Saiyan32

thanks.. it looks like those two metal things are of same height as the other port...doesnt seem like it is flattened somewhat :(...

My hp v250w 32 GB pendrive was a tight fit to my laptop USB port I had to somewhat force it in . this usb is tight for any usb port and it is proven Although it didnt cause any issue but now my port is a bit loosen compared to my other USB 3 port...i feel like it may cause hardware issue in the near future but the usb detection and transfer speeds are all fine however will this be a issue ?... as it feels a bit loose compared to the other port when i pull out any usb pendrive i insert

well..general users dont usually transfer 100 GB of file everyday...so..............

Fast startup is already disabled

I use transcend Nvme ..does it ssd support low power state?..it feels like it is still draining power on IDLE mode... When i use the factory HDD of the dell laptop..the battery backup is fine ..but when i use ssd ...it drops like hell Does anyone use transcend nvme ssd on their laptops? to help me on this?

You are wrong somewhat

Laptop is less than one year old ..quite new..so dont think battery eould wear out that quickly

Oka Lemme check..

I always used hdd that came with the laptop It is a brand new laptop Less than a year old I always uses the hdd that came with the laptop... The laptop is less than a year old...so it is quite a new... Didn't swap the drive i uses both hdd and ssd now..no other hardware changed

My laptop is less than one year old when i purchased it... So it is quite new..for the battery to age.. No idea whats happening here.. Even when the laptop is idle.. Battery is drained

Help post Nvme ssd is reducing laptop battery backup... I thought nvmes draws ultra low power And does anyone know any solution? I used to get 5-6 hours now i get max 4 hours It is a transcend 220s nvme and my laptop is dell inspiron 3593

seriously wasting my time with you dont be a fanboy and get the facts properly ..whats the case here.. taking advantage of an architecture does not make it an apple to apple comparison as different aspects arrive...apple fans only have that geekbench you dont know that linux gives 5-10% (in some case 20%) boost of the same cpu over the windows version of geekbench...because their structure ... if you still cant see the pictures and your just blinded fanboy of apple which has always ripped their customer and still doing it by locking all upgradability of laptops.. no surprises their...also me not knowing how to write program does not mean i dont know how it works...there are ways of knowing it... your statements are becoming weirder every time

No, no, no, no. Threads aren't "intelligent scheduling done by the physical core". You got things the opposite way around. A thread is a sequence of instructions that is managed by the OS scheduler. It is not a hardware thing. It is purely a software thing. The CPU is not really involved with it. ------------------------------------------------------------------- --You are going downwards with these and caught up with your own logics...if you are right then a 4 core 4 thread can be used as 4 cores 8 threads from within the windows itself ...but that is on hardware level (eg. BIOS and dont confuse BIOS firmware with softwares like windows).. windows tells the cpu ...cores are designed to split the tasks aka scheduling of the tasks...that is not something windows directly commands to do that.... it is upto the devs to optimize their own software to run on threads ..no by windows ever saw a core with 3 threads?..or 4 threads?... i start to doubt if you even use windows laptops/pc...maybe macs only... I fully agree with the article but problem was it didnt express what it actually wanted to say... i am not surprised by the performance of m1 and those who say it destroys x86 cpus in single threads are just under hoax by apple ... risc design demands the optimization of the hardware and software to be in sync(most desgined by the same company like apple)....... any poorly coded software will run worst on arm-risc like m1.... there are so many unoptimized software developed by unknown devs on x86 cpus and they will have less issue and less performance hit on x86 cpu then risc based m1... i am not going explain on smts ..further ....i have no poprblem with multithreads no matter what it says i say macos and windows are different ..a claim by apple ...powerful than most laptop cpus is a foolish claim.... i say to apple... "1st come to the same architecture and then claim this type of things...if you dont want to..then explicitly say ..." powerful cpu in mac environments only" geekbench scores is heavily hammered when used through Rosetta 2 ..single sccore is around 1400-1450.... this proves geeknbench uses different tactics for arm based arch.... disproves that geekbench test are not affected by different architectures i aint coming back here after hearing some of the answers you gave..you really need to dive deep into archs....

"Single thread is a virtual core" is wrong." -I SUGGEST YOU TO LEARN FROM ZERO ABOUT SINGLE THREAD IN A PROCESSOR... threads are just intelligent scheduling done by the physical core itself to do the work more efficiently...it is treated as logical (virtual) cores by windows ... a core is designed to have 2 threads there is nothing you or i can do about it... ....single thread depends on the program and the programmer how they develop their app for different arch....like risc in this case....which puts x86 in massive disadvantages .. explained by the article while not fully correct but most is ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 30% CPU utilization in task manager does not mean only half the core is being used. It might mean 100% of certain elements of your CPU is being used. Also, the same thing happens on ARM cores all the time. It is extremely rare to find a workload that actually fully utilize all parts of a core at once. " -You misunderstood ........ i said half the core used when it will show 50% of usage calculating the total cores and threads ..thats how task manager works....of cpu usage.. i have already seen this on i5 4 cores 8 threads running geekbench single thread test showing even lower cpu usage.. and where did you get that 30% means "full" usages of one part of a core ?.. it is totally false assumption ....task manager deals with cores and threads only ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ " x86 processors aren't designed around the idea of executing two threads at once, and they barely execute two threads at once even with SMT" -This is the conflict that the mentioned article is having with the disagreed people.... article does not talk about 1 core 2 threads ... a cpu when tested has only core 1 thread when single thread tested and full 2 threads used when using multthreaded test it depends on the program how they are using single streamline of the single thread on x86 platform ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Task manager is a very crude and unprecise measurement of core utilization."... -it does not make any sense ...noone has any report of saying it "flawed"..it is because you misunderstood task managers calculation ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "RISC does not have this problem by design" is wrong. -pls learn more about this before replying ..even m1 has no info of having threads means it is using full core (GEEKBENCH SAYS FULL SINGLE CORE TEST..i and i will not repeat that again) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Again, x86 does not "use multi threaded design" in the way you think it does. Also, it uses just as much of a "full single core" on ARM as it does on x86. " - False... there are plenty application even games that uses hyperthreading per core to get benefit.... --------------------------------------------------------------------------- You lost me there when you said programs dont even use 2 threads at same time when there are plenty more apps and even games now started to take advantages of multi threading...giving one example does not matter know.....you are like 3-4 years behind in this .... IN THE END no one has usage report but i can assure from mobile arm devices that one core is fully (at least majority part) used if used ...and and their core ultilization measured on numbers of actual cores used/active that time remember a 2 core 4 thread is total of 4 logical processors to a windows system but is not equal to actual 4 cores in performance.... the problem is with geekbench ...if they said single thread and x86 is a major disadvantages but everyone would expect that...but saying a single core test and using a scheduling to perform sequential single tasks and showing it as single core test is terrible..either geekbench have to fix their app to use majority of the single core (2 threads) or name it single thread test ...as risc deals with cores only ....if you still repeat the same thing over again....you got to have a deep analysis

i will answer your questions in the same order you answered me "This is incorrect. Modern x86 cores are not "designed to be divided in 2 threads". SMT (aka hyperthreading) lets your OS schedule two threads and it will execute on a single core, but this is not the same as executing two threads at once, and it does not mean the core was "designed to execute two threads at once"." then you can care to explain why my core i3 10th gen dual core 4 threads uses only 30%-35% of my cpu usages instead of 50% of it..which indicates one full core of the two ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I don't understand what you are trying to say. Can you please elaborate? I have a feeling that you're making some incorrect assumption and generalization. Both AMD and Intel processors are RISC processors these days. They accept CISC (x86) instructions but then translate them to RISC instructions internally. what i meant is that in risc based processor one thread is per one core means ..basically if you use one thread ..thats is meaning ..use of the whole one core.... that is one full core is being used ..while one thread does not potentially use the full one core in x86 platform "by design" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ When Geekbench says single core performance they mean single thread performance. Threads and cores are often used interchangeably in the computer world. well i dont own geekbench ..assuming single core test is single thread test is applicable for processors with one thread per core.... since x86 uses multi threaded designs.. this does not mean one single thread used by geekbench is potentially using one full single core test.... those who say the term core is irrelevant in terms of threads ...needs to check their task manager while cpu intensive tasks..single thread is not a separate core ...it is a virtual core that does not mean it uses the full single core ...while m1 or other arm based processor .... they are basically using full one core for test and yeah tell geekbench to explicitly say single thread test cause ..there is a hell of a difference ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's not really how it works... But okay. x86 does not split its core or split threads "by design". It doesn't split the core or threads period. Geekbench doesn't check the cores in this way either. already explained this...however if geekbench says they test single thread not core...then by me...although in x86 , single thread is a virtual core not actual full utilization of single core....whereas risc does not have this problem by design hence full use of the single core in terms of single thread hope you get my point