Cast your vote or opinion on the new Alienware 2015 model line up!!

I wasn't for a second saying it would be an acceptable solution for us, just throwing it out-there as a possibility AW may be considering to get out of this hole

 

I'm just sick of dealing with Alienware in general at this point (and I was tired and cranky, it was late ). I've had to call Dell/Alienware about my order so many times, then this. I mean how long does it take to benchmark it, come back and say "hey we found some results, we will release them when blah blah blah"? I'm assuming they can't release the results until they get looked at, but at least show SOME transparency that you're doing this stuff.

 

Guys, check your 980 4GB bandwidth, as it's most likely 3.5GB with increased latency over the 970M.

 

You're referring to this aren't you:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-geforce-gtx-970-vram-stress-test.html

I don't know if the mobile chips are affected by this. Apparently there is little VRAM bench marking tool that a user created to highlight this issue, there's possibly a link to that VRAM bechmarking program over at the link above.

The desktop GTX 970 4GB is not an identical chip to the 980M even though both are GM204, the desktop card has 1664 shaders activated, and the 980M has 1536 shaders - it's possible it doesn't have the same issue of a portion of it's VRAM having very low bandwidth.

 

The 980M 8GB IS affected by this, and because the 4GB is the same card it will have the same problem.

I'm just trying to highlight the issue before people go complaining after when they realize their games only use 3.5GB of vRAM.

Edit--

I take the above remark back. I dont know if thrthe 8gb really is affected. The benchmark is inconsistent so the only trtue way to tell is to load up games.

 

At this point it sounds like scaremongering, have you got some links or can you post some test results that prove the 980M has the same 'issue' as the GTX 970 desktop? Even with the GTX 970 desktop it's still a good card & nothing changes that fact, the performance reviews of the card still hold true, it's mostly just that the review specs were wrong, NVidia effectively sent out misinformation on the specs of the GTX 970. NVidia say it was a mistake on their part. All this is described in the guru3d link in my previous post.

 

It's not scaremongering. The benchmark going around gets low around the last 500MB because of Windows GUI. Desktop 980 owners got rid of the slow benchmark by rebooting. The best way to test is with games, that's why I took it back.

I don't know why you say "nothing changes", the card doesn't use >3.5 and there was a video posted today showing the stuttering with Skyrim and high textures due to that issue. People already suspected stuttering beforehand so yes, nothing changes, but now there is an actual reason to consider it's a broken product.

 

What I'm trying to say is: rather than posting statements, can you post some links to the test results. People can say anything, but better to have the facts - it's not like I don't necessarily believe you, I'm just asking you for the data - for the sake of everyone.

 

I'm confused. I'm posting here to gather data on the 4GB 980M because I couldn't find any test results for it.

 

Ok, so to be clear, you don't know if the 980M suffers from the same VRAM bandwidth issues as the GTX 970 desktop card, but you think it might be affected, and you're trying to find out by asking people here to test there 980M's to see if it has the same issue? If that's the case, then might be best to provide a link to that VRAM bandwidth testing program I mentioned earlier - it was designed specifically by a user to test the issue in the GTX 970. That would be useful to run on a 980M to validate. On the GTX 970 the last 500MB of VRAM has a memory controller that has to share a chunk of L2 cache with another memory controller - this is what makes that last 500MB of VRAM so slow on the GTX 970. There might be a link to the bandwidth testing program at the guru3d link I gave in one of my previous posts if people want to test out their 980M's.

EDIT: I found a link to the program, I have no idea about any compatibility issues or whatever, but here's the link:
http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4998341&postcount=115

and it comes from this article:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/does-the-geforce-gtx-970-have-a-memory-allocation-bug.html

 

I don't recommend that program since it will give similar results to the desktop 970 on every card because Windows allocates vRAM to run the OS. That's why you will see similar screenshots of the GTX Titan and desktop 980 showing the VRAM slowdown in that CUDA benchmark. That's also why I was asking for game reports. It doesn't require downloading anything extra, and Dying Light, if anyone has it, loads 4GB of VRAM within 15 seconds of game time.

 

Well, you're gonna need to explain to people how to set up some kind of a control. Just because the game uses all 4GB of VRAM and performs horribly (or even OK) is not proof it's due to the supposed slow 500MB portion of VRAM, it could be due to something else, that's why you need a control or comparison or a means of running below 3.5GB VRAM without changing any game settings that will effect anything else bar VRAM usage. You'd be best off figuring how you're gonna overcome that.

For example, in the article at the following link they use the GTX 980 4GB that is not afflicted with this issue as a means of comparison to the results of the GTX 970 in order to see the effect of the slow VRAM portion on the GTX 970 and I don't know how you're gonna achieve something similar when talking about the 980M because I think it lacks cards that can be compared:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/does-the-geforce-gtx-970-have-a-memory-allocation-bug.html

 

I think it's easiest to start off slow and not confuse anyone with comparisons and serious data. A preliminary report is all that's necessary. That link has a card that actual HAS the problem, which is why it was researched further. I don't know if the 980M does. All I'm asking is if games allocate 4GB of vRAM or not...

Just need one person that is used to using PrecisionX/AB and the OSD.

 

Start off loose, get looser! I'll leave you to it anyway.

 

The conspiracy theories in the past few pages are nuts. Guys, we are getting data and gathering insight from multiple user groups. We aren't re-coding the BIOS. We aren't saying we don't believe your results. We aren't saying we're having difficulties running into the data. We aren't calling you culprits, liars, or Stupid McStupiders! We're looking into it.

 

To be somewhat fair, the lack of communication these past couple of months have driven some of us to think in such manners.
And we now believe you more than ever since the AMA... I think.

 

I'm saddened that you guys felt that way by the lack of communication. I get it. I'm a consumer as well and when whatever company I back kind of sits back and doesn't respond, it sucks.

I'm doing what I'm doing now because I want to. I wasn't asked to do this or forced to and there was no "Oh gawd! They are angry! AW Khan! Quell the uprising!" I'm doing this on my own, replicate the customer experience, gather your insights, put myself in your perspectives on the use you make of your product. This is important to me and I think it's very important for you.

 

Please, you're doing this out of the goodness of your heart, and care of the community? A good career move though If you can convince people you are their 'champion' on the inside.
What is your job title within the organisation? I'm intrigued. Maybe I do have you wrong but one thing for sure is that Mr. A approves your posts ATM.

And I'll say it again. Take a brand new AW17 and benchmark it. Plug in 220W or greater PSU, problem gone. Not difficult . Root-cause may be more tricky but an interim solution of supplying adequate PSU's should be your first priority - unless the next 'issue' in your bag of tricks is 'Customer Safety'?

 

Yes, it's not hard to replicate.

 

One other thing to add regarding the choice of 180w PSU - I think I recall seeing Mr. A say that part of the reason was to cut down on weight and size for portability. Yes, I can see the logic in that, however when you are lugging around a laptop close to 4 kilos (17), a few extra grams and slightly bigger dimensions of a 240w brick are hardly gonna be a deal breaker for anyone. It's as plain as the nose on your face that the decision to ship 180w was based on cost issues and nothing quite so noble as consideration about the added stress and strain on your average gamers back and/or arms!

There is only one solution - ship the darn things with an adequate supply. End of story. No ifs or buts, just do it.......

 

No one is saying we won't if that is the case. Never declined that demand. Just didn't confirm it.

 

You don't understand. PSU is 180W because it's from Dell normal laptops. It's cheaper to have one PSU to both Alienwares and Dells and that's why it's shipped with this adapter. No weight or size is the matter.

 

Yes, I do understand this. Of course, it makes financial sense to use something already in mass production and already available as opposed to a different PSU solely for the Alienware models.

 

Of course but that is what Acer could do. Not Alienware. That's not acceptable when paying so much for product.

 

Some testing done by Mr. Fox seems to indicate that the 180w PSU is, in fact, sufficient. The problem appears to lie in the BIOS itself. In other words, the BIOS is preventing the PSU from supplying enough power. The BISO is throttling the PSU which, in turn, throttles the 980M.

Which makes sense, when you consider the Clevo P650SG with identical specs ships with a 180w PSU and performs just fine.

Shipping a 240w PSU is a band-aid: it doesn't actually address the real issue, which appears to be the BIOS.

 

But that's just it....with this latest generation...you're really not paying 'that' much....

For the specs/build of these laptops they align quite well with the market...these are not the upgradeable mega-buck boxes of old....they maintain some of the look and features, but have been positioned to bridge the gap between mass-market and enthusiast...

Dell (and apparently many/most other laptop manufacturers) are betting on the fact that not EVERY person that plays games is a rabid performance-aholic...

note: I'm not saying these are bargain-basement machines....they still carry a hefty pricetag...but look at the market....and yes...you can get a Clevo/Sager for less....check out the rest of the market with similar specs..

 

So a BIOS update is a necessary step to see if this is true (for others).
Still, I worry about the PSU's health. The 240w PSU wouldn't just serve as a band-aid.

 

In Canada at least, you are correct. A Clevo/ASUS ROG with similar specs costs around the same amount of money. When you factor in the big discounts you can sometimes get from Dell (coupons, etc.) they are actually very competitively priced (in Canada, anyway).

 

I'm just thinking that if the 180w PSU is enough for a Clevo running the exact same hardware...it should be enough for the AW. Clevo is clearly not worried about the PSU's health.

If you're talking about overclocking, then you clearly have a point. The 180w PSU is clearly not enough for O/C on the 980M.

 

Having an Alienware computer that you can't overclock is an oxymoron. Well, it used to be anyways.......

 

It's nearly two times more expensive to buy an Alienware compared to Asus ROG.

 

No it isn't. ASUS ROG G751JT is about $1850. A AW 17 is about $2000 with the same specs.

The difference is a bit greater if you compare the G751JY at $2200, since a comparable AW will cost around $2650.

And that isn't even factoring in the discounts you can negotiate with Dell. There's typically always a $100-$200 coupon out there, a lot of people qualify for a 2% EPP/MPP discount, you get 5% cash back, and you can often negotiate a bit. So it isn't too difficult to get the price of the AW either at, or below, the level of the ROG. You then have a comparable machine with much better warranty/support.

You DID read the part where I mentioned I was comparing prices in Canada right? Hopefully you did, because I mentioned it twice.

 

It's not enough to just fix the bios. Must have a greater power supply than 180w.

 

Only if you plan to overclock. The newer tests seem to show that (much like the Clevo) 180w is enough to power the system at stock once the BIOS stops throttling the PSU.

 

If that's the case for the GTX 980m, then what about the R9 m295x?
Well, actually, none of us can correctly answer that. Only the AW 15 has it on the PC side of things, and none of us have an AW 15, let alone an AW 15 + a 240w PSU + some wattage detector. And there are no 3Dmark benchmarks for it either as far as I have checked (rather not check more).
If it has to be that the only way the AW 15 gets a 240w PSU is because of the m295x, then so be it.

 

Hopefully you thought about my post and realized that I was talking about prices in Poland.

 

Well, it's not like they haven't done multiple PSU's within a model range before. Previously, if you ordered with a 100w rated GPU you got a better (three pipe) heatsink and the larger PSU. It catches out a lot of upgraders that think all they need is a new card!

You'd think that the cost of maintaining two parts on a single model would negate the few extra pennies they pay at bulk prices, but they do their sums so it must be more profitable to mess around with the accessories?

 

And why would I think you were talking about prices in Poland? Nowhere is that written in your post. I personally have no clue who you are or where you live.

I specifically mentioned my price comparison was in Canada. If you wanted to point out that in Poland, prices are twice as much, you need to mention you're talking about Poland.

 

That's what I thought when I read it, too. The alienware here is pretty close to the Asus in terms of price if you haggle a little.

 

If the 900m series can work off of a 180w PSU but the m295x can't, would there be any financial gains in providing a 240w PSU for a GPU that will have very poor sales in comparison to the each of the other GPUs. At least the top end on the previous 17" models were desirable, but the same can't be said for the m295x.
Hypothetical, but it is something to consider.

 

Except the AW 17 R2 can be configured with an i7 4980HQ CPU.

 

My review (comparing both the R1 and R2 AWlienware 17's) on Alienware.com remains removed. There are other reviews without a "verified buyer/owner" certification next to the user, so I don't believe that was the reason for which my review was removed. However, I believe my review was removed because my conclusion said that the R2 is not much of an upgrade to the R1, except for in 3 areas: screen, keyboard, and power button. It was a very objective review with pros and cons of both the R1 and R2. It's cowardice of them to remove it.

You can't hide from the truth. Misleading customers through manipulated benchmarks, videos, and reviews will only cost you money in the long run (returns, etc.). I suggest you listen to the remaining brand-loyal customers you have, and stop ruining the Alienware name.

AW Khan also ignored my post in the AMA thread when he asked us our opinion about the Graphics Amplifier. My response to that: If you truly want honesty, don't ask questions you don't really want the answer to.

 

I think you just have to accept this happens on manufactures sites. They can't shut you up here or in a blog .

I, like a lot of 'educated' buyers, never rely on OEM's published reviews and seek out unbiased opinions . Sucks that you can't speak to the un-informed, but sometimes you have to let people make their own mistakes...

 

Yeah, educated users likely do not. But I write reviews to help the uneducated. I'm also a member of this community to help the same group. I didn't think Alienware had become so much like most other manufacturers - hiding behind manipulated reviews, charts, etc. - boosting sales through manipulation and misleading customers into purchasing their products. That falls within a huge grey area when it comes to the legality of such behaviors and what can be said. I believe even NVIDIA had a dispute with Samsung recently about something like this ( here).

The whole market is full of this crap. Such a shame, really. But hey, business is business - banking off of others stupidity or naiveness.

 

Those media/marketing people that run the contents have their own set of ethics - not a nice bunch of people IMO.

The only hope for better, clearer data is for the GM to jump over it as 'not our ethos'. Since they continually refused my requests to point out the loss of optimus and battery life on the 120hz models I think we know their morals these days . So many support posts asking why optimus was not working, or they only get half the battery life of others. A disgusting sales tactic in my eyes, deception by omission, not what we expect from a premium brand.

 

Alienware doesn't exist for me as their new marketing, manipulation and dissapointing products changed my opinion from very good to neutral (or even worse).

My next computer will surely be Clevo or MSI one. If many poeple from this forum go same way they will think about releasing this kind of **** twice in next year.

Soon I'll make guide how to upgrade M18xR1 from radeon 6990M to GTX 780/880M. Don't know if that's useful to anyone but I'll be happy if someone will use my experiences.

 

Benchmarks aren't manipulated. This is something I guarantee as we'd be in deep trouble for doing that. Like deep, deep, deep getting fined and people losing their jobs trouble. Also, reviews aren't manipulated. Just look at reviewers who GET their units from us. Some reviews are positive and some are really bad. That's all on the reviewer. We aren't tossing money at these people and we definitely aren't showing them in glorious, glorious white Alienhead stickers. And we don't do anything with anyone's videos online. You can even look at the videos I put out on our channel with the Alpha. Some of the settings make the games awesome and some of the settings just show you the most optimal way to play on the product. It's all there and it's all clear. People can feel free to reproduce what I did.

I'm actually actively looking into why your review was removed.

I didn't ignore your post. I wanted people's opinions. I didn't really go to each person and reply to their answers. I wanted to see public opinion on the topic and I'm not shoving your assessment off the table and ignoring it. I didn't invent the Graphics Amplifier. It doesn't hurt my feelings.

 

On Youtube I heard that the Alienware 17 (2015) that came with soldered CPU and GPU was discontinued. Is this correct?

Does the Alienware 17 now come with a standard / upgradebale MXM slot? if so, how do I make sure I'm not getting the old one?

 

The old models - 2013 <> 2014 - are MXM (100% upgradeable). The new models are not.

 

It's crap like this that makes me sick. I'll give you my own experience.

A while back, I was considered 'good enough' to become a Dell Rockstar. Great. Wonderful. I was ecstatic. Really, I was.

I was going through issues at the time with my M18x, and I made them public on this forum. I was told that this would not affect my becoming a "Rockstar" by the guy who runs the programme - If you Google for it, you'll come up with some names, especially if you Google the Rockstar programme......anyway, Dell continued to disregard my issues and I voiced even more so. Consequently, my "invitation" to become a "Rockstar" was withdrawn - obviously as I was deemed no not be an appropriate candidate for such a programme.

I'm sorry, but to be part of that kind of programme requires good and bad experiences, not just glowing "blow smoke up my rear end" kinda talk - my experiences were negative, but I was silenced and not given the opportunity to become a Rockstar because of the bad experience I went through with Dell.

Goes without saying that if they (Dell) censor people like myself in such a fashion, doing so with on line reviews etc would not be a stretch of the imagination. As my Mother once told me....."Don't believe everything your hear, see or read....."

Take what you will from that. I had been a brand advocate and a loyal customer who fell on hard times with a crap machine Dell sold me. What I am getting at here is that I was censored, in a manner I considered to be rather "back-stabbing"........if Dell can do that to me, then they can easily manipulate other things that will suit them best.