Optimus Series: 15.6 - System Lag Fan Constantly On

Sounds good ubuysu.

Double re-paste has been done unfortunately not any better.

"another double-check that the heat exchanger next to the fan is spotlessly clean" - Perhaps I have not been as attentive to the detail as needed. Hvae done double clean on fan and surrounding areas but not cleaned other areas. I'll have another go now.

As I write this CPU is 2%, 6, 10 then 65% yet the fan is on in all cases. Surely your right this is simply overheating.

phil_c64 said:

Sounds good ubuysu.

Double re-paste has been done unfortunately not any better.

"another double-check that the heat exchanger next to the fan is spotlessly clean" - Perhaps I have not been as attentive to the detail as needed. Hvae done double clean on fan and surrounding areas but not cleaned other areas. I'll have another go now.

As I write this CPU is 2%, 6, 10 then 65% yet the fan is on in all cases. Surely your right this is simply overheating.

Click to expand...

The only way to tell is monitor your temp idle and under load.

Okay checked inside looks clean. Attached picture.

Will monitor now and see.

Assuming it gets to hardware replacing stage. Would you start with the fan? I'm trying to avoid cpu, gpu replace for obvious reasons.

phil_c64 said:

Okay checked inside looks clean. Attached picture.

Will monitor now and see.

Assuming it gets to hardware replacing stage. Would you start with the fan? I'm trying to avoid cpu, gpu replace for obvious reasons.

Click to expand...

The heat exchanger, the bit that needs to be spotlessly clean, is where the copper heat pipes go. There are fins inside there that clog up with muck very quickly. You need to be able to see clearly through these fins because airflow through there is what does ALL the cooling.

Once you're happy that everything is clean there, and you're satisfied that you left no air bubbles when you repasted, then a high idle temp on the CPU or GPU would tend to suggest permanent damage I would think. As Sherlock Holmes has said, 'once you eliminate all other possibilities whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the cause'.

BTW. I would also advise running Resource Monitor when the laptop is idling and look at the resource usages sorted on the columns I suggested earlier. It's not impossible that you have something running that you don't know about and that's what causes your CPU/GPU to run hot. You need to eliminate that too.

Yeah, the heat section at end of copper pipes has been cleaned twice. It's very clean.

Happy with the repaste.

Uninstalled Magicware!!! going to remove process explorer and just go back to core as close. Will monitor while backing up everything to restore quickly.

Think I'm going to try Ubuntu first just to make sure. Then back to windows.

The only thing in the back of my mind is the fact that I removed the battery from being flat. What are the chances that the moment the battery dies that the laptop experiences these issues. Coincidence maybe but I'm suspecting that this has a role to play. Would it be possible that the battery has been trying to charge and was generating excess heat which in turn might have damanaged parts? Or is that 1+2=C.

phil_c64 said:

Yeah, the heat section at end of copper pipes has been cleaned twice. It's very clean.

Click to expand...

Ok

Happy with the repaste.

Click to expand...

Ok

Uninstalled Magicware!!! going to remove process explorer and just go back to core as close. Will monitor while backing up everything to restore quickly.

Click to expand...

When you do a resinstall only install Windows and the drivers, nothing else. You want as pristine a software platform as you can get for testing.

Think I'm going to try Ubuntu first just to make sure. Then back to windows.

Click to expand...

That's a wise move, it will tell you whether it's software or hardware

The only thing in the back of my mind is the fact that I removed the battery from being flat. What are the chances that the moment the battery dies that the laptop experiences these issues. Coincidence maybe but I'm suspecting that this has a role to play. Would it be possible that the battery has been trying to charge and was generating excess heat which in turn might have damanaged parts? Or is that 1+2=C.

Click to expand...

I don't believe in coincidences either and it did ring warning bells when you first mentioned a flat battery. That said, if it still exhibits the issues running on mains power only and with no battery inserted then it's not likely to be a battery issue. I doubt that a faulty battery on charge could have damaged the CPU/GPU but it's not impossible I guess. However, it's important to solve one problem at a time, so leave the dead battery out and try the Ubuntu and then Windows installs first.

SOLVED and it was something ridiculous. Something only windoze could cock up.

Ran https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html which told me the machine was running 2 of 8 processors!!!
This was established after Linux detected all 8 cores but was initially slow due partly I think to running a live cd.

bcdedit /set numproc 8 tells windows to actually use all 8 cores - https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/2-useful-bcdedit-options

msconfig > boot > advanced options > number of processors loading on bootup shows available processors. This is always set to 1 by default by windoze but the proper number available shows here.

makes sense now that on multi tasking, also newer graphics drivers would struggle as probably making the most of the card.

Thanks ubuysa & SpyderTracks for all the advice - still learned a lot in the process.

phil_c64 said:

SOLVED and it was something ridiculous. Something only windoze could cock up.

Ran https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html which told me the machine was running 2 of 8 processors!!!
This was established after Linux detected all 8 cores but was initially slow due partly I think to running a live cd.

bcdedit /set numproc 8 tells windows to actually use all 8 cores - https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/2-useful-bcdedit-options

msconfig > boot > advanced options > number of processors loading on bootup shows available processors. This is always set to 1 by default by windoze but the proper number available shows here.

makes sense now that on multi tasking, also newer graphics drivers would struggle as probably making the most of the card.

Thanks ubuysa & SpyderTracks for all the advice - still learned a lot in the process.

Click to expand...

I would highly recommend a full reinstall of windows.

If you had magicware and the other process gimper installed, your system was compromised. The reason only 2 cores were active were very likely due to the process gimper.

I still don't think the root cause has been addressed.

phil_c64 said:

SOLVED and it was something ridiculous. Something only windoze could cock up.

Ran https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html which told me the machine was running 2 of 8 processors!!!
This was established after Linux detected all 8 cores but was initially slow due partly I think to running a live cd.

bcdedit /set numproc 8 tells windows to actually use all 8 cores - https://www.itprotoday.com/compute-engines/2-useful-bcdedit-options

msconfig > boot > advanced options > number of processors loading on bootup shows available processors. This is always set to 1 by default by windoze but the proper number available shows here.

makes sense now that on multi tasking, also newer graphics drivers would struggle as probably making the most of the card.

Thanks ubuysa & SpyderTracks for all the advice - still learned a lot in the process.

Click to expand...

Again I'm 100% in agreement with SpyderTracks. This is NOT a solution. If Windows has access to only two processors (and whether numproc references physical cores or logical processors is unclear), that WILL NOT make your system overheat. Only one process can be dispatched on a logical CPU at any one time, and it will use only as much of the CPU as it is able. Fewer processors does not mean that the processors you have are working harder, it just means that the system overall is offering a lower throughput. More processors means more throughput, it doesn't mean each processor is working less hard (and thus running cooler).

You are still clutching at straws, and still implementing 'fixes' suggested by questionable websites. This is NOT the way to solve the issues you have. As SpyderTracks has said, your existing Windows system is of questionable reliability and a clean reinstall is your best next option. Actually your suggestion of installing Ubuntu and then Windows is a very good one, because if you see similar excessive fan and/or overheating issues on both Ubuntu and Windows then it's a hardware issue. That is what you should do next (or at least do a clean Windows install), anything else is a waste of your time...

All 8 cores were working on Ubuntu live cd. i would agree with you on cooling issue except linux doesn't return the same results.

We ran benchmark tests, diagnostic tools all hardware is performing fine and all software fine.

I see what you are saying so will point out what you have mentioned so I am listening. I also mentioned core temperature and 65 is fine for Intel processors so 55 now is v good.

What I can gather is that Ubuntu has no problem accessing the hardware so therefore I assume the install of windoze is the most likely issue. Will backup and do a re-install. However windoze does only detect 1 processor at bootup and has to be manually changed and always has. So it's not a massive stretch to conclude that it didn't detect the hardware correctly on that specific install. I'll burn another ISO with a completely different version of windoze on it.

Thanks again, I'm relieved after all the testing that the hardware does look perfectly fine and that the most likely cause is bad install of windoze.

Edit: The fan is no longer on either apart form running v high intensive software or benchmarks.

Also if I installed windows again and it detects on 2 processors but linux detects 8 that isn't a hardware issue right? but a failure by windows to recognise hardware?

phil_c64 said:

What I can gather is that Ubuntu has no problem accessing the hardware so therefore I assume the install of windoze is the most likely issue. Will backup and do a re-install. However windoze does only detect 1 processor at bootup and has to be manually changed and always has. So it's not a massive stretch to conclude that it didn't detect the hardware correctly on that specific install. I'll burn another ISO with a completely different version of windoze on it

Click to expand...

When you say it only detects one processor, do you mean it’s a multi-processor system or multi core?

If multi core, windows will always detect and utilise all cores (within the realms of intelligent switching), you would never have to manually enable cores unless there was a problem with the windows installation.

phil_c64 said:

All 8 cores were working on Ubuntu live cd. i would agree with you on cooling issue except linux doesn't return the same results.

We ran benchmark tests, diagnostic tools all hardware is performing fine and all software fine.

I see what you are saying so will point out what you have mentioned so I am listening. I also mentioned core temperature and 65 is fine for Intel processors so 55 now is v good.

What I can gather is that Ubuntu has no problem accessing the hardware so therefore I assume the install of windoze is the most likely issue. Will backup and do a re-install. However windoze does only detect 1 processor at bootup and has to be manually changed and always has. So it's not a massive stretch to conclude that it didn't detect the hardware correctly on that specific install. I'll burn another ISO with a completely different version of windoze on it.

Thanks again, I'm relieved after all the testing that the hardware does look perfectly fine and that the most likely cause is bad install of windoze.

Edit: The fan is no longer on either apart form running v high intensive software or benchmarks.

Also if I installed windows again and it detects on 2 processors but linux detects 8 that isn't a hardware issue right? but a failure by windows to recognise hardware?

Click to expand...

I assume you're looking at the msconfig setting there? That's the number of processors used for booting, not the number of processors available to Windows. One boot processor is generally more than enough and enabling two or more for boot makes almost no difference. Windows will enumerate the available logical processors during the boot process, unless you have any physically disabled (typically a BIOS option). Thus what you're seeing is not a problem, it's normal Windows behaviour.

Yeah, effectively it's 4 core 8 threads. https://ark.intel.com/products/78937/Intel-Core-i7-4810MQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3-80-GHz-

Hypothetically if windows only detects 1 core 2 threads again but linux detects all what would be the next step?

phil_c64 said:

Yeah, effectively it's 4 core 8 threads. https://ark.intel.com/products/78937/Intel-Core-i7-4810MQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3-80-GHz-

Hypothetically if windows only detects 1 core 2 threads again but linux detects all what would be the next step?

Click to expand...

To see how many logical processors (threads are something entirely different) Windows can see use Task Manager. Click the Performance tab, then click the CPU icon to display the CPU usage graph. Right-click anywhere on the CPU graph and in the pop-up menu that opens select 'Change graph to' and click 'Logical processors'. You will see one graph displayed for each logical processor. In your case there should be 8 graphs.

How many graphs do you see?

I can't get task manager as replaced with process explorer and now can't get it reverted back.

Left at moment to carry on with essential work. Soon as I have spare day will do win wipe.

phil_c64 said:

I can't get task manager as replaced with process explorer and now can't get it reverted back.

Left at moment to carry on with essential work. Soon as I have spare day will do win wipe.

Click to expand...

That's your best bet. I think it also unwise to install Process Explorer at all, at least until you have sorted these problems. It is easily possible to do a great deal of damage with that tool if used unwisely.

Right well the problem is solved now. Did clean Win install. Froze on re-install and the wouldn't log back in windows or install in linux.

It said drive size was 0. Then disappeared.

I believe the SSD HD has been on a slow failure hence all the problems. Did run tests but...

New SSD - everything working fine.

Not touching process explorer or any other hacks and keeping things as close to core as possible.

Thanks for all the advice guys

Out of interest you guys know any good win software for thumbnail preview of ai, svg, psd, eps files? I bought fastpictureviewer which no longer works (and support ignored emails or it wasn't working), sagethumbs partly works. Was looking for open source/free solution if possible

phil_c64 said:

Right well the problem is solved now. Did clean Win install. Froze on re-install and the wouldn't log back in windows or install in linux.

It said drive size was 0. Then disappeared.

I believe the SSD HD has been on a slow failure hence all the problems. Did run tests but...

New SSD - everything working fine.

Not touching process explorer or any other hacks and keeping things as close to core as possible.

Thanks for all the advice guys

Out of interest you guys know any good win software for thumbnail preview of ai, svg, psd, eps files? I bought fastpictureviewer which no longer works (and support ignored emails or it wasn't working), sagethumbs partly works. Was looking for open source/free solution if possible

Click to expand...

Windows does it natively in explorer..... you don't need hacks.

Glad it's sorted! Well done isolating it to the SSD too. :clap:

SpyderTracks said:

Windows does it natively in explorer..... you don't need hacks.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately it doesn't display eps, svg, ai, psd. There's separate codec packs and paid solutions (lots of discussions on this on forums like affinity) needed.

I'll keep looking.