carbon x1 has gamut 72% and is very high for a TN screen, probably a main reason to like it, contrast has been reported all over the map but 400:1 seems likely with good viewing angles.

Edited by scutterflux
I made a mistake and updated too
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2016 at 6:45 AM, scutterflux said:

Can't find specs/info on the carbon x1 screen (TLE2), but the (TLG1) looks good if it performs similarly but with only 45% gamut but 300nits.  The big difference is the panels I listed should be drop in replacement (no modifications provided the connectors are in a similar location),  the second one I listed (LG) is the common recommended upgrade for the XPS 14 L401x, also a notable TN panel, but the first one (n140o6-l02 Dell Studio 14z TrueLife) still looks like the best specs to me with highest contrast, viewing angles, and gamut, -50nits...

 

I'll check back in few weeks or so with updates.

 

Update* TLE2 in carbon x1 has gamut 72% and is very high for a TN screen, probably a main reason to like it, contrast has been reported all over the map but 400:1 seems likely with good viewing angles.

 

Let us know if you find anything interesting... there is also 1080p 14" LVDS as suggested by @jacobsson on the 1st page...

 

Spoiler

 

On 16/1/2015 at 2:19 PM, jacobsson said:

@timohour

I could only find one single panel that matches your description:

LVDS, 1920x1080, 14.00" (it's 2CH though):

LP140WH8-TLA1

 

 

 

I couldn't find it anywhere available.

 

EDIT: It seems that there was a typo in the panelook.com. It now states that this screen is a 1366x768p. Seems like there are no 1080p 14" screens.

Edited by timohour
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2016 at 0:34 AM, Khenglish said:

 

Temperatures had no effect. When using an approved power brick, CPU TDP on an xm cpu would be limited to the long power limit of 55W at all times. When using an unapproved power brick, The short term power limit would then work, allowing up to 68W, and full x4 turbo multiplier.

 

Raising the power limits using IFR only worked when using an unapproved power brick. Using an approved brick would always clamp power draw to 55W.

 

Yes, I also can be able to overclock only with an unapproved psu adapter (not the Dell one).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2016 at 0:43 PM, Dewos said:

 

Yes, I also can be able to overclock only with an unapproved psu adapter (not the Dell one).

 

It seems like I am the only one that I was able to OC my 3720QM with an official Dell adapter.

The reason probably is that my 3720QM @ 3.8GHz is under the default short term power limit of 56.250W

But I ran my CPU [email protected] for almost 255 sec without throttling (sometimes less sometimes more).

 

Could you test your 3740QM with your unapproved psu adapter?

How much is  your maximum consumption [email protected] under full load (tbench 1024M)?

If it is under 56.25W it should probably work with your Dell Adapter for small windows of time (128 sec).

 

I currently have at home a friend's E6530 and going to try my 3720QM in his laptop this weekend to check if it works like in mine or needs an unapproved adapter.

He picked it up earlier today. Didn't have enough time to try my 3720QM  :dispirited:. Maybe another time.

Edited by timohour
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not so long ago, i have kind of finished upgrading the hardware in my 6430. I can only tell one thing, this machine is a beast!

memcache.thumb.png.8c02056f84043477d9cd9SSD.png.8d66089a91be09055fa89bb50a329a77

 

3dM11 results With a slightly overclocked GTX560Ti @1.2Opt

 

The memory controller of this i7-3840QM can run my RAM sticks at factory timings @2133 with no problem, althrough only the slightest BCLK raise freezes the machine. No problem, i am fine @4Ghz 4C/8T :D

 

The performance is on par with the desktop Ivy i7-s!

 

I do not use C3 &C6, but turn on C1E to reduce temps & power consumption occasionally. I made aproppriate Throttlestop profiles for my usage scenarios. Idling power consumption is around 6W, but @full load the CPU is over 55W. Since i have the iGPU only model, the hetsink is inadequate, so currently i am looking for a dGPU heatsink to mod to fit.

 

I use a Dell PR03X dock (with usb3) and i created a neat little script that automatically changes TS profiles when docked / undocked, and...

 

As i found out, my current eGPU setup(W8.1 x64 UEFI, x1.2Opt @EC) can be hot-plugged on the go. No need to sleep / wake, i can just plug it in, and it instantly activates, aswell my 2 displays connected to the GPU. The other thing that i noticed, that i can "Safely Eject" it from the taskbar menu (disabling from device manager also works, but has to be enabled manually to regain true hot-plug) , and then remove the adapter without any system crash happening. So i came up with a very convienent solution wich fits my workflow when docking the laptop: I've made a script, which runs in the background, and detects if the machine is undocked, and automatically ejects the GPU. So basically, i can dock the laptop, plug in the EC, and everything works flawless, then without any interaction in the OS. When i take the laptop i only eject the machine from the dock, and can unplug the EC without any problems, without the need to restart/ sleep/wake the machine. The only interaction still required is to manually switch on and off the ATX PSU which feeds the GPU with juice, but  this could be easily automated using the "dell monitor stand connector" which indicates when the laptop is connected. Work in progress... :)

 

The script is kind of in beta state right now, but anybody who is interested hit me up with a PM and i send it, with the minimal instructions currently needed to configure it. Oh yeah and it does not need a docking station, theoretically i can bind the GPU eject to the removal of any hardware, (USB hub,mice,thumbdrive). Of course it cant be connected through the EC-s USB port because the removal of the EC must be after the removal of the helper device.

 

Edited by kondilac
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought E6430 (i7-3740QM and with 16GB 1600mhz memory ) also with dGPU (NVS5200).

Everything works fine with PE4L 2.1b adapter. No different from booting up than with my previous Lenovo X230. Basically plug n-play.

All GPU's are detected and present in Win.

Weird thing is that my stock FireStrike2013 test is a lot slower than with the i5-3220M in X230.

Altough physics score is doubled, but graphics score is lower :S

Using same e-gpu (Gigabyte GTX670 OC with Windforce 3X). That is odd...

 

Graphics result is around -900p less all stock clocks with E6430  :/

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6344581/fs/7136982

 

And the most weird thing is that I cant OC my videcard anymore. Using MSI Afterburner. I apply the clocks, GPU-Z confirms that those clocks are applied, but there is no gain in graphics score like 0 effect!  With X230 i had a huge bump in graphics score when I oc'd my GTX670.

 

Comapring my X230 best OC score with E6430 best OC score.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6345009/fs/7139888

 

As You can see there is massive gain in Physics score thanks to 4 vs 2 core CPU, but more than -1200 point loss in graphics score. 

What gives? Also tried with same graphics driver versions... no change in result. It seems that clocks are applied but not utilized by program...

 

Edited by viilutaja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, viilutaja said:

I bought E6430 (i7-3740QM and with 16GB 1600mhz memory ) also with dGPU (NVS5200).

Everything works fine with PE4L 2.1b adapter. No different from booting up than with my previous Lenovo X230. Basically plug n-play.

All GPU's are detected and present in Win.

Weird thing is that my stock FireStrike2013 test is a lot slower than with the i5-3220M in X230.

Altough physics score is doubled, but graphics score is lower :S

Using same e-gpu (Gigabyte GTX670 OC with Windforce 3X). That is odd...

 

Graphics result is around -900p less all stock clocks with E6430  :/

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6344581/fs/7136982

 

And the most weird thing is that I cant OC my videcard anymore. Using MSI Afterburner. I apply the clocks, GPU-Z confirms that those clocks are applied, but there is no gain in graphics score like 0 effect!  With X230 i had a huge bump in graphics score when I oc'd my GTX670.

 

Comparing my X230 best OC score with E6430 best OC score.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6345009/fs/7139888

 

As You can see there is massive gain in Physics score thanks to 4 vs 2 core CPU, but more than -1200 point loss in graphics score. 

What gives? Also tried with same graphics driver versions... no change in result. It seems that clocks are applied but not utilized by program...

 

 

Do you have Optimus enabled in BIOS? I assume yes.

I also assume you checked with GPU-z that your card runs @ x1.2 speeds.

 

Could you try to disable your NVS5200 inside Windows?  You can do it easily if you go to Device Manager -> System devices and disable the PCI Express Root Port that your dGPU is attached.

 

Then try again to OC your GTX670 and check if the results change.

 

On the second link you provided the results on the x230 are with an OCed GPU while with the E6430 it seems like it is not OCed (check under the graphics) that's what caused the huge difference.

There is still a big difference though in the non OCed results.

 

If you still have the X230 could you please run CUDA-z and post a screenshot of the performance tab for each laptop? (use the heavy load mode test)

It will be helpful to see if there is a big difference in the host to device or device to host benchmarks.

Edited by timohour
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, viilutaja said:

I bought E6430 (i7-3740QM and with 16GB 1600mhz memory ) also with dGPU (NVS5200).

Everything works fine with PE4L 2.1b adapter. No different from booting up than with my previous Lenovo X230. Basically plug n-play.

All GPU's are detected and present in Win.

Weird thing is that my stock FireStrike2013 test is a lot slower than with the i5-3220M in X230.

Altough physics score is doubled, but graphics score is lower :S

Using same e-gpu (Gigabyte GTX670 OC with Windforce 3X). That is odd...

 

Graphics result is around -900p less all stock clocks with E6430  :/

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6344581/fs/7136982

 

And the most weird thing is that I cant OC my videcard anymore. Using MSI Afterburner. I apply the clocks, GPU-Z confirms that those clocks are applied, but there is no gain in graphics score like 0 effect!  With X230 i had a huge bump in graphics score when I oc'd my GTX670.

 

Comapring my X230 best OC score with E6430 best OC score.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6345009/fs/7139888

 

As You can see there is massive gain in Physics score thanks to 4 vs 2 core CPU, but more than -1200 point loss in graphics score. 

What gives? Also tried with same graphics driver versions... no change in result. It seems that clocks are applied but not utilized by program...

 

The effect of higher physics score on 3dm points is very small, upgrading from a i5-3230M to i7-3840qm yielded ~300p better scores, but the physics score increase was more than 120%.

If you still have access to the x230, maybe you should check the graphics settings in the nVidia control panel, and make sure that the settings are the same on the e6430 setup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found another comaprison firestrike core, with equal mem clocks. Altough core clock is 5mhz different.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/7139888/fs/6344859#

But still massive difference in graphic score :(  

If i can't get this in line and no OC, then I have to resell e6430... which would be shame. 

Had big plans for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, viilutaja said:

Found another comaprison firestrike core, with equal mem clocks. Altough core clock is 5mhz different.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/7139888/fs/6344859#

But still massive difference in graphic score :(  

If i can't get this in line and no OC, then I have to resell e6430... which would be shame. 

Had big plans for it.

 

Ensure you are running a Gen2 eGPU link.

 

Set your power profile to 'high performance' where PCI link state management is disabled

 

Set your NVidia control panel 'power management' mode from 'adaptive' to 'prefer maximum performance'.

 

Enable HPET timers via a admin command prompt 'bcdedit /set useplatformclock true'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

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.