*OFFICIAL* Alienware 17 R4 Owner's Lounge

could be a bad hdd. do things stutter a bit when it clicks?

 

Did a small mini review. After a few days the 1440p scanlines don't bother so much. I also calibrated the monitor a bit through nvidia control panel. Will do a longer better review if people request it enough.

 

Nice, did you enjoy gaming with 120Hz/g-sync? I heard that during gaming the banding problem is not so obvious. Is your replacement with the same panel?

 

Does anybody know a nice sleeve for the 17inch? (other than the original)

 

nvidia hotfix

Win 10
64bit

http://international.download.nvidi...top-notebook-win10-64bit-international.hf.exe

32bit

http://international.download.nvidi...top-notebook-win10-32bit-international.hf.exe

P.s its for artifacting flickering my bad

 

http://www.techspot.com/news/66910-psa-nvidia-37576-hotfix-drivers-address-two-annoying.html

says it fixes flickering im not sure if its the same thing.

 

maybe votum can confirm if the fix makes a difference

 

New owner of a 17 R4 here. Trying to pick a M.2 ssd for my system, does anyone know the specs of the three M.2 slots (pci-e Gen 3 4lanes, etc)

 

Hi Dainger,

the new generation, there are actually two ports that run at 4x and a third port that runs at 2x.

Solid-state drive (SSD)

• Two full-size M.2 PCIe gen3 x4/SATA drives
• One half-size M.2 PCIe gen3 x2/SATA drive

 

The flickering issue is not the banding issue. Two totally different issues.

 

heard that the 1080p display is overclockable up to 100hz. Is the panel the same on both options? 1080p with and without eyetracker?

 

If 1080p gaming was your first priority (AW17R4/1070), how would you classify the available panel options after everything we know so far?

1) 1080p IPS 60Hz (overclockable to 100Hz?)
2) QHD TN/120hz/gsync downscaled to 1080p
3) 4K 60Hz downscaled to 1080p

 

Option 1!

 

Indeed, my IPS panel does 100hz nicely and it makes a huge difference in game play (like any 100+ hz monitor does).

And though I haven't verified officially, I would guess the panel is exactly the same on the 1080p model, whether you get Tobii or not ... same LG panel I'm sure (just call HIDEvolution and ask them, they are real good with such questions).

RE: Tobii, though? I find it sort of annoying and will be trying to find some way to turn it off ... novel but annoying.

 

I ordered mine yesterday. I7 6820hk, 1070, 16gb Ram, 1080p without tobii. I will not use it and the panel looks cleaner without it. Hope my screen runs 100hz or at least 90hz too. Bf1 would be nice on this ips with 100hz.

 

I wish they offered an IPS-G-sync option

 

I think the 1070 at 1080p is powerfull enough to stay above 60 Fps and then we can use fastsync. This should help against tearing

 

Hi, I just got AW 17 yesterday and my laptop have a light bleed on 1080p IPS panel. Do this Problem common and should I a replacement.

 

This late 2016 alienware panel-gate is a real nightmare

 

If it bothers you? Then absolutely ... make Dell give you a new machine ...

1080p IPS panels without any light bleed are out there ... I know because my AW 17 has a perfect IPS panel ... the fact that such perfect panels are out there gives you every reason to exchange/replace and gives Dell no right to deny you said exchange.

RE: Tobii ... totally wish I'd ordered without it too ... I find it idiotic.

 

I love G Sync too ...

I have a Acer XB270HU 1440p 144hz G Sync monitor that I've used on my desktop for over a year and the G Sync (my first encounter with it) feature just blows me away. I get the most satisfaction from it at sub 70fps scenarios, though ... makes the frame rate fluctuations and especially playing at what I consider low FPS, far more enjoyable ... super smooth, no tearing, and none of the lag I hate so much about V Sync at low FPS (V Sync doesn't bother me at all at 100FPS+ as the lag is almost unnoticeable).

I will say this, though ... were I a *serious*, "twitch" game guy? I'd go with the 1440p AW 17 option without question ...

But playing at 100+ HZ ... even on a Non G Sync panel is pretty much just as enjoyable to me ... anything over 100hz, even just using standard V Sync, still gives me that "oh so smooth and buttery" sensation and so I'm completely stoked on the AW 17 IPS screen overclocked to 100hz. The smoothness, combined with the ridiculous color saturation and brightness make playing games like Witcher 3 and Crysis 3 freakishly gorgeous ... so much so that I've not really been playing any games on the AW 17 in so much as I've just been cruising around in game, *looking* at everything ... LOL ...

BTW: I'm thinking most of these LG panels will do 100hz just fine as I'm the second person to report success with that...

Best of luck ... I know about the whole panel lottery thing, trust me ... sucks ass ... played that lotto game with my Acer XB270HU ... took me two returns before I got a Unicorn(tm) ...

...

 

I heard that the 4K IPS panel is not overclockable like the 1080p one, is this confirmed?

 

Wow man ...

I was so in the dark about Fast Sync. Had no clue about that. Just enabled it via Nvidia Inspector and disabled V Sync in Witcher 3 ... and on the 100hz clocked AW 1080p IPS screen? Lordy how much better than vanilla V Sync that is!~ I can't really believe it. V Sync looks/feels great ... but the lag is noticeable ... with Fast Sync, no tearing and best of all ... ZERO lag. Just as twitchy fast as playing non V Sync. Switching back and forth between my (non G sync) Asus 144hz 1080p desktop panel and my AW 17 100HZ IPS? I can see/feel no real difference other than the slightly noticeable response time difference between the Asus TN and the AW IPS (and the ridiculously better colors of the AW IPS ;-) ) ...

Thanks again for that tip ... stock GTX1070 on the AW 17 keeps me at about 85 to 110FPS at all times in Witcher 3 (Ultra/no HairWorks) and Fast Sync looks/feels no different than G Sync at those frame rates ... hot damn.

 

Personally I give up on Alienware this time around. I've had 3 17 R4's so far and all have had some sort of light bleed. They are made so cheap. You run your finger along the bezel and you can manipulate the light bleed. It's definitely pressure related as others have said. The screen is put together so cheaply with the big plastic bezel and strip of glue tape. I actually took the panel off and with no pressure of being mounted the light bleed was minimal. Once I put it back in, it bleeds because the panel is actually bending a bunch in the housing. There are two foam pads near the bottom middle that actually put pressure on the middle bottom of the panel. This causes the panel to bow out a bit when screwed down, which is causing some of the bleeding along the bottom. I bet if I took those foam pads out things would be better, but I'm not even messing with it.

The 13" model with a touch screen would probably be better as it will have a glass panel in front that will help hold things square. My XPS 15 has no light bleed. My XPS 11 has no light bleed. Many other Dell/Alienware notebooks I've had have not had light bleed, yet all 17 R4's I've got from Best Buy had some amount of light bleed due to the poor construction of the housing holding the panel.

Dell/Alienwere, you really screwed up again.

Oh and yes people will say they have no light bleed. And I might believe it. But run your finger along the edge of the panels and tell me if you see light bleed. You will. Which tells me you just got lucky and that your panel is somehow in there with no pressure being applied anywhere to cause the bleeding. You got lucky. I would say consider yourself part of the minority. Either you truly have no light bleed or are just not sensitive enough to see it or care about it.

Good luck everyone on the display/light bleed lottery! You're going to need it unfortunately.

 

I'm super sensitive to light bleed ... visual designer, etc. ... as well as having a truly clinical case of OCD when it comes to tech... as mentioned, I returned my Acer 1440p G Sync desktop monitor twice before finally getting a perfect one third time around ... so I feel your pain, man.

In fact, I got so OCD'd out that my recent HIDEvolution AW 17 custom order was going to have an imperfect IPS panel that I just yesterday canceled my order in favor of keeping the Best Buy unit I'm currently typing on ... just because the screen is so nice ...

It only cost me about 1900 US with taxes (f'ing taxes!) ... so I've got quite a bit of budget to spare for parts orders ... SSD's, extended warranty, etc.

Funny story?

My HIDEvolution AW 17 order that I recently canceled totaled out to about $3150 ... 1TB m.2 RAID 0 boot array, 1TB Mech drive, 16gb ram, 2 USB ports (wtf AW?) ... 3 year warranty and otherwise base unit specs for screen, etc ...

And on my lunch break today, I went to my local MicroCenter to check out an MSI GT73VR that they have on sale for $2999 ... 512gb m.2 Boot Drive, 1TB Mech drive, 32gb RAM, 120hz G Sync 1080p panel (which looked super nice, BTW) *and* a GTX 1080 ... along with MSI's 2 year standard warranty ... oh yeah ... *and* 5 USB ports ... (much much easier to service/repaste/etc. as well) ...

But I'm still sticking with the AW 17 ... the new MSI's just come across as so garish and toy like ... gaudy red chrome and what not ... ugg ... the things an eye sore and just feels "plastic" and rickety in comparison to the AW ...

So folks having issues with bleed or not? I completely disagree with the claim that these new AW's are built "cheap" ... much to the contrary ... hands down the most solid, well built laptop I've ever encountered ...

But dango man ... only *2* USB ports ... LOL ... I have a 10 year old Sony Vaio with 4 ... but ... something I can work around.

...

(and every monitor I own ... TN/IPS or otherwise .. will show visible bleed when pressure is applied to any external area of the bezel ... nothing exceptional about the AW 17 in this regard at all; this is not to make light of your frustration or angst, though ... because I completely know how that goes)

;-)

 

You can always get a converter or a new cable for the c type usb connection. But ya i agree, ive had to send multiple ips desktop monitors back for light bleed before getting a good one. Seems to be an issue with the mounting in most cases, ive seen guides where people use some shims to greatly reduce or totally remove the bleed. Im not sure how viable that is with this laptop however, and i understand peoples frustration spending a huge amount of money for a premium product, to have it blemished.

 

Any recommendations on the best (cheapest and highest performing) m.2 512gb drives to install in RAID 0 as my main boot drive? I'll be replacing the stock 128gb m.2 boot drive with these two new drives but am sort of clueless about the new m.2 techs ... I'm still feeling like good old SATA3 SSD's are plenty fast ... LOL ...

Was thinking about a couple Samsung 950 Pros or EVO's ... but don't know if I might be better off with something cheaper that runs just as good ...

??

 

Wait the Samsung 960 pro will be out very soon.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10754/samsung-960-pro-ssd-review

 

Just saw that on Amazon ... it's available for pre order and releases on Nov 6 ...

I think I'm just going to go with that 960PRO as a single 1TB boot drive ...

Thanks for the tip ...

 

Ya they are really fast, and should be priced pretty close to the 950, the other thing is though you might be able to pick up some cheap 950s on black friday now that the 960 is out.

 

First, I want to apologize for my english. I will buy an AW17 in the next 2 week and I want to know how it's gaming with the 4K screen and gtx 1070. Is the games nicer than with 1080p screen or not for exemple. Thanks.

 

Ben3731, you speak Spanish?

 

no french, why ?

but i speak a little spanish

 

because I speak English (so so) and Spanish. What do you know about the 4k screen?

 

I want to know if it's better gaming on 4K or on 1080p. The gtx1070 can run actual games in 4K so these games are they more beautiful on a 4K 17 screen than on a fhd 17 screen or it is nearly the same ?

 

you wont be running most games at max setting with 60 fps on 4k. maybe 30-60 fps for some games, and like 20 fps for the really demanding ones. example gears 4 at max 4k will be like 30-40 fps. witcher 3 however would be sub 20 fps or so I believe.

you can just play them at 1080p on 4k, but then people would question whats the point of 4k then. I like 4k because I will get use out of it for work and non-gaming situations. which will honestly be like 90% of my time spent on this notebook anyways.

1080p on 4k is also not the same as 1080p on native 1080p. some say it's blurrier because its rounded pixels vs squared or something, but it's not noticeable unless you are 2 inches from the screen.

 

I'm no expert in games. but I think it's the same. in a 4k screen, you can run games in the same resolution that you play in a FHD screen. if I had to choose a screen only for games, I choose QHD screen.
I choose 4k screen, because not only use for games.

 

Thanks. First I would choose QHD, but it seems there is white lines' problem. And I'm not only playing games, but I think it's 4k screen is not better for movies than FHD on a 17 laptop.

And what about playing 1440p on 4k screen ?

 

The 7337 gaming click will tell you that playing 1080p on a 4K screen is far inferior due to the necessary downscaling involved... and I'd somewhat agree with them ... anytime you can play (or otherwise view anything else) at a "native resolution" ... technically, it will look superior than a downscaled interpretation of the same image ... sharper, better textures, etc ...

The same is true with my 4K television ... cable, blu rays .. any standard 1080p content, simply does not look as sharp, clear and "perfect" as when viewed on a quality 1080p television. It's just a fact of monitors/tvs having to re sample the material .. it introduces artifacts, noticeably blurry edges, etc. when compared to viewing the same content on a native res device. It doesn't bother me a bit when it comes to TV's ... but if it's something I work and play on? All day long? I only want content and work space to be rendered as it was intended to be rendered.

I've played at 1080p on my 1440p desktop screen and it's totally enjoyable. Knowing what the content looks like at native res though? It gets bothersome because I know how much better native looks...

 

if you choose fhd or QHD, you will have a problem when you want to play 4k movies or anything 4k.

It is the reason why changes my 17r3 FHD by 17r4 UHD.

 

Spot on I agree just sold my 4K 17r3 and a friend has the 1080p screen and when gaming it looks much better I wish i had got the 1080 screen now.

I've gone QHD this time but after reading it may we'll be getting returned.

Mind you I've found 4K on medium settings looks way better than 1080 on ultra.

So the 4K may be viable with the 1070 ....... depends how hung up on ultra u are

 

I wonder what panel options they will offer with the 1080 AW17R4, maybe only the 4K one

 

I have connected an Graphics Amplifier with a graphics card Gigabyte 1080 G1 Gaming and LG Oled Tv 65 inches and looks perfect in 4k.

 

This isn't necessarily true ... as with downscaling 4K content to a 1080p device, you will still not be seeing the content as it was meant to be rendered ... but in my experience, viewing 4K content on a 1080p monitor looks *far* and away better than viewing 1080p content on a 4K monitor (might have to read that last bit a few times depending on if your drinking or not ... LOL ... )

For instance, especially if you have a high quality 1080p IPS screen (or any other PC screen that produces rich colors and contrast) ... check out this 4K Youtube video ... it looks stunning on a good 1080p screen, even though there is resampling involved (much better than any 1080p youtube content I've ever seen):

...



...

If that same video was recorded in 1080p res and then displayed on a nice 4K monitor? It would look horrible compared to the same content shot at 4K and then downscaled to 1080p.

It's all about the data captured at the instance of shooting.

Content shot at proper 4K resolution simply has 4x the data to work with when resampling down to a standard 1080p device, therefore, it still looks brilliant. Content shot at 1080p, however ... has far less data to work with ... and a 4K screen wants tons of data to work with ... and so when you render 1080p content *UP* to a 4K device? It suffers way worse than the other way around ...

But it's all about personal preference...

...

Oh yeah! Here is a good read regarding this very same topic over at ARSTechnica (note the comment in the first two or three posts about having "much more source content" to work with when going from 4K down to 1080p ... that's *exactly* what I was trying to get at with the above):

http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?t=1295115

...

enjoy your gear!

.j

 

I think it's a matter of taste. LG Oled 4K upscaling/downscaling or MPC-HC with madvr works very well for me. Look at screenshots of upscaling 1080 to 4k on my Alienware 17R4 UHD. I think it does very well.

 

I agree. Personal preference all the way ... and those shots look great, BTW ...

 

Finally we agree.
Now, there are tvs that do an excellent job of upscaling, like LG Oled Tv.

 

upscaling =/=downscaling though. Upscaling can look decent, downscaling will always look worse at non-native res. If you turn your 1440p laptop to 1080 the second you get it an never use 1440 it won't be bothersome, but likeSirrah said, native res is always going to look better, and its not a thing regular people won't notice.

 

But isn't downscaling to 1080p from 4k a different story? It seems to me that it should look exactly the same on either screen since 1080p goes into 4k evenly (twice as many pixels each direction). Shouldn't it just be using 4 pixels (2x2) on the 4k screen for every 1 pixel it would use on the 1080p screen?