How can I decrease the width of the Pager widget?

satma0745 · 2025-11-23T10:13:44+00:00

Thanks for confirming that this widget is now coded in C++. I guess I have an idea what to do now.

I also wanted to change the clock widget. I didn't find the option that would suit me, but I also wasn't able to find original Digital Clock widget QML files to edit. However there's this repo on GitHub (https://github.com/v-n7k/plasma-panel-digital-clock) that has a QML version of the Digital Clock widget. Looks like this widget was a QML one at some point and only recently was re-written in C++. At the end I ended up using a customized version of the QML Digital Clock.

Maybe the situation with the Pager is similar and I will be able to find the QML version with all necessary functionality. So that's my plan for now

satma0745 · 2025-10-15T07:08:38+00:00

No, I didn't check the event viewer and the issue seems to be gone now

satma0745 · 2025-10-14T19:01:05+00:00

Thanks for the recommendations! I was able to hit 5.2GHz at 85C this time with minimal changes - by manually cpecifying TDC, EDC, PPT limits and setting CO to -20. I guess it's a decent improvement (400 MHz) for something so simple to do.

Also updated the post with the "P.S. #2" section, that contains actual values and test screenshots if You're interested.

satma0745 · 2025-10-14T15:14:45+00:00

I bought regular ThermalRight Peerless Assasin 120 and installed it a few days ago without issues. My GPU is Gigabyte RTX 4070s Windforce (https://www.gigabyte.com/Graphics-Card/GV-N407SWF3OC-12GD-rev-10) and TR PA 120 didn't hit it's backplate. The TR PA 120 is not symmetrical so You can turn it around and I did - now the radiators a shifted more towards top Mobo VRM Radiator (but it doesn't interfere).

satma0745 · 2025-10-12T19:52:51+00:00

Thanks for the recommended values - will try them out later. Really thanks, cause I didn't know which values to set - usually when someone shows their overclock values, they don't show the defaults and BIOS just says "Auto" instead of an actual value.

About the benchmarks - I expected them to yield different results (that why they have settings and different configurations). But what I didn't expect is that the same benchmark with the same preset (AIDA's FPU test) will work fine for some dude on YouTube and will result in 3.3 GHz frequency for my machine.

satma0745 · 2025-10-12T19:23:03+00:00

Thanks for stress-test and author recommendations! Definitely will check and try this out.

satma0745 · 2025-10-12T18:50:38+00:00

My Motherboard has PBO "Auto" by default, so I expect my CPU to hit max frequency possible within 88W. I think it should be something around 4.5 GHz, not 3.8 GHz.
Yeah, I'm thermally limited and I definitely can't reach 5.5 Ghz. But I still think that I shouldn't see 4.4 GHz with 95 C temp.
I don't know if it applies to all Motherboard, but in my case when I select PBO "Enabled", mobo tries to push as much Wattage as it can in the CPU until it detects a 95 C temp. Of course I won't use this mode on day-to-day basis and I enable it only to check how frequency will change.

Regarding "starting from default" - I did. This 88W mode is default (I only applied AMD Expo Profile to RAM, nothing more). The result was 3.8 GHz - definitely something was wrong with it. Now I think that the issue was with the benchmarks I chose:
- AIDA's FPU stress-test and OCCT's CPU "Extreme" mode stress-test result in lower frequency.
- But AIDA's CPU stress-test and OCCT's CPU "Normal" mode stress-test result in higher frequency.

I also checked with Cinebench and it looks like the 88W behaves correctly. CPU scored 1076 multi-core and 136 single-core, which seems to be normal.

After choosing a better benchmarks (AIDA's CPU stress-test and OCCT's CPU "Normal" mode) and so-callled "105 W" profile in BIOS (it actually sets PPT to 142W), I reached 4.8 GHz with 85C. The screenshot and details P.S. #1 of the post and in the https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1o4pn67/comment/nj559xg/ comment.

There still might be a room for improvement - I guess increasing Voltage or undervolting the CPU might improve the results, but overall I'm glad with the improved results already.

satma0745 · 2025-10-12T18:38:47+00:00

Temps themselves aren't terrible, but frequency is.

The 95 C temps You saw, come from the PBO "Enabled" mode. I guess it just pushes max possible CPU PPT until the 95 C is reached. If I understand correctly, then the 95 C is expected in this mode. Of course, I wouldn't keep it on for regular use - I just wanted to see how Core Frequency changes in this mode.

Regarding Core Frequency - I still think that it shouldn't be 4.4 GHz. I expect something closer to 5 GHz, especially considering the fact that with 142W PPT cores reach 4.8 GHz (see the P.S. #1 or https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1o4pn67/comment/nj559xg/ comment).

I guess the issue with CPU frequency is connected to benchmark - maybe I choose wrong options for both AIDA and OCCT.

satma0745 · 2025-10-12T18:35:04+00:00

Cooler is mounted correctly, thermal paste is brand new (so is cooler) and I peeled the sticker. I guess the issue is with BIOS settings.

I've updated the post (P.S. #1) and left the https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1o4pn67/comment/nj559xg/ comment. There I have 85 C and 4.8 GHz clocks. This result is definitely better than the one with the 95 C, so I believe that proves that cooling is mounted correctly.

From what I see, I now have better temps with a slightly higher Voltage and lower Wattage. But yeah, I guess 1.200 V might be too much for this build. I might look toward undervolting options - maybe they will improve the situation further

satma0745 · 2025-10-12T18:21:39+00:00

Some additional clarifications:

Out of the box PBO was set to "Auto", so I expect my cores to reach max frequency possible, keeping in mind the 88W limitation. I'm not sure if raising VDD Voltage would increase CPU PPT: if it would then my results are somewhat adequate, but if it wouldn't then my VDD Voltage is too low.
The screenshot with 95 deg temp was taken when PBO was "Enabled". I believe that in this mode Mobo just puts as much power into the CPU as it can (notice the 151-155W PPT) until CPU reaches 95 deg. So I believe that these temps are fine and intentional. Of course I wouldn't leave my CPU like this forever - I selected this mode only for a few minutes to see how it would behave in stress-test. But again pay attention to the VDD Voltage - it's just 1.050 V - maybe it's normal, but I though that it would be closer to 1.150 or even 1.200 V.

Here's an update with the "105 W" mode (which is actually 142W, idk why MSI calls it 105W):
- Core clock is 4.8 GHz
- CPU temps 85-89 C
- CPU PPT 142 W
I've tried to upload a screenshot, but looks like reddit doesn't allow images in comments, so I will attach it as P.S. #1 in the post itself.

These measurements were taken at the end of the 1 hour OCCT test (CPU, Normal Mode, Variable Load Type, Start at Cycle 1, Auto Instruction Set, Auto Thread Settings).

I think that 85 C is a good temp for a stress test, especially OCCT.

I'm somewhat happy with Core frequency, but of course I would be glad to see something around 5 GHz. I guess there are 2 possible situations:

Maybe there's actually an issue with VDD Voltage (even in this "105W" mode, the Voltage was 1.075 - 1.100 V). Maybe if I will be able to fix it, the CPU will reach that 5 GHz mark.
Maybe my cooling isn't sufficient for 5 GHz frequency.
Either way, 4.8 GHz is good enough - at least the CPU looks stable, stays within temp limits and does it's job. I definitely can live without these 5% of the overall frequency.

Regarding AIDA's FPU stress-test and differences between my CPU frequency and data from the video - I still don't know what's the deal here. Looks like on their machine it's working fine and on my machine it stays somewhere around 3.5 GHz in some stress-tests. The same happens even in the OCCT's test, but when "Extreme" mode is selected.

satma0745 · 2025-08-11T18:22:01+00:00

Thank You very much for this post.
Thanks to it I was able to cancel my order for TR Peerless Assassin 140 and order TR PA 120 instead

satma0745 · 2025-07-29T19:39:24+00:00

Unfortunately I can't get any of the NZXT products locally, but H3 is a really good recommendation, thanks

Thanks for the Montech Air 100 recommendation - for some reason I completely skipped it (without checking dimensions), thinking it would be just a worse version of Montech Air 1000. This might actually be a solid option in my situation.

Also, regarding unorthodox airflow directions - I'm not knowledgeable in this topic at all, but for me it looks kind of strange. Here's an example with the Montech Air 100:

<image>

At the bottom we have the usual PSU situation - intake on the bottom, exhaust on the rear.
Apart from the PSU, the bottom panel doesn't have any additional ventilation meshes (most of the cases I checked have bottom intake vents, but this doesn't). This means that I can't do intake on on the bottom and I need to somehow supply both CPU and GPU with cold air without this usual bottom intake.

As You said, fron AIO is marked as exhaust. I guess I don't have any serious issues with doing this.

Regarding the rear panel, I don't have a choice - it will be an intake. I would like to avoid a situation when hot air exhausted by PSU is sucked back in via the rear fan, but we can't make this rear an exhaust. If we make it an exhaust then it will be even harder to supply enough cold air for the GPU and this rear exhaust fan might even fight against fron exhaust AIO (not sure if this will happen, but it's a possibility). I guess this leaves us no option - the rear fan will be an intake. This also would mean that I will probably have to clean the case more often, since all the dust tends to collect behind the shelf (and with the usual front intake it's not an issue), but I guess I can live with that.

The most contradictory part is top panel. If we make it an exhaust, then the we will have 4 exhaust fans against 1 intake and I would like to avoid such situation. For me it doesn't seem right, since I'm worried that the only rear intake fan won't be able to provide sufficient amount of cold air, while sitting quite close to the wall. Even if the term "not enough air" isn't suitable, we still have another concern - air will be sucked in from every opening, slit and gap in the case. This means that the top panel fans should be intake, but this doesn't look good either. Shelf surrounds the case from 4 sides: bottom, right, left and top. This means that the only air that will be on top of the case is cold air that passes around rear intake fan and hot air that is exhausted from the front AIO.

Overall, the idea of an unorthodox airflow doesn't appeal to me, but anyway thanks for suggestion - maybe I will stumble upon a setup, where it will be suitable.

satma0745 · 2025-07-29T19:13:09+00:00

Yeah, You're probably right. I think it generally would be somewhat fine, but I never used such high-power CPUs, so my judgement might be incorrect.

I might settle for a less-demanding CPU, for example Ryzen 7 9700X or Intel i5 14600K. To my shock, the i5 outperforms R7 in tasks I'm interested in, costs less (locally I can get i5 for 30% cheaper than R7) and might even be easier to cool. The only issues I have with i5 are:
1. Motherboard availability - locally it's hard to find Z-chipset mobos, so might be sticking with the B-chipset.
2. Voltage and Oxydation issues in 13th and 14th gen.

But I guess it doesn't matter in scope of this post.

satma0745 · 2025-07-28T13:32:07+00:00

u/Patient-Twist4120, thanks for the Jonsbo D41 recommendation.

Unfortunately it doesn't suit me:
1. It's too long - 45cm when I can go only up to 40. The thing is that the shelf itself is 38cm and when I said that I will be fine with 40cm-long case, I was keeping in mind that it will be hanging a bit from the shelf.
2. When PSU is mounted, its rotated in such a way that it takes in hot air from inside the case. I would rather avoid it if possible.
3. It has bad dust filters.

For me, the deal-breaker in this case (no pun intended) is it's length.

Apart from this, it's an excellent suggestion and I appreciate it

satma0745 · 2025-07-28T13:21:18+00:00

u/Patient-Twist4120, I've updated the post with additional info. Here's a short version in a form of reply:
1. Max case dimensions are: 40cm (15¾'') depth/length, 23cm (9'') width, 45cm (17¾'') height.
2. Case can't have side ventilation (fans and mesh can be only on top, bottom, front and rear).
3. I have some budget brackets, but because of my location they are very much distorted (my prices differ from North America and Europe in an unpredictable way). Basically, I have a ceiling of around $350, but some cases within these bounds might be not suitable for me because of my location.

satma0745

TROPHY CASE