*OFFICIAL* Alienware m15 R4 / m17 R4 Owner's Lounge

It really only makes sense to compare stock-stock or OC-OC.

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/52352929?

Anyway, yeah the RTX "3080" mobile is basically a 3070.

 

It was less a comparison against a 3070 & more a showing that all 3000 Series cards drop hard on the 2nd test (percentage wise), and not due to temps. Like a few posts above mine was insinuating. It matching the 3070 was just icing on the cake. Also noting that the temp was 53c while still experiencing a hard drop. All 3000 cards drop in similar fashion desktop or mobile.

I would've compared it to Premas OC scores, but that's kind of useless since his GPU scores haven't been replicated by anyone else (800+ points higher than anyone else). Which is quite a bit in lappy land.

Case in point, the 3080 even while gimped surpasses the unreplicated scores.

Once mine arrives next month I'll do be sure to do a thorough analysis w/ actual gaming benchmarks, OC'ed to the max from 1080p to 4K.

 

That was just the second 3070 score I grabbed from another forum, didn't even run a search. It's from some bobbysix guy, who mentioned his OC settings, like clock +500, mem +1000 or something like that - didn took like an irreproducible OC.

 

Oh no, you misunderstood. I was referencing about the 2080 Super GPU score by Prema, not 3070 desktop. Which has yet to be replicated (800+ points away for the next best 2080 Super notebook score).

 

Mine arrives tomorrow. Happy to test anything you guys want to see. Going to undervolt cpu and oc gpu as high as I can.

 

For those that have received their R4 with a 4K display, what are your thoughts on it? The reason I ask is because I received my Alienware m17 R4 on Feb 15th and ended up returning it. I had the i9, RTX 3080, 32GB version with the 4K display. The main problem I had was the 4K display, the colors were off and it had a yellowish tint to it, almost like you had the blue filter on. My daughter has a 2020 Razer Blade 15 and my son has an ASUS Tuf Gaming laptop. Both of those displays looked way better than the 4K on the Alienware. I compared all 3 laptops side by side with the same pictures, articles, and videos pulled up and the 4K on the Alienware just looked bad. I'm not sure if there was something wrong with my display or what, but I uninstalled/reinstalled drivers and even removed the hard drive, added my own and did a new Win 10 install but nothing improved the display. So I returned it and ordered the m15 R3 during their President's Day sale. I got the i7-10875H, 32GB, RTX 2070 Super, 300Hz display in Lunar Light for $1699 ($1300 cheaper than the m17 R4 I had returned) and hope that display will at least be comparable to my daughter's Razer Blade. I was going to go with the m15 R4 but I couldn't use any coupons on it (which is funny because I was able to use a 10% off coupon on the m17 R4) so that's what led me to the sale page where I found the deal on the m15 R3.

 

On my previous M15R2 i had the samsung Oled panel. It had perfect color accuracy and was great. I can only imagine that it's just as good if not better with the R3 and R4 version.

 

The M17 R3/R4 is not the OLED you find on the M15 versions though. If DaBears92 was comparing the M17 R4 4k non-OLED screen to the Razer 4K OLED screen, that could account for the disappointed comparison. That said, it still sounds like something may have been off because the reviews I read of the M17 R3 4k screen (which I believe is the same as the R4) seemed to be generally positive as far as the picture quality went.

 

Well i understand you are very satisfied with the overclock score of 14K graphic in TimeSpy. I agree it is the best graphic score on a syntétic benchmark so far with this 3080 version of the card.
I understand that Prema score (he's a professionall benchmarker) is out of our league and i agree that my score 12600 vs 13989 is more of a fair comparaison but....stil it's only a 12% improvment but at least it's an improvment and i understand you are excited about this results. I personnally think it's just OK.

Where it hurts is the results in game we have so far. That is the only review i could find of some of the performance in games of the M17R4 : https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/alienware-m17-r4

They have tested the 3080 with the I9 10980HK CPU in games benchmark and when i duplicates their settings with the previous gen Nvidia card, the 2080S gave me better FPS in the 2 test i did today.


I also tested RDR 2 and i average 83.5 FPS as opposed to the 3080 79FPS.

I will be testing Metro Exodus soon.

For sure in some games the 3080 should ouperformed the 2080S but it shouldn't be a discussion. It should beat the previous gen by a big margin in almost every game.
My guess is Dynamic Boost is only effective in Benchmark (i could be wrong).

So yes in benchmark the 3080 is 12% stronger but in games in don't see that. I see the opposite. Temperatures? Dynamic boost? i don't know.

Edit: I edited the good link for the results, https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/alienware-m17-r4

 

sorry i thought he orderered the M15R3 oled. He ordered the M15R3 300Hz.

 

I put in an order today for the M15 R4, i7-10870H, RTX 3080, and 4k OLED. I spent days debating over the panels, but seeing as I really don't play FPS games I don't think I'll be missing much with the 60hz. Besides, even though these are intended to be plugged in for their main purpose, I still find the idea of getting under 2 hours of battery life browsing the web or watching Netflix a bit distasteful as exhibited on the 300hz panel.

Considering that my last gaming notebook has a GTX 680m, it's been a while so this is exciting. Current ETA is 3/2 - 3/5. If it gets here that quickly I'll be pretty impressed.

 

In the past 2 years i had 144Hz g-sync, 300Hz 3Ms and samsung OLED on my previous 15. You have made the right choice in my opinion. The 3080Laptop ,even though it's the most powerfull so far, won't be strong enought to let you play games in 4K at 60FPS minimum but......what i did back then and love it...you can create any resolution you want when gaming. I used to play my games at 2K or 3k most of the times and that was a great compromise.

 

I saw that one awhile back. I would take any review of any gaming laptops with a grain of salt when it comes to numbers. The only people capable of pushing a gaming laptop to get the best numbers out of them are the people actually buying them, knowing exactly how to use and push them. Without having to follow a strict guideline of review. Tomshardware most definitely is not one of them.

Nevertheless, it's only the beginning. Once the lappy gets in more capable hands, I think the discussion ends there to be frank. Would I have liked a 200w of the 3080? Sure. It would've been great to out it up against my shunt modded 3090 just for ****s and giggles

I got a few more weeks til I get mine (w/10980HK). Hopefully it ships on time!

 

I would of loved a 200W version too. The way i see it the M17R4 is going to be the new flagship of alienware and when my 51MR2 breaks beyond repair in the next 2 years, this will be the replacement they will offer me . So i wish it performs much better in games (stock settings) as opposed to Tomshardware results. Can't wait to see real stock results from your benchmark.

 

Yeah, it's too bad they will likely never do a R3 for the 51M. Still a slight chance they might though. If not, I expect them to come out w/ a higher end model above the M15/M17 two years down the line to at least bridge the gap in terms of performance/cooling/size, BGA or not. Or that might just be the reboot of the M17 series. Who knows w/ AW

 

Sad they release a DTR that isnt really upgradeable beyond the model that it is. Then they continue to release these thing and light machines with soldered ram and wifi. I mean seriously for what use to be THE enthusiast brand has become the everyday run of the mill Apple wannabe of gaming computers. My new XPS17 is more upgradeable than these "gaming" laptops. AW has some soul searching to do. Sadly people keep buying the non upgradeable things so i guess if they are making money from the mass not caring about upgrading then why change it. I do miss the good ole days of the true enthusiast power laptops they use to have.

 

Same thoughts, but then I realize we've reached a point where you can cram a 3090 into a Dan A4 w/ a 5950x on a 645LT, hook up a type c portable monitor, call it a day & have it run laps around a full blown enthusiast laptop. Which was something never dreamed possible back in the day. You win some, you lose some as trends move.

 

Probably my post you refer to.... http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...r4-owners-lounge.835058/page-20#post-11078778

If you read within the numbers you can see your higher FPS from test 1 dropped significant for graphics test 2. Not the same for 2080 Super due it run at lower temp. The drop would be more with hotter card. You know Nvidias boost clocks start drop for each 5C degrees steps below 40C ? Yeah, the scores from 1 to 2 will drop more for 3000 series. How much the FPS will drop will depends on the temp increase from test 1 over into test 2. The colder you can keep the card running the better. Have been like this since Pascal.


Edit.
Put it the other way. 3080 should be stronger on paper both for graphics test 1 and 2. But a colder running 2080 card can eat off some of the disadvantage if it can run a lot colder. Higher temp would do the opposite and yeah, the 3080 would won test 2. The way it should have been.

 

Thanks. Very informative. Didn't know those details, i mean i knew temps was important but didn't know the 40C target
So i guess that's why sometimes i see some pro-overclockers (like you ) benching and having a 40C average temp on TimeSpy. Cooling the GPU at/or below 40C would be the ideal target for Nvidia GPU's.

 

Here is some more info for the topic... http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...unge-phoenix-3-0.800081/page-65#post-10476824

Edit... See also
The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3000 series also has a Hotspot...

 

Thanks again. I am amaze how fast you can find and share reference ,
Great now let's get smarter and read this.

 

It's awful how the boost algorithm works for newer nvidia graphics. It should only throttle down boost clocks in same way as etc Intel processors when it reach TJUNCTION. But I expect its a nice tool to help on RMA costs, as well steal some performance from the users to push them over on new before time. Just sad.

 

Yes it makes a lot of sense. So they don't only cripple performance by removing dynamic boost but as soon as temps are above 40C they reduce clock speed progressively. Nice to know. So do we know for sure what are those decrease values or we user have to guess?

 

Heh heh, I've been OC'ing for longer than some of you were born . Regardless...

What you're seeing is power throttling, and if you had a 3000 series card, you'd know this. It's not apples to apples w/ Nvidia's previous cards (9 series & up). All 3000 series cards show similar dropped bins, regardless of temps. On average, the 2000 series is much more likely to drop bins due to temp than power, which is the exact opposite of the 3000 series. This is pretty well known in the OC community. And in general, the 3000 series will show higher gains in the 1st test than the 2nd test (which includes much larger drops) vs 2000 series, percentage wise.

Take any score off the 3000 series Timespy test, (air, chilled, wc'ed etc etc) and this'll prove my point. 99.9% of them show similar drops on the 2nd test, again, regardless of temps. They are power limited before being temp limited, due to how hard they drop and simply the architecture changes in conjection w/ how much power the 2nd test pulls than the first test.

I can tell you first hand it's not an apples to apples comparison when it comes to overclocking the 3000 series in comparison to the 2000 series. Will bins drop? Absolutely. Is it the prime reason for the percentage drop in the score from the first test temps? Absolutely not.

Care to explain the dropped bins for the cards below or any 3000 card really on 3Dmarks website, as all show similar drops percentage wise from the first test, regardless of temp. You can't have it both ways.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/14869884

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/18511575

As I said in my previous posts, what you're saying used to hold true. Not anymore w/ the 3000 series. These are extremely power hungry cards.

Edit: I don't like coming off as a know it all. It's just I've had enough experience along w/ many others in regards to the 3000 series on overclock.net etc to know. As I said before, it's too bad we won't get a 200w 3080 so it can stretch it's legs a bit more.

 

One of the card stands out. Both for boost, results and temp.


All I say is, the cards will drop boost as it will run hotter. Better cooling is equal better performance.

 

Well it's pretty clear you didn't read my post fully

Why not add the other benchmark 3080 laptop bench I posted? He boosted lower...with colder temps. He's power limited. From the same guy.

https://www.3dmark.com/spy/18511575

Also, that 5900hx laptop is vbios limited w/ no mux switch. Now what about the other link w/ the 3090's? And what about the drop in relation to the first test? All similar drops/scores percentage wise, regardless of temp.

Like I said, all 3000 series cards experience hard drops in the 2nd test due to power than temp. Will you lose some bins due to temps? Of course. But it's power limited more so than ever, especially when it comes to the 1% lows.

Edit: Nvm, I see you did add it! On my phone . But doesn't really help your point.

Edit 2: And I know that's what you're saying. I'm saying, the drops are bigger due to power limits more so than temp vs 2000 series, on the 2nd test. That's why no matter what 3000 benchmark link you choose, all will have similar drops on the 2nd test, while the 2000 will show less of a drop off on the 2nd test than the first test as it's more temp related vs power related. Along with the architecture changes of the 3000 series, where it gains more in the first test than 2nd test in general, regardless of temp or even power vs 2000 series. That's all I've been trying to communicate since your original comment.

"This show it crystal clear. Once the GPU test 1 is done, the second graphics test will colapse. Expect same behaviour in games as well."

 

Desktop Ampere cards are power limited? They don't use Max-Q technologies including Dynamic Boost in desktop cards. Strictly speaking there are no Ampere laptop cards on the market, since the new Clevo X170 is not out yet.

 

Yes, specifically in the 2nd test. It hits the vbios limit much quicker in that test than the 1st on a curve in terms of power limit vs temps on all desktop 3000 cards. All well known. These cards while they run cooler on average than the 2000 series, they are starving for power, much more so than the 2000 series ever was. GPU boost will stall due to power limits before temps ever become the *main cuplit*. I've got nearly 500 watts pushing through my shunt modded 3090 to take full advantage of it. Even then it still drops on the 2nd test, due to architecture differences, percentage wise. More so percentage wise then compared to what the 2000 series gets on the 1st test & then on the 2nd test. Once they tap TMSC for the 7nm refresh, I'm sure changes will come back to normalcy & temps will be more of a factor than artificial limits on power via bios (and/or architecture). Or perhaps a driver update will better take advantage of the 2nd test.

Edit: You do realize the X170 will be using the 165w 3080, right? You will see a similar drop on that system as well percentage wise on the 2nd test, regardless of temps. Scores will be slightly higher due to desktop CPU's in regards to the GPU score overall, but the hard fps drop on the 2nd test will remain. Bank on it. And I'm unsure what you mean they aren't Ampere cards? They are all based on the same architecture. Albiet, different SM and cuda core counts along w/ even worse vbios limits than the desktop versions.

And when I talk about the Ampere architecture in general performing worse than Turing on the 2nd test, when compared percentage wise on the drops from the 1st to 2nd test to the 2000 series. Look no further. Some top scores for the 3000 series. Temps look great etc

3060 TI- 40c
Drop from first test: 15.6%
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/16054727

3070- 36c
Drop from first test: 15.2%
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/17612119

3080- 39c
Drop from first test: 14.6%
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/18228743

3090- 14c
Drop from first test: 14.5%
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/18352561

3080 (notebook)- 53c
Drop from first test: 15.4%
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/17271051


2080 Super- 26c
Drop from first test: 7.3%
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/18065861

2080 ti- 19c
Drop from first test: 8%
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/17271051

2080 super (notebook)- 58c
Drop from first test: 9.5%
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/18421309

 

Sorry, could you clarify how single run scores like the one you posted prove performance drops between runs? I just see single run scores. Even if we did see two results and some slowdowns, we wouldn't be able to tell if this is due to thermal throttling (which is real, particularly on an overclocked 3090) or something else, would we?

Anyway, stepping back, it is still not obvious by what mechanism would a standard Ampere desktop card power throttle on a second run. The fact that these cards can be shunt modded to use more power is obviously irrelevant.

Yes, I realize X170 uses the mobile chip... still, it will have the only Ampere mobile card on the market - everything else out there is soldered, although AW takes the infamous Golden Solder prize by also making RAM and WiFi non-upgradable on their new flagship.

 

Soldiered or not, it's unfortunately a gimped card w/ no pathway to a realistic upgrade (at a price actually worth it). No matter what notebook you choose. Options are great, if they are logical in the long run.

Wait a sec? Was it not an earlier post that was using a single score run to prove you can expect major thermal throttling in games? You guys can't have it both ways. Want me to gather some high temps score as well? Showing similar differences? I mean I could do this all day

I've shown all the proof that is needed, based on the original comment which used the same premise of a single run. When it comes to the 3000 series, desktop or laptop, you don't base in-game performance off the 2nd test & compare it to the 2000 series, it's not an apples to apples comparison. There's obvious differences which I've gone over countless times. Simple as that. Understandably, it's harder for some to comprehend when most people still can't get their hands on a 3000 series GPU.

Nevertheless, It definitely looks like I ruffled some feathers here, if anything. So I'll be sure to tune in once that X170 w/ 3080 launches next month

 

Calm down, no need to address me in plural - I'm a single genuinely curious person. The key (still unanswered) question has been regarding the mechanism of the purported power throttling in Ampere desktop cards on subsequent runs (for mobile chips it's clear: Dynamic Boost could turn off). For now my understanding remains that no such throttling actually takes place in desktop cards, or at least no obvious mechanism for it exists.

 

Might have to pick one of the m17 r4's with the 4k screen and the 3080 once the comet lake refresh happens. Seems to be one of the better built and performing 3000 series laptops from what I've seen so far. I love my desktop, but I'm not home often due to work. Also not happy with my m15 r2 performance or battery life and I wouldn't mind a bigger machine as my needs have changed.

 

I might be sending mine back. Just got it today and it has a stuck pixel near center of screen. It is very disappointing for a 3500 dollar machine. What are the groups thoughts?

 

Unfortunately, we have seen similar reports. @jpowell490 received 2 machines with dead pixels in a row. If it's just the screen, Dell can probably replace it for you onsite. I would return just because of the soldered RAM and WiFI.

 

Ugh, is this the OLED on the M15 R4?

 

Am I absolutely crazy here or is something seriously wrong with this gen of screens. Still using 4K 60hz screens, now with 25ms response time (what?), or an FHD 360hz with 5ms response time. 15" with an OLED seems the "best" buy but it's 60hz. Razer even has a 4K/120 screen out already on their models. I want something nice with a 3080, 11th gen doesn't matter too much to me but these screens just seem ridiculously underspec'd in relation to what you are buying.

 

I'm assuming you'd wait for the Tiger Lake refresh in a couple months, pci-e 4.0 does give a boost to SSD's and a mild uptick for 3xxx gpu's. GPU impact is small but given 3xxx performance probably we could use every %.

 

4K 120's were available as of Q4 2019. If they aren't gimped for some reason, it would be nice if more vendors used them. Particularly now that the XE gpu's in Tiger Lake should support the refresh rates (pretty sure on that).

 

I meant tiger lake. Can't keep all the lakes together these days. Hoping they update some other things as well like the panel options, but we shall see.

 

I have my RMA, Loving the machine otherwise though. Scored 13442 in last 3dmark Timespy run with over 10k cpu score. Looks like this one undervolts about 150mv on the cpu and core +130 memory +1000 on GPU. Screen only has one small area of backlight bleed on the right bottom corner. It is miniscule. Shame for the dead pixel as i think this one would be a keeper otherwise.

 

There’s a new VBIOS available to download on the support site. No changes in performance due to it.
Can anyone check if resizable bar is supported on their nvidia control panel? Not sure if it was yes or no before, but it’s yes now

 

The above is correct. Just checked your new vBIOS and this system uses the 165W 3080 and 140W version for both the 3060 & 3070.

Edit: My bad, I was confusing a secondary/alternative 3080 140W vBIOS in the package for the 3060.
Contrary to the readme there apparently is no 3060 vBIOS contained in the updater.

 

Backlight bleed are normal for IPS panel. Inexistant in OLED and TN panel. Too bad for dead pixel. My 300HZ display has a red stock pixel. Seems common to have issue with pixel with higher refresh rates panel.

 

Does both your numbers include a 15W dynamic boost?

 

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-...0HX-APU-and-RTX-3070-mobile-GPU.524301.0.html
Oh, so Alienware + Ryzen may be a thing. However, just assume it'll be just like the m15 R4 without thunderbolt. At least then the AGA makes sense for an eGPU route (even if it's EOL).

 

I appreciate the dialogue. I know it is a lottery swapping one for another. It had very minimal backlight bleed. I was actually pretty impressed with the screen other than the pixel. If the next one comes and is worse or has a pixel or two dead, I guess I will have to live with it. I was extremely pleased with the results otherwise. I have owned 4-5 alienware laptops over the years. The QC has definitely gone down. I was actually around when Mr Fox was helping us all with our SLI systems. lol

 

We'll see what compromises are made to house Ryzen and what 11th gen intel looks like. According to the rumor, only 3060 and 3070 were listed with ryzen. Would suck if 3080 systems are Intel exclusive. Give me a choice!!!

 

Boost, yeah good one NVIDIA.

Let's call it what it is >>> throttle.

All 3 vBIOS use a 15W lower fallback throttle value, if the EC and/or driver signal that they are no longer "happy" with the power limit.

3080 drops from 165W to 150W
3070 drops from 140W to 125W

 

Thanks a lot. Exactly how i see it. Dynamic Throttling boost. But i really like the way you present it. It's so much clearer this way.

 

It would appear that Bar support exists on the R4's at least.
AW m17 R4 Resizeable BAR supported : Alienware (reddit.com)