Folks with Nvidia-based gaming laptops can now use a new tool called NvpwrControl to unlock additional performance from their assuredly power-limited mobile GPU, as long as they're willing to accept the risks of cranking their GPU power limit by as much as 40 watts. The tool, spotted by VideoCardz, is available for download on GitHub, and it is labeled as 'experimental', so you'll want to be very sure you're willing to damage the reliability, if not the lifespan, of your fancy discrete GPU gaming laptop before using it.

If you've ever had a gaming laptop, you will know that the GPU model name can be deeply misleading. Whether it's NVIDIA using wildly different GPU configurations, AMD using confusing suffixes that don't exist in desktop GPUs, or Intel naming integrated graphics like a discrete GPU, all three vendors do things to keep the user guessing why their new gaming laptop isn't as fast as expected based on the name alone.

In Nvidia's case, the GPU models (aside from the RTX 30 Series) don't match at all between laptop and desktop, but even with the smaller size of the laptop GPUs, the chips are still sharply limited in performance by their stringent power limits. These limits top out at 150W, with an extra jolt, usually 25W, available from Dynamic Boost if the CPU isn't heavily loaded. This is, frankly put, not enough power for even the mobile GeForce RTX 5070 Ti to stretch its legs, to say nothing of the GeForce RTX 5080 Laptop or GeForce RTX 5090 Laptop. In high-intensity gaming situations, these GPUs can score pretty similarly due to having the same power limit.

That's what makes this tool attractive. By cranking the power limit, you can give these power-limited GPUs a performance boost. The developer doesn't provide any benchmarks, but I can say from experience that testing power limit adjustments on a power-limited GPU can give nearly linear performance gains, meaning that increasing the power limit from a stock 140W all the way up to 180W could potentially give a GPU performance uplift in the neighborhood of 25% or more, although it is impossible to verify this without testing.

There are quite a few caveats to this utility, though. For one thing, even the author describes it as 'experimental ', and for another thing, it's clearly AI-generated in the largest part. The developer is called "LevinAI", after all, and there are the hallmarks of generative AI all over the GitHub repository. Still, there are a few reports on both GitHub and Reddit suggesting that users have been testing it, and the developer claims that it works on his GeForce RTX 5070 Ti laptop, posting the proof below.

Other notable qualifiers include that it only supports Blackwell GPUs for now, and it only enables power controls when it can recognize the power policy layout and OEM baseline. If your GPU already ships with a wacky power configuration, this tool may not work for you. It's also not verified to work on every brand of laptop nor every model of GeForce RTX 50-series GPU, so we absolutely wouldn't try this unless you're willing to replace your Blackwell-based laptop.

The partially AI-generated project description (likely chosen as the author's native language appears to be Russian) explains that the developer investigated numerous layers of the software stack on top of the GPU to see where the power limit could be modified. The controls that NVIDIA exposes generally won't let the user raise the power limit above the value set by the OEM for fear of potentially damaging the hardware, since the power delivery and cooling mechanisms were likely not designed with the higher power draw and thermal output in mind.

The solution he found was apparently to modify a low-level NVIDIA power policy that isn't normally exposed to end-users. He says, "One of the important findings was that the power-management chain contains internal policy values that are not exposed through the normal consumer power-limit controls. This is the path that eventually led to a working experimental implementation." However, due to the method employed, the tool does require the user to disable Windows driver signature verification, which is yet another 'gotcha' of the mod.

As amusing as it is to see that the developer left his AI assistant's instructions for constructing his GitHub repository (which he didn't follow), it's a reminder both of the reliability concerns around "vibe"-coded software in production as well as of the incredible potential of AI software development. Since we spotted the story on this utility, the developer has already bumped the version from 1.5.0 to 1.8.0 with a new release on GitHub, suggesting that the pace of improvements is extremely rapid.

A few users on Reddit, where the author posted the above screenshot, lambasted the developer for taking ownership of what they claim is "100% AI generated work" and also for not structuring his code repository correctly (since all of the source is packed in a ZIP file, not properly viewable on GitHub). However, the majority of other users seem enthusiastic about his work, and several have already posted proof that it seems to work, with huge gains in 3DMark and other benchmarks.

PieceMakers, a Nanya-backed DRAM designer, began trading on Taiwan’s Emerging Stock Board on September 16 at a NT$740 reference price, Cnyes reported ahead of the debut. PieceMakers is not an HBM company. Instead, it bets that inference memory diverges from training memory, President Lee Hsiao-wen told Cnyes, and that DRAM stacked directly on the processor with hybrid bonding can sit between Nvidia’s SRAM-only Groq LPU and HBM. As it stands, design fees, not chips, carry the company's profit, with AI custom-design work accounting for around 40% of the company's revenue in the first half of 2026. Piecemakers Chairman Joseph Ting told TechNews that its first volume customer program will not contribute to the company's financials until 2027 at the earliest.

At roughly 60.4 million shares outstanding, that price values the company at around NT$44.7 billion (around $1.4 billion). Taiwan's Emerging Board is the Taipei Exchange's pre-listing market, not a main-board IPO, so shares trade through market makers ahead of any formal listing application. The stock ended its first session at NT$915, 23.6% above the NT$740 reference price, after opening at NT$1,035 and trading as high as NT$1,205.

Nanya Technology is the largest holder of Piecemakers, at 33.96%, after selling 715,000 shares at NT$740 to seed the float, a disposal it disclosed in a Sept. 9 exchange filing reported by Knews.

What PieceMakers sells

PieceMakers was founded in January 2006 in Hsinchu, Taiwan, led by chairman Joseph Ting and president Lee Hsiao-wen. Historically, the company has designed standard SDR/DDR DRAM and known-good-die (KGD) parts through representatives in China, Japan, France, Turkey, and Israel. Now, the company seeks to shift from direct product sales to custom design services, paid as non-recurring engineering (NRE) fees, and then to IP licensing, royalties, and turnkey production from 2027, the company said at its Sept. 7 briefing, UDN reported.

Revenue from the AI custom design unit has risen from around 4% in 2024 to almost 40% in the first half of 2026. The products behind that increase are HBLL (High Bandwidth, Low Latency RAM), a 2D die rated at 144 GB/s that was taped out in 2016 for Intel’s HPC line and published at ISSCC in 2017, and HiBaLL, the 3D-stacked version rated at more than 1 TB/s, the company claims.

The company described its customers to Cnyes as developers of cloud AI inference accelerators, international semiconductor players, and North American customers, with some programs in design and verification, and none named. Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon’s Computex keynote backdrop in June listed PieceMakers among Taiwan ecosystem partners, although neither company has defined the relationship. The takeaway is that the profit is in design fees and not chips. The margin curve matches a pre-royalty Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE) business, rather than a traditional memory vendor.

Why Nanya is chasing this instead of HBM

Nanya’s AI-memory strategy is custom and edge rather than HBM3E. PieceMakers is the first half of a strategy laid out in 2024. On Aug. 7, 2025, Nanya announced a joint venture with Etron Technology, a Hsinchu-based chip designer, capitalized at NT$500 million, with 80/20 ownership. The venture was envisioned to design custom high-bandwidth memory for edge AI devices rather than for data center accelerators. Nanya president Pei-Ing Lee said earlier in 2025 that the company would not compete in HBM3 or HBM3E, TrendForce reported.

Both halves of the strategy rely on Formosa Advanced Technologies, the Formosa Plastics Group’s test and assembly affiliate, for packaging. It is building the through-silicon-via (TSV) and die-stacking processes that both need. The surge in DRAM pricing has made commodity memory Nanya’s real business, which leaves PieceMakers a cheap side bet that has become a windfall. Nanya took advantage of this by selling around 3% of its stake in a move that suggests it is acting more as an investor than a parent building a memory stack.

The inference gap

Groq is an AI inference startup that Nvidia struck a $20 billion licensing-and-talent deal for on Dec. 24, 2025. Nvidia announced its first chip built from that, the Groq 3 LPU (language processing unit), Nvidia’s SRAM-based inference chip, at GTC, its annual developer conference, in San Jose earlier this year.

There is no HBM or DRAM on the Groq 3 LPU. Instead, it uses 512MB of SRAM on the die to deliver 150 TB/s of bandwidth against 22 TB/s from the 288GB of HBM4 on each Rubin GPU. It’s a decode-only co-processor with Rubin handling the prompt prefill, displacing Nvidia’s Rubin CPX from the roadmap.

At Hot Chips 2026, Nvidia’s Igor Arsovski, Groq’s former chief architect, said the rack is in production and published the first third-party benchmark: 3,431 tokens per second on a 100K-context, 31B-parameter model, at about four times the next-fastest public endpoint, in a single-request test that we noted isn’t directly comparable to the shared endpoints it was measured against. The cost is capacity: at 512MB per chip, a 256-LPU rack holds 128GB, with the model needing 62 chips at FP8 just to hold the benchmark weights. Nvidia accepted that trade for decode speed, which supports Lee’s point that the market leader’s newest inference product contains no HBM.

At Hot Chips, Samsung’s Sangwook Han laid out a three-phase HBM roadmap that ends in zHBM, which is DRAM stacked directly on top of the processor rather than beside it on an interposer. Samsung projects about 70% less I/O power usage than HBM5 with roughly 2.3x the bandwidth of a four-stack HBM4E system, with zHBM’s stacks limited to about four-high due to heat, at around 100W less. This would require wafer-on-wafer hybrid copper bonding and tight co-design between DRAM and SoC teams. SK hynix’s Jaesik Lee, VP of package engineering, said on Aug. 23 that hybrid bonding won’t be ready for HBM4E, leaving HBM5 as the earliest point. Counterpoint Research expects full-scale HBM production with the technique around 2029–2030.

PieceMakers offers a different version. Instead of the GPU-plus-HBM 2.5D layout, it bonds the DRAM stack directly onto the processor, wafer-on-wafer, with hybrid bonding instead of microbumps. This fits far more connections with the finer pitch, improving bandwidth, and the shorter path reduces both latency and power consumption. The company puts its wafer-on-wafer product at more than 2 TB/s per layer with latency under 20ns, the company figures, but the target is more capacity than SRAM at a lower cost and power than HBM. PieceMakers is not doing the TSV or hybrid bonding itself, as this is handled by the customer’s logic wafer foundry, Ting added. This custom service promises a 2027 date against Samsung's undated roadmap end and SK hynix's HBM5-at-the-earliest timing. Nvidia and Samsung have each, in their own way, settled the architecture question, with the open question being the customer.

Yield is the product

Lee also said that yield is the biggest hurdle to wafer-on-wafer mass production. The repair architecture has to be designed in, with testing before bonding, after bonding, and then after logic integration. Lee’s own example was 80% yield per layer, at which four layers come out at about 41% and eight at 17%. Our recently-published hybrid bonding state of play covers the process side in more detail.

This better puts into perspective why the company sells repair and known-good-die IP as much as it does bandwidth. It’s also why an IP-and-royalty model fits the strategy — yield IP is portable across customers while a bandwidth number is not.

What to watch

For PieceMakers, AI revenue remains primarily NRE until there is a first named customer, with the first volume program expected in 2027 at the earliest. Ting said that Nanya’s Q3 2026 results, which come in late October, will gauge the PieceMakers gain and reveal further financial information. SK hynix’s hybrid-bonding timing, which targets HBM5 at the earliest, is the current benchmark, although its 16- and 20-layer memory stacks are a separate problem from a few DRAM layers on a logic wafer. Qualcomm may also describe its relationship with PieceMakers more formally.

PieceMakers is likely to end up as an IP licensor with a small number of accelerator customers and turnkey volume through Nanya and Formosa Advanced Technologies. The technology risk is the foundry’s and the customer’s, which is why PieceMakers’ design-fee model works. PieceMakers is expected to benefit from a 2027–2028 ramp, later than Ting’s 2027. If the largest HBM maker won’t bond its own memory this way before HBM5, PieceMakers’ own 2027 date is the one it must meet.

Anti-Tamper and DRM (Digital Rights Management) software developer Denuvo is taking its fight against video game piracy to court by filing a lawsuit against the anonymous game cracker known as “voices38.” According to TorrentFreak, the company claims that the accused bypassed its Anti-Tamper technology in at least 26 PC games and is seeking monetary damages as well as a court order that would prevent further tampering of its DRM.

In its lawsuit filed on September 14 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Denuvo alleges that the “defendant is a computer hacker who is focused on reverse engineering, hacking, or ‘cracking’ video games employing Denuvo’s Anti-Tamper product. Defendant has bypassed DRM restrictions in copyrighted works, removing protections that allow copyright owners to restrict who may access their works, and allowing for pirated versions of those copyrighted works.” The complaint also named 26 games including popular titles such as Hogwarts Legacy, Black Myth: Wukong, Resident Evil Requiem, and Doom: The Dark Ages.

It is worth mentioning that Denuvo doesn’t actually own the copyrights to any of these games. Meaning that instead of a filing for copyright infringement, the complaint relies on the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA. It essentially prohibits bypassing a digital lock that controls access to a copyrighted work, or distributing tools and instructions that help others to bypass copyright protections.

What makes the case interesting is that Denuvo does not know the real identity of voices38. It only points to the defendant as “an unknown individual or entity” alongside ten other unnamed defendants. The complaint also references Reddit and Discord accounts as well as Steam profiles that Denuvo believes may be connected to the cracking activity. The company could eventually seek information from these platforms as part of its legal proceedings.

Voices38 has been particularly active in recent months, with reports pointing to a growing number of Denuvo-protected game cracks to the anonymous cracker. Recent releases include Star Wars: Outlaws, Persona 3 Reload, and Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown. For Denuvo, the lawsuit could lead the way in identifying one of the more active figures in the recent video game-cracking scene. That said, the case is still in its early stages, and Denuvo's allegations have yet to be tested in court.

Micron this week introduced its first 512GB DDR5-9200 memory module that is designed for servers used for applications that demand a lot of memory. The new modules — which are currently being validated by AMD and Intel with their next-generation server platforms — will enable server makers to build machines with up to 12TB of fast memory. What remains to be seen is the price of such modules and servers.

To build its 512GB DDR5 RDIMM, Micron uses advanced packaging that stacks multiple DRAM dies vertically and connects them using through-silicon vias (TSVs). The company does not disclose which memory devices and how many of them it uses, but claims that a single 512GB RDIMM consumes over 60% less operating power than four 128GB modules — based on 16.0W for one 512GB module compared with the 44.2W total for four 128GB modules — which suggests that we are dealing with fairly advanced ICs.

Micron's 512GB module is not the industry's first 512GB DDR5 RDIMM — that achievement belongs to Samsung — but it is certainly the industry's first 512GB module certified to operate with a 9200 MT/s data transfer rate with standard 1.1V voltage (which implies on usage of Micron's 16Gb DDR5-9200 devices made on its 1γ (1-gamma) fabrication process that uses EUV lithography and consumes 20% less power than predecessors, though we are speculating).

Truth to be told, 512GB DDR5 memory modules are rather niche products, which is perhaps why Samsung's 512GB RDIMMs formally introduced in 2021 have not become widespread even after AMD and Intel introduced processors with over 100 cores. Micron positions its 512GB DDR5 RDIMM primarily for servers running analytics, in-memory databases, simulations, virtualization, agentic AI, and other workloads demanding high-core-count processors and plenty of memory. As processors with 200 or more cores emerge, 512GB modules may become more relevant as 12TB of memory in a server running two 256-core CPUs means 24GB per core, which no longer looks particularly excessive for applications like in-memory databases, analytics, or caching.

Micron claims that in memory-constrained Spark Support Vector Machine (SVM) analytics workloads, systems featuring 512GB memory modules can provide up to 1.4 times the performance of configurations equipped with 256GB DDR5 modules, though the company does not disclose how much memory in total these systems use. Micron also says the higher-capacity memory can increase throughput and concurrency for memory-intensive database and caching applications such as RocksDB and Redis.

AMD and Intel are working with Micron to qualify the new modules for their upcoming server platforms. Micron plans to begin volume production of its 512GB DDR5 RDIMMs sometime in the second half of 2027 and intends to align the schedule with customer requirements.

One of the more pressing questions about Micron's 512GB DDR5-9200 memory modules is their price. A 256GB DDR5-6400 RDIMM currently retails for around $19,000. Given the unique proposition that 512GB modules have for memory-constrained applications, such modules can cost significantly more than 256GB memory sticks, which will not help their broad adoption.

With the ongoing memory shortage, smaller smartphone and laptop manufacturers are reportedly looking at new ways to tackle the problem. While some are changing how they design their products, others are placing orders months in advance and are even forced to test incoming memory chips to make sure they are not fake. A Reuters report suggests that more than the price, availability has become a bigger problem, with manufacturers struggling to secure enough chips in the first place. Still, device makers like Fairphone say that memory now makes up nearly 60% of a device's bill of materials.

Back in July, memory maker SK Hynix’s CEO Kwak Noh-jung said that 2027 will be the "worst year" for the ongoing memory shortage and expects the memory crunch to last until 2030. For smaller manufacturers, however, simply paying more for memory isn't always enough. The situation is particularly difficult for budget-oriented phones and laptops, where memory makes up a much larger portion of the overall product cost.

According to Raymond van Eck, CEO of repairable-phone maker Fairphone, memory can account for almost 60% of the bill of materials in phones costing around $400. That itself is worrying, as a recent Counterpoint Research report expects global smartphone shipments to fall 13.9% this year to 1.08 billion units, marking the largest annual decline on record.

Finnish phone maker Jolla has designed two motherboard versions, allowing it to switch between combined packages for discrete chips depending on availability. The company is also testing samples from every batch it receives to ensure new memory isn't being sold as refurbished hardware.

Similarly, laptop manufacturer Framework has been able to rely on its highly modular approach where customers can install memory salvaged from older laptops or opt for second-hand units, giving the company and its users another way to deal with limited supply. The company is also placing non-cancellable orders well in advance, even when it doesn't know the final price or exact delivery volume.

Back in July, it nearly doubled memory pricing for 32GB and 64GB variants of the Framework Laptop 13 Pro after receiving a cost update from its LPCAMM2 supplier. However, after sourcing new inventory at a reduced cost, the company recently announced a price drop for the same, including retroactive orders that have already shipped.

China's state-run newspaper has downplayed the call of Anthropic founder Dario Amodei to “pace the frontier.” China Daily, the official English mouthpiece of the Communist Party of China, questioned the move, which was supported by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and SpaceXAI’s Elon Musk, asking if they were doing it out of concern for humanity or if they’re afraid of competition from China.

“The report, and the corporate ‘alliance’ that followed it, amounted in essence to a coordinated play — a response to Chinese competition and to the regulatory pressure coming from Washington. Its aims were threefold: to blunt China's AI advance, to win a favorable policy environment at home and to keep investors' enthusiasm for US AI alight,” the publication wrote. It further criticized the move thusly: “The proposed coordination among the three companies sounds rather like a club whose membership rules have been drafted before the guest list is announced. A global AI-safety framework that excludes China is not quite global.”

The paper also called out the U.S. efforts in blocking Chinese AI advancement, both through hardware, by blocking Beijing’s access to the latest Nvidia chips, and software, with Amodei’s multiple accusations of illegal distillation of Claude by Chinese AI labs. China Daily said that these efforts have apparently failed, and cited the success of the DeepSeek and Kimi K3 models, which turned out to perform well enough but at a much lower cost.

The availability of those models has resulted in many AI users shifting demand to cheaper tokens, like Kimi K3 (low) and DeepSeek V4 Pro, over the expensive frontier models like Fable 5.1, GPT 5.6 Sol, Grok 4.6, and Kimi K3 (max).

China Daily also took issue with Amodei’s focus on excluding China from his proposal. It suggests that the move is meant to widen the technological gap between the two rivals when it comes to AI technology and give American AI labs breathing room to “pace the frontier,” and that it reveals how Washington sees Chinese AI as an existential threat.

Nevertheless, Chinese policy acknowledges some of the risks that Amodei raised. The Standardization Administration of China, in cooperation with the Cyberspace Administration of China, says that the development of AI technology must be monitored as it may go beyond human control.

“Treating the AI race as a zero-sum game makes the cooperation needed to manage those risks more difficult. China and the US should cooperate where neither can manage the consequences alone,” says the state media outfit. “The planned AI-safety dialogue between the two sides and future high-level exchanges offer opportunities for practical engagement. The promise of AI lies in serving humanity's common good, not in being weaponized for geopolitical gain or instrumentalized for personal profit.”