Confused!!!!

Hi there, I'm currently researching the Studio XPS 16 and obviously have come across some of the issues which are attached to the system. Can someone please explain these issues in more depth; also, are there ways of avoiding them. And if possible; general feedback regarding anything and everything from an owner whose laptop is reasonably new.

As a conclusion, can you please state whether or not it is worth getting this system or any recommendations on other systems for multimedia, editing and medium gaming.

Thankyou so much.

P.S. If it helps, i am from Australia.

 

I am from Australia too and have been researching this laptop for some time (mainly sourcing info from this forum).

What you basically need to be aware of ... there are two systems; the 1647 and the 1645. The former is the dual core CPU configuration, the latter the quad core (i.e. basically the Intel i7 range of CPUs barring the i7-620M).

And it is the quad core configurations which seem to suffer the 'majority' of throttling issues. When the CPU and GPU are under stress (i.e. operating near their upper boundaries), the computer throttles things back; resulting in some rather negative side effects (others would be in a better position to explain). The dual core also suffers from a similar problem but it is far less frequent. Surprisingly Dell still ofers the smaller 90W AC adapter with the dual core system. Basically I see this as a plus. Buy the dual core, ring up Dell and complain of a hot power supply and they may send you the 130W power adapter for free.

To overcome; for the 1645 systems, Dell has released a number of BIOS updates and has increased the size of the power supply from the normal 90W to 130W in the hopes of overcoming this 'throttling' issue.

Please note that the design of the XPS does not help matters. In opening the lid, the lower part of the screen blocks the vents. Just thought I would throw this in ...

I believe you can avoid these throttling and heat issues by selecting the lower power dual core systems and selecting the ATI Radeon 5730 GPU but Dell of late seems to like screwing with me by not offering me the config options I want.

Others have resorted to more creative means ...

 

So if the i7 might be one of the factors in these issues, will an i5 be enough to handle multimedia, Photoshop, animations and medium gaming?

Thanks

 

I can't speak about the "medium gaming" because I don't do any gaming, but, for the other applications you mention, the i7 processors should have no problems whatever. I am a photographer, and I've used my 1645 i7 720 for some pretty heavy photo applications, things like raw conversions, stitching 4-5 large Tiff files together, etc. For those kinds of things, there really isn't the kind of stress that is likely to cause throttling because the computer's resources are not being stressed for extended and continuous periods of time. For those kinds of applications, my processor temperatures rarely go any higher than 45-50 degrees, and my GPU temperature is rarely any higher than about 50-55 degrees, and I only have the older 4670 graphics card. Those temperatures are not even close to the threshold that would lead to throttling.


When I use my 1645 for photo applications, I can see that it doesn't perform quite as well as my custom-built i7 desktop, but the differences are, practically speaking, not very large. Similarly, there have been no issues whatever with multimedia applications. For photo applications, with either a 1645 or 1647, I'd suggest that the best thing you can do to help your system to perform is to max out the RAM so that you don't end up going to the scratch disc. (This assumes that you are using Photoshop CS4 or CS5 because earlier versions of PS can't use more than 3 GB of RAM.)

 

The i5 would handle it. If you can, upgrade to i7 620M. IMO its worth it.

 

The throttling was due to the combination of the quad-cores AND the old ATI 4670. The quad-core 1645's that come with the new ATI 5730 graphics card don't have nearly as much throttling problems.

The dual-core 1647s also had throttling problems, when they had both the 4670 AND the RGBLED monitor, and the RGBLED was discontinued for this reason.

The problems are because the quad-cores, 4670s, and RGBLEDs consume more power and produce more heat than the dual-cores, 5730s, and WLED displays. As long as you don't have more than 1 of (quad-core, 4670, RGBLED), you should be just fine.

I do medium gaming on mine, and have not had any throttling or excessive heat problems.

 

I have one of the most power hungry configs and i experience no throttling at all. I play Starcraft 2 for 5 - 6 hours at a time and my temps never pass 78c for cpu and 79c for gpu. My system runs beautifully

 

Even outside of these forums, a number of 'experts' have advised that the dual cores are the way to go with laptops for the time being. Until they can get the quad core power down (so move to the 32nm die), get the clock speed up and they become more reasonably priced, the dual cores are generally the great all rounder.

The i7-620 and i7-640 are the fastest dual cores around. As parthg advised, pay the extra for the i7-620M.

All this said, the i7-620 has recently been dropped from the Australian website as a configurable option on the Dell XPS 16's. You can only get the i5's ... and they are more expensive. Go figure!

If you dont think you will be pushing the laptop, the i7-740 configuration should be fine. You can get a pretty decent system for AU$2000 and if you have the right e-coupon voucher, you can get a further 10% off.

 

I think that what people are advising/recommending depends entirely on who is doing the advising and what applications those people are using. From those who use applications that can make use of 4 cores or who are frequently running multiple applications simultaneously, I'd guess that you are going to get strong recommendations for the quad cores, and from those who are not doing so, I'm confident that you will get similarly strong recommendations for the dual cores. I know that my current Studio XPS 1645 and my current i7 desktop are the first two quad core processor computers I've had, and I will not ever go back to a dual core processor. My 1645 is frequently running with 3 (or 4) cores being used and with clock speeds in the 2.4-2.53 range. With 1 or 2 cores running, it is regularly hitting 2.66 and (very) occasionally the 2.8 Turbo Boost limit. Even when it is running at lower clock speeds with 3 or 4 cores working, I'm still getting more computing power than I would be getting with 2 cores and a higher clock speed. In a laptop and with today's technology, I can't ask for more.

 

I would agree that the 620 will be faster than the 720 under most circumstances. However, where the 620 is slightly faster than the 720 running 1-2 threads, the 720 is a lot faster than the 620 when running 4 or more. People that use do a lot of multimedia editing/encoding or multitasking will see benefits when using a quad core. Also, now that multi-core CPUs have become standard, new programs that come out will begin to take advantage of the 8 threads available with the 720, making it more futureproof (or at least as futureproof as any computer component can be).

 

I think that is a very important point. Just as dual core processors became the norm and single core processors became the exception 3 or 4 years ago, quad core processors will become the norm in the relatively near future, and, as that happens, more and more applications will be developed to take advantage of 4 cores. As that happens, the advantages that the quad core processors have now over the dual core processors will become greater. For me, I'm looking forward to my next computer replacements being ones with 6 core processors, and, as I said earlier, I know that I won't ever be going back to a dual core processor.

 

hey, thanks for the input. Another question; does the nine cell make any difference? I've heard both positives and negatives to this...

also; whats the difference between ATI HD 565v and ATI HD 5730. And is it worth it to pay $100 to upgrade to the 5730?

thanks

 

Definately get the HD5730. Lower power and better specc'd GPU.

And if it were me, I would be getting the 9 cell but I am all about battery life. But this battery will prop up the laptop by about 1 inch when sitting on a table. This is both a good and bad thing. Good in that it gives the air a bit of circulation underneath the laptop; aiding in cooling. Bad in the fact that its uncomfortable on your lap.

 

The 565v is the exact same thing as the 4670, ATI just changed the name so they could continue selling it with the 5xxx series chips. The upgrade to a 5730 is 100% worth it. The 5730 is 20% faster (in terms of GFLOPS), and consumes 9W less power, produces less heat, and has DX11. It is also mush less likely to have throttling issues than the 565v or 4670 or whatever they decide to name it next week.

As far as the 9 cell goes, I never really use mine on battery power for more than an hour at a time, so I can't really help you with battery life estimates, though based on other's comments, you'll get around 4 hours with the 9 cell, and a bit less with a 6 cell, of course depending on the hardware you end up getting with it, and what settings you use.

The 9 cell sticks out the bottom of the laptop, and acts as kind of a laptop stand. I thought it was silly looking at first, but it's better than if it was sticking out the back like on alot of other laptops. Plus, the inch or so that the 9-cell raises the back of the laptop improves airflow, reducing temps and lowering the chance of throttling. If you end up getting a quad-core, it won't matter, because the 1645 only has the 9-cell.

 

for what it's worth, the 9-cell battery also helps a bit in terms of ergonomic positioning. occasionally i lug my 1645 into a colleague's office to work on a thing or two, and the 9-cell helps prop up the back of the notebook (as everybody has mentioned) and i find that it makes the laptop a little bit easier to type on.