john_wayne

11 minutes ago, kelvinhall05 said:

I actually like that they play through headphones, because if I have headphones connected they're in my ears and I can actually hear my notifications.

I do not disagree with you there. The issue is not that the sounds play through the headphones. the issue is that with Pie the sounds can ONLY play through the headphones. In previous versions of android, the routing could be specified to: 1. headphones 2. device speaker 3. both . Everything is good when you have headphones in, or are sitting in your car, or are near your bluetooth speaker. But if you lay your phone and earbuds on the counter, or get out of your vehicle, or walk yourself/device away from the speaker - the notifications are inaudible. The problem is with the inability to set the user's routing of the notification sounds. that ability was stripped out of Pie.

Android Pie severed the ability to have notification sounds (sounds other than a call ringtone) play over the device's speaker when corded/bluetooth headphones/vehicle are connected. So if say you have headphones connected, any notification (other than a call) is inaudible if the headphones are not in/on ear. There is no support channel I can find to submit this OS fail to Android, and I have started this petition, but in my limited circle, it hasnt gotten very far yet. http://chng.it/4WV6Dsdr  I have likely oversimplified the explanation of the ramifications of the issue here. It is a major productivity killer. Does anyone here have suggestions? I have not been able to root my device, nor do i really want to go there and do that.

I am trying to find a single partition tool (paid isnt an issue) that can handle setting primary, active, boot, and can properly modify extended partitions. I have a quad boot setup: (xp, win7, win10, cublinux). I have some hardware that requires the older OSes for their software and i am trying to get rid of some older failing pcs and put everything on one pc. if win10 isnt on the drive, xp will boot. if all installs are on the drive, if i use grub2: win7, win10, and linux will boot. if i use win10 bootloader, all technically boot, but xp halts at the splash screen. standalone sector by sector cloning to facilitate the trial and error of this process has wrapped the extended partition (that started around linux) around all partitions except the xp partition. gparted cannot handle the primary and active parts. other tools either cannot handle linux partitions or cannot see the extended partition at all. some tools wildly misinterpret extended partition. I cannot run chkdsk /r on the xp partition as the pc i am moving to has a sata controller that causes the drive not to be found by the cd. I am working in a MBR platform. I am not asking for debugging on the quad boot setup, but i am hoping to be directed to a better gui partition tool. I know what the end-result layout needs to be, but have no means to get there.

What is the black tape used in laptops to cable manage wires to the board? When doing laptop repairs, mainly re-doing thermal paste, the tape that is used to cable manage on the motherboard doesn't re-stick well. They seem to be fabric backed. The best guess i can find is automotive wire loom tape. electrical tape will not stay adhered, and i refuse to use scotch tape. My concern using the automotive tape is the adhesive being too strong during later removal, damaging the board or leaving residue.

why isn't bluetooth 4.1, 4.2 or 5 mainstream in usb dongles? there are 3.5mm transceivers and pci(e) cards that spec up to 4.2, and headphones that spec 4.2 . I have found nearly zero bluetooth 5 peripherals.

found how to get msi afterburner to unlock the core and memory clocks 795/925. now i get 17fps out of furmark, and a full 30fps out of just cause 2. oddly enough, despite the increase in the memory clock, the actual memory clock usage only goes up to about 270Mhz. Is this normal for built-in gpu to not use the full memory overclock?

wow, so after accidentally finding a post in another forum, it seems that the setting for "powerplay" must be turned on in catalyst control center, otherwise the radeon locks the card down to its minimal settings, way below the default. now running furmark, i get an "astounding"  14 fps, and gpu-z shows the gpu core running at 600mhz, but the memory clock only gets up to 216mhz. So now i just have to find a way to force the memory clock up to the default 800Mhz, and I should be in business. I am searching for memory clock tools for this radeon, which may be an ATI instead of an AMD..

@Tristerin yes the drivers are loaded for the radeon, the driver in use is 8.882.2.3000 and the radeon bios (which i'm not sure can be upgraded), is BR41055.001. In the computer's bios, i have things set to fixed switching, meaning that per the selection made in catalyst control center in the OS, either the intel or the radeon is in use for everything (the other option in bios of 'dynamic' would be auto-switching per program window in the OS). so for the screen shot tests above, i select the intel card, confirm the card is the only one in use via device manager, and run the test. then i select the radeon card, confirm the card is the only one in use via device manager, and run the test. fwiw, i just re-encoded a video file with nero recode on each graphics card. with seemingly the same fan spin on each run, the intel got up to 73C while radeon never got above 58C. I would almost suggest there is some damage to the radeon card, but there is zero instability in the laptop. It's like the radeon just never tries.

edit: per the gpu-z graphics card tab, the gpu clock is set to 600Mhz (the default) and the gpu memory is set to 800Mhz (the default), which is what afterburner read, but when i go to the gpu-z sensor tab, the clock reads 100Mhz and the memory reads 81Mhz. Afterburner read those as a constant 600 and 800 respectively.

@Tristerin attached is screenshots of afterburner after running Just Cause 2 ingame benchmark for just over 2 minutes. intel on the left (setting up steam was logged prior to the benchmark run), and radeon on the right. just watching the fps numbers, the intel stayed around 9fps or better, where the radeon stuggled to stay at 6fps. the intel was much further along in the benchmark at the 2 minute mark than the radeon even got to.

@xAcid9 the gpu clock is set to 600Mhz (which is the default) and the memory clock is set to 800Mhz (which is the default). i additionally found and ran FurMark, and the intel and the radeon both averaged 3fps, with the radeon temp occasionally bumping 50 Celsius, but spending most of the time at 49 Celcius.

@Herman Mcpootis ran novabench's gpu test and the intel gpu scored 107 (4fps) and the radeon gpu scored 99 (3fps).

ran uniengine's heaven benchmark the intel gpu constantly reached 4-5fps and the gpu temp was 53. the radeon gpu never got above 2fps and the temp was 49 (the radeon idles at 47). i've never heard of a gpu throttling at that low of temps - so i am at a loss. the system is stable, so i'm not sure what to do next. the passmark rating of the radeon over the intel says the radeon should be doing much better than it is.

@Spotty thanks for clearing that up, i understand the use case better now. I was not even thinking about the content that goes over to youtube.

feature request for floatplane, ability to put publicly viewable single video embeddable player into an external site. the end of the single video would end with a continue watching on floatplane, which leads to a simple explanation of why to subscribe, to bring in viewers that otherwise wouldnt know about about floatplane. trading off bandwidth consumption for subscriber recruitment.

what free older benchmarks can you suggest for older/small cards

running the simple 2D & 3D gpu benchmark from passmark on my HP envy15 3040-nr laptop with switchable graphics, the intel graphics is outperforming the amd graphics - WHY?? everything is up to date, I have the card selection in bios set to FIXED, so that card selection is done manually by the switchable graphics menu in the OS. What prompted this testing is: before today, i had the card selection via bios set to DYNAMIC, so the "high performance" amd graphics would be used on-demand by softwares. I noticed that chrome kept the amd graphics engaged, causing the fans to run at a higher RPM at otherwise idle (simply having chrome open). Is it possible the thermal compound needs re-doing on the amd chip?? it gives hot exhaust, not increased fan-spin of cool air. The system has had no stability issues. It seems that now the amd graphics are just better at creating heat and fan noise, with the intel graphics outperforming it. and fwiw, running heaven on this machine, the intel graphics beats amd as well: intel (9), amd (3). I would really value some insight and suggestions.