Setting up the Perfect Icelake U Swift 5 2019

Hi all , According to my Swift 5 2019 model issue about PCIe SSD speed with Intel Optane Memory and Storage Management Tool 17.9.0.1008 here
https://community.acer.com/en/discussion/601657/why-acer-swift-5-514-54gt-use-only-pcie-3-0-x-2-link-instead-of-pcie-3-0-x-4-link-to-kingstone-ssd#latest

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/s5/t59kuzcassfb.jpg

Yerterday I decided to upgrade Acer's Kingstone RBUSNS8154P3512GJ1 PCIE 3.0 x 2 SSD with coming with default setup from Acer to SAMSUNG NVME SSD 970 EVO PLUS 1TB.

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/nn/xyjdwx0cdjk7.jpg

These upgrade was very easy and Acer Swift 5 514-54GT BIOS 1.14 detected NVME SSD automatically.
After upgrading and install Windows 10 2021 H2 Iron Fe Insider Preview Build 20170.1000
My Swift 5 NVME SSD mode detecting by Intel Optane Memory and Storage Tools 17.9.0.1008 was PCIe 3.0 x 4.

These bring it to be one of perfect Icelake U laptop. No storage bottleneck at all.

Hope my experience bring some idea to Acer teams .
Please use the best NVME SSD instead of KINGSTONE PCIE 3.0 x 2 for New Swift 5 2020 with Tigerlake SKU in the future.
Tigerlake U coming with PCIE 4.0 across the system. So SAMSUNG 980 Series must be consider . Acer please.

Regards

Accepted answers

aphanic

I think it depends on what they have designed a system to have and what they have on hand.

An NVMe SSD is better than a SATA one in the same M.2 form factor, even if it's using just 2 lanes of the PCIe (also known as budget NVMe SSDs). 4-lane capable disks are more expensive, certainly perform faster, but more expensive. With time though things may change and just like mid-tier laptops nowadays are shipping with NVMe SSDs we may end up seeing 4-lane ones too.

I am more concerned with mid-tier laptops shipping with mechanical hard drives. With or without Optane (with please, they're slow enough already) those drives are the biggest bottleneck in a system if they're used as the system drive. And specially bad if they're 1TB+, as far as I know there are no 1TB+ mechanical hard drives in 2.5'' form factor (for laptops) that doesn't use SMR.

I think users would have more appreciation for the brand if they were SATA SSDs instead, even if they needed to go from 2TB to 512GB to keep the cost at hand, it's *well* worth it. I've seen many people tell me the brand X is sh¡t because they bought a new laptop and it is slow as hell. Not only do those machines have slow mechanical hard drives, but together with the default embedded programs it's a recipe for unresponsiveness.

The good thing to take from all of this, is that the M.2 socket is wired to 4 PCIe lanes, so if one were to upgrade to a more performant disk like you did, the possibility exists.

All comments

aphanic

I think it depends on what they have designed a system to have and what they have on hand.

An NVMe SSD is better than a SATA one in the same M.2 form factor, even if it's using just 2 lanes of the PCIe (also known as budget NVMe SSDs). 4-lane capable disks are more expensive, certainly perform faster, but more expensive. With time though things may change and just like mid-tier laptops nowadays are shipping with NVMe SSDs we may end up seeing 4-lane ones too.

I am more concerned with mid-tier laptops shipping with mechanical hard drives. With or without Optane (with please, they're slow enough already) those drives are the biggest bottleneck in a system if they're used as the system drive. And specially bad if they're 1TB+, as far as I know there are no 1TB+ mechanical hard drives in 2.5'' form factor (for laptops) that doesn't use SMR.

I think users would have more appreciation for the brand if they were SATA SSDs instead, even if they needed to go from 2TB to 512GB to keep the cost at hand, it's *well* worth it. I've seen many people tell me the brand X is sh¡t because they bought a new laptop and it is slow as hell. Not only do those machines have slow mechanical hard drives, but together with the default embedded programs it's a recipe for unresponsiveness.

The good thing to take from all of this, is that the M.2 socket is wired to 4 PCIe lanes, so if one were to upgrade to a more performant disk like you did, the possibility exists.

R6E7980XE

Totally agree with you mate @aphanic

I think Swift 3 5 and 7 platform must be optimized for their best due many things were soldered on system board.
Luckily my Swift 5 model not soldered SSD

as LPDDR4X once.

Acer left one thing for best performance via BIOS whice configuring LPDDR4X 4266 at 2666 MHz.
I'd sending mail to their BIOS team @ Taiwan HQ. If they'd accept my mail they'll find the way to upgrade
memory SPEED and setting those LPDDR4X 4266 to what SK Hynix recommend.

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/qr/4gxltng74gnc.jpg

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/s8/iqv8aavcskqj.png

According to :: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-10nm-ice-lake-test-benchmarks,6257.html

If you looking at Icelake U memory controller capable on tom's hardware guide. Acer BIOS team need urgently fixing their fault immediatly.

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/31/d3v4x160cosu.png

aphanic

Huh... could you run something for me please? Download and execute Thaiphoon Burner (don't worry, the freeware version is enough) and post de details it outputs about the RAM you have installed, you should see something like this:

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/fy/8kb172uu8xxp.png

Please, disregard the highlighted areas, it's a screenshot I had already for a post for another thread on RAM upgrades:

I'm interested to see what kind of profiles your RAM has, because per the Intel specifications your processor can only work with at a maximum memory clock of 3200 MHz or 3733 depending on the type of memory it has installed.

R6E7980XE

Sorry mate @Aphanic ,

I'd trying to run your suggested tool above but Acer BIOS 1.14 and Windows 10 OS preventing it to run due
Microsoft's Smart screen filter. Would you please use Sisoft sandra to detecting better and safer.

aphanic

R6E7980XE said:

I'd trying to run your suggested tool above but Acer BIOS 1.14 and Windows 10 OS preventing it to run due
Microsoft's Smart screen filter. Would you please use Sisoft sandra to detecting better and safer.

The darn "SmartScreen" is always twisting my nuts because I tend to use newly seen programs and it still hasn't checked them, I have it disabled throughout that's why I didn't see the notice.

Sandra won't do I'm afraid, it's not capable of showing the kind of info Thaiphoon is, we needed something more specialized. Would you be open to disabling SmartScreen momentarily until you can get the screenshot? It's in the Windows Security app, in the part about App and browser control:

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/mj/f5xpg6f7d87l.png

CPU-Z and HWiNFO show some data, but not enough. AIDA64 could help, but I don't know if the trial version if capable of displaying all of the timings. I'd really like to see the intricate details on the modules Thaiphoon is capable of reporting (right click, open in a new tab for the big ones to see them clearly):

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/6i/r2c0qvzj0n3f.png

R6E7980XE

Due it was different motherboard between your Comet Lake U laptop and my Swift 5.
HardwareInfo 64 couldn't read anything like that but information and timing of my Swift 5 was the same as AIDA64 above.

I running at 2660MHz due Acer BIOS 1.14 commanded. The chipset was reconized by AIDA SK HYNIX NEE LPDDR4X 4266

R6E7980XE

Due it was different motherboard between your Comet Lake U laptop and my Swift 5.
HardwareInfo 64 couldn't read anything like that but information and timing of my Swift 5 was the same as AIDA64 above.

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/pv/sf0ts2720j59.png

I running at 2660 MHz due Acer BIOS 1.14 commanded. The memory on board was reconized by AIDA SK HYNIX H9HCNNNCPMALHR-NEE 8GB
both sticks. It was the best LPDDR4X 4266 part from Intel MIO.

More Info about SK Hynix H9HCNNNCPMALHR-NEE 8GB

According to ::
https://www.thailand.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/platform-memory/lpddr4-3733-4266-memory-down-validation-results.pdf

aphanic

I see!! The platform isn't relevant, mine being Comet Lake doesn't affect the outcome, but the kind of your memory is. It's all soldered into the motherboard! It's therefore LPDDR4 and when under load it should be clocking at 3733 MHz max. because that's maximum an i7-1065G7 supports.

That's what HWiNFO reports as the "Maximum Supported Memory Clock" (the first D in DDR stands for double, that's why it shows half, it's expected to be shown that way).

Because the clock speed of the RAM, much like the rest of the system, is dynamic to save energy the only way to know if it ever reaches the top speed is stressing it and then checking with any of those tools. With the added hindrance that being soldered there's less data on it, one of the ways I can think about is using Prime95, choosing to stress tests with large FFTs which should tax the memory quite a bit.

And after it's running, running HWiNFO and going to the same memory tab, seeing if the current speed matches the maximum speed. If that's the case, you're golden.

Because mine are sticks I can see it in the summary, I was about to record my screen but that already made the memory trip to its max speed. So I used a phone, excuse the shakiness, and being recorded in portrait mode hahaha:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKTleut6A-E

R6E7980XE

I see , but Prime95 could not fixing LPDDR4X Speed for other softwares.

I'd like Acer BIOS teams unlocking LPDDR4X speed from 2660MHz (1330MHz actual)
to 3733MHz (1866MHz actual) or 4266MHz (2133MHz actual) via BIOS.
It'll bring full Icelake U IMC performace for all software running.

Our mates trying to do here
https://www.win-raid.com/t6931f54-REQUEST-INSYDEH-O-Rev-Acer-A-G-BIOS-modification-request-to-enable-all-of-its-settings.html#msg118687

aphanic

Prime95 is just an example, it's just for you to know there may not be anything to fix.

If under load the "Current Memory Clock" in HWiNFO reads just like the maximum supported, everything is performing as it is.

Let's make another example, the machine I have right now, it has an i7-10510U and supports a maximum of DDR4-2666. I could put a stick in there that's rated for 2933 MHz, but it will run at 2666 MHz at the most, because that's the limit the processor and memory controller have.

Your memory is performing as it should without overclocking, its maximum speed is the one the processor supports, 3733 MHz, and my guess is that its clock goes at that frequency when it is needed (that's why I wanted to stress test the RAM, to see if it would clock up). The 1866 MHz HWiNFO reports is actually 3733, remember it works at double of what it reports

.

4266 MHz is unsupported by the processor without overclocking.

R6E7980XE

I see , the stress testing of my Swift 5 was the same as your Core i7 10510U mate.
Personally I think Acer BIOS team trying to bring more stability for Icelake U more than performance.

For Its microarchitect design Icelake U IMC support upto DDR4 3200MHz and LPDDR4/4X 3733MHz natively.
Core i7 10510U was based on Skylake microarchitect (Comet lake optimized node 14++ nm) .

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6029997/uploads/editor/bo/xz6demib4cpk.jpg

So LPDDR4/4X should be most efficient memory setting up. For LPDDR4/4X 4266MHz as SK Hynix module above on my Swift 5
It will gain native LPDDR4/4X on timing latency setting up.

For example , If you got LPDDR4/4X 3733MHz timing such as 28-28-28-32 2T on the board.
LPDDR4/4X 4266MHz timing on the same board design could be 24-24-24-26 1T @3733MHz once.
Those setting will be improve overall performance on system memory and CPU together.

However Acer selecting to downing clock speed from 3733MHz to 2660MHz same as your Comet lake Core i7 10510U.
These bring overall Sunny Cove Microarchitect lower than its standard.

I trying to do my best to fixing these.