|
Full OC report when you get home and tweak it, Animal? 
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:23 |
|
|
Yes tonight, unless I get sent on a trip at work while my package sits in the front door for days (being a reserve airline pilot sucks when you are receiving new hardware)
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Agreed posted:That said... If everybody agrees that the Game of Pwns poster is, More like the Silicon Pwn, made of the melted chips from GPUs burnt out from overclocking and cooled by nerd tears
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 19:18
|
|
, just the worst, then who shall sit atop the Iron Pwn?
|
Kramjacks posted:When I first connected my 1080p TV to my PC I also had bad overscan. I fixed it by going into the TV's menu and finding an option to change, something like "input type", and it fixed the overscan and gave 1:1 pixel ratio. Thanks alot man! After doing a firmware update on my old lcd tv (dunno if that was neccessary), I found what you mentioned and solved my overscan. Wonderful!
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
Dogen posted:More like the Silicon Pwn, made of the melted chips from GPUs burnt out from overclocking and cooled by nerd tears 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
And that's a wrap. Well done, guys.Animal posted:Yes tonight, unless I get sent on a trip at work while my package sits in the front door for days (being a reserve airline pilot sucks when you are receiving new hardware) Yeah but... you can fly airplanes, holy poo poo that's cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Agreed posted:I hope it didn't come off as me wanting thanks for just rapping about video card stuff, what else would I do? Play games? lol no Not at all, I just wanted to say thanks because I found the guide very helpful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
Thoom posted:Not at all, I just wanted to say thanks because I found the guide very helpful. Ah... Well, I am glad I could help. I know I get a bit rambly, but there's info in there, dagnabbit  I bet you've got more room on the VRAM if you want it, although with the memory bandwidth limitation more or less lifted thanks to the 384-bit bus, it's not going to be as much of a limiting factor as it was with the 680. But if you're wanting every bit of performance out of it, EVGA is using high quality Samsung 1500MHz GDDR5 modules and it should be easy to get another 50 or even 100mhz out of their base clockrate. The memory controller is good and can handle it, nVidia is even shipping 1750MHz GDDR5 on the GTX 770 - you've got a great core overclock, maybe see if you can get some more memory bandwidth going on to improve overall performance, eh? Mine topped out at 6600MHz, or +300, or base clock 1650MHz. If you were able to push it to +500, that would be 1750GHz (a 250MHz overclock of the GDDR5, so not trivially easy - but also not going to hurt the card if you give it a shot briefly, find it doesn't work, and need to back down) and effective clockrate of 7GHz. And given the high TDP of the 780 and the fact that our EVGA SC ACX units run at 1.2V with max overvoltage set, it shouldn't stop the core clock from being nice and high, either. I mention that because with the GTX 680 it was a balancing act: with its lower TDP and 256-bit memory bus, in order to get the results of the core OC and not hit a bandwidth wall you had to overclock the GDDR5, but if you overclocked it too much then you'd run out of allowed power and that was that. The GTX 780 doesn't face that issue, since it has the same TDP as Titan but less SMXs and no power-hungry full DP CUDA cores (and half the VRAM to power, for that matter). It's a card with a lot of headroom, and a 50MHz GDDR5 overclock isn't getting the most from it - if that's your goal, of course.  If you'd like a general target, 6600MHz effective clockrate is a good number to shoot for - that's +300, and well within reach of the memory controller on the GPU and the hardware controllers that make up the bus. Just a question of whether that particular Samsung GDDR5 can take it 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Stuff starts crashing at +120MHz on the memory. Is it possible I could get some more headroom on the memory by reducing my OC on the core clock, and if so is there any point at which that tradeoff is actually worth it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
Thoom posted:Stuff starts crashing at +120MHz on the memory. Is it possible I could get some more headroom on the memory by reducing my OC on the core clock, and if so is there any point at which that tradeoff is actually worth it? Nope. Every card has walls, it's unusual for the memory to wall that low but your core clock is nice so I wouldn't worry too much about it. It isn't a bandwidth starved card to begin with - getting more out of the GDDR5 is an exercise in overclocking for fun almost as much as for performance. My card's memory would run 3Dmark Firestrike at +500, or 7GHz, without crashing. I lost 10 points (which is well within the margin of error for the test, anyway) going back to +300 when I noticed some artifacts in 3Dmark11 and Heaven. So not a big deal if you "only" get 50MHz out of the GDDR5.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
I am getting a stable clockrate of +51 on my 780. Stable in the sense that if I raise it even a little more than that, Crysis 3 will crash and burn. Everything else seems to run fine though - is it just a case where Crysis 3 is a bit more sensitive to instability?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
I am now ready to play THE GAME OF PWNS
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
Shadowhand00 posted:I am getting a stable clockrate of +51 on my 780. Stable in the sense that if I raise it even a little more than that, Crysis 3 will crash and burn. Everything else seems to run fine though - is it just a case where Crysis 3 is a bit more sensitive to instability? Probably, the first 2 were notorious for this as well. If a game works the GPU harder it's going to expose overclock instability, much like how you might be able to boot into windows with a CPU overclock, but that doesn't mean it's going to handle a run of intelburntest or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
Animal posted:I am now ready to play THE GAME OF PWNS Glad it arrived in one piece! I'm scanning in the sales receipt for it now, I'll shoot you an email in a couple of minutes. Please (Please) don't send me one of those game of pwns posters. I have two, and that's enough, holy poo poo. please
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
Shadowhand00 posted:I am getting a stable clockrate of +51 on my 780. Stable in the sense that if I raise it even a little more than that, Crysis 3 will crash and burn. Everything else seems to run fine though - is it just a case where Crysis 3 is a bit more sensitive to instability? I love Crysis 3 because apart from maybe Metro: Last Light, it flexes DX11 logic moreso than pretty much any other game. For real-world testing it is fantastic (benchmark software goes so far, and then you need to  actually play games to test stability). Far Cry 3 is another good one but some current bugginess with certain shadows makes it a little bit less reliable. Metro 2033 is fantastic for DX9, DX10, and DX11 testing since it has a flexible engine that runs each, and does it right - DX9 is its own thing, kinda, but DX10 and DX11 have what you look for in a truly optimized engine, which is that with the same features enabled (that is, DX11 specific stuff turned off) all you get is better performance thanks to DX11 optimizations.The Witcher 2 is a heavily demanding DX9 game, turn on Ubersampling and if you can play it just fine, fantastic. I've found with both Fermi and Kepler that DX9 games actually seem to be weirdly more demanding on the core clock than DX10 or DX11 games. That is, a higher clock may be stable at DX11 but crash out or driver reset in a demanding DX9 game. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. - SHoC with Complete 2009 and everything cranked graphically (except AA, the X-Ray engine does not do AA worth a poo poo and it's more likely to cause the game to crash) with the fancy shaders available for SHoC and Clear Sky is a very highly demanding DX9 game, too. All the logic of the GPU is used differently by different engines with different DX levels. The good news is that nothing about the above stuff means actually going around testing the card rigorously. You just play your games, and if you notice instability, lower your OC. You'll find the lowest common denominator overclock as you just play your games, and once you're there, you won't have to mess with the settings for the card again ever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Alright agreed, using your guide I overclocked the card from default to +180 on the core and +300 on the memory. It seemed mediocre, but the Metro 2033 benchmark went from an average of 55fps to 63fps, holy crap! Thats a huge performance gain from what seems like a mild overclock. And this is with the reference cooler. What an awesome video card.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
Animal posted:Alright agreed, using your guide I overclocked the card from default to +180 on the core and +300 on the memory. It seemed mediocre, but the Metro 2033 benchmark went from an average of 55fps to 63fps, holy crap! Thats a huge performance gain from what seems like a mild overclock. And this is with the reference cooler. What an awesome video card. Awesome! Do you guys think I should formalize a Boost 2.0 overclocking guide? Right now all my thoughts and info are kind of spread around among a bunch of posts, and not highly organized.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
All this talk of overclocking makes me wonder if I should bother doing it with my 7850s. Due to Crossfire, I suppose I'd get held back by the lesser of the two cards? The main reason I haven't really bothered yet is that, as some people might recall, I'm held back by my second GPU going through the PCH with a glorious PCI-E 1.1 x4. Am I mistaken in that I could still eke out some gains from overclocking, and it just means the cards will still go faster, just at the slower 1.1 x4 bus multiplier?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
Agreed posted:Awesome! Heck yeah; I missed your guide a few pages(?) ago apparently, PM me links to those and I'll totally throw them in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
movax posted:Heck yeah; I missed your guide a few pages(?) ago apparently, PM me links to those and I'll totally throw them in the OP. Hah, it's pretty easy to miss - right now, my "guide" consists of my first posts after getting the ACX installed and learning how to do it myself, then several more posts helping Zotix overclock his since Boost 2.0 is a little confusing even compared to Boost 1.0 (I tells ya, overclocking the 650 TI with its old-style, no boost, three variable overclock was awesome, but that won't be the standard going forward). I linked Animal a post that comes the closest to a guide, as such, but I am fairly confident that I could formalize my thoughts into a more compact, easily parsed, no-scare-quotes guide. I'll work on it and post it up, and PM you when it's good to go, deal?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
Jan posted:All this talk of overclocking makes me wonder if I should bother doing it with my 7850s. Due to Crossfire, I suppose I'd get held back by the lesser of the two cards? The main reason I haven't really bothered yet is that, as some people might recall, I'm held back by my second GPU going through the PCH with a glorious PCI-E 1.1 x4. Am I mistaken in that I could still eke out some gains from overclocking, and it just means the cards will still go faster, just at the slower 1.1 x4 bus multiplier? I can speak to this from experience: You are 100% free to clock them independently, but that might contribute to uneven frame times, i.e. microstutter. Best practice is to clock them for equal performance. Also, overclocking a CF pair will get odd. I have a pair of 6850s. Independently, both reach 940 MHz core at the 6870 ref voltage (stock is 775 MHz). One reaches 1150 MHz VRAM, one stops at 1050 MHz (and will show artifacts if I do a marathon 4+ hour gaming session, which is a good sign to stop). But when they're in CF, I needed to overvolt to get past 900 MHz, which I didn't consider worth it to pursue, so I just stuck them both on the max driver overclock of 850 MHz.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 02:07
|
|
|
I'm getting some strange behavior overclocking the 780. On EVGA Precision, if I run the Furry EVGA test it will bring the voltage up to 1,112mn and the core to 1,123mhz. But if I run the more intensive Furry/Tessy Donut test, will go to about 975mn and 966mhz. I have the overclock set to Temp Targetr and the slider all the way to 94 degrees. Also I have the voltage set to overvolt and max voltage. -edit- During the Metro 2033 benchmark the core goes all the way up to 1.2Ghz, so I am guessing its an issue with the Precision X stress tests... Animal fucked around with this message at 16:08 on Jun 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 16:04
|
|
|
Finally settled for an overclock of +175 core, +300 memory. Firestrike score is 9883. Pretty happy at this level of performance now time to actually play games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Animal posted:Finally settled for an overclock of +175 core, +300 memory. Firestrike score is 9883. Pretty happy at this level of performance now time to actually play games. If you've got it, turn on Borderlands 2 and force 2x2 Supersampling via nVidiaInspector, play for a bit, and see how the memory clock holds up. I had to back mine down from +300 because that not-even-all-that-demanding DX9 game driver crashed me. Core clock is a-okay, but it was not happy with the effective +150MHz GDDR5. It's fine with +100MHz, and the performance difference between 6600MHz and 6400MHz is really negligible. I say again, unless you're rocking a MASSIVE core clock there's no way these are bandwidth starved cards.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
I have BL2. Downloaded Nvidia Inspector 1.9 but cant find where to change that setting. -edit- never mind, figured it out. Will be back with results. -edit2- played it for a few minutes with 2x2 Supersampling and no crashing. Framerate pegged at 60fps. Animal fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Jun 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
Animal posted:I have BL2. Downloaded Nvidia Inspector 1.9 but cant find where to change that setting. Did you make sure to change the AA mode to "Enhance Application Setting?" It's the one right above the actual AA setting. Borderlands 2 runs on a heavily modified UE3 engine (pretty much all UE3 games run on a heavily modified UE3 engine, so that part is not unusual, obviously, it's kinda the point  ); it is therefore not a very demanding game and also runs on a deferred rendering system that only accepts the brute-force type AA modes, and since it uses FXAA tuned somewhat as its own AA setting in-game as either on or off, you can't force FXAA in the drivers (shader-based AA doesn't stack like that). Supersampling works on every D3D game, but is a performance hog - we just happen to be using cards that can easily handle the demands of the AA mode.You can max it with much lower hardware than this. However, there are certain scenarios where it becomes demanding - with PhysX maxed, for example, and with higher levels (more than 1x2 or 2x1) of supersampling AA turned on. Re: no issues, solid framerate - same here, for about an hour, maybe an hour and a half. This despite Crysis 3 running fine for extended gameplay, no artifacts in benchmarks, etc.; if you don't particularly enjoy Borderlands 2, I wouldn't worry too much about it, but you might be surprised at what your eventual lowest common denominator (and thus fully stable) clocks are going to be. Found another cool thing I am liking about the 780 vs. 580 and 680: its driver crash and recovery behavior doesn't actually take you out of the game. Resets your overclock, but all you have to actually deal with is a black screen for a few seconds while it resets the driver then you're still in-game. Previously you'd usually have to ctrl+alt+delete and kill the process. Cool. Agreed fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Jun 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
I selected "Override any application setting". I'll try it with Enhance. I actually brought the memory down to +200 just in case since it should not provide a big performance boost anyways, might as well err on the stability side.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
Agreed you are absolutely right, Borderlands 2 hung and I had to alt-ctrl-del out. There was no driver crash message so I assume thats a memory crash?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 21:37
|
|
|
Hopefully it's not in too poor of form to crosspost my SA-Mart thread here, but I do so because of generosity to GPU thread folk, who are some of the finest folk on this forum. Knock $30 off the 680+ to bring it to $330 shipped, $20 off the 570s individually, $25 off the pair. If you've got any more detailed questions about them, feel free to hit up the e-mail address in the thread and I'll provide as much detail as you'd like. (If a mod wants me to edit this out, just let me know.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
Animal posted:Agreed you are absolutely right, Borderlands 2 hung and I had to alt-ctrl-del out. There was no driver crash message so I assume thats a memory crash? On the one hand, called it... On the other,  Hard to say. I am one data point for the driver recovery behavior, it could be something idiosyncratic to my system w/r/t actually staying in-game. The kind of crash doesn't tell you too much about what specifically was overworked, unfortunately. Could be core, could be memory. But I'd try backing the VRAM off first and see if that fixes it. I noticed some memory-style artifacts about 15 minutes before the crash, so I was kind of expecting it... And it appeared to behave completely fine after I went from +300 to +200. I haven't noticed any performance difference as a result of the memory overclock, and with 307.6GB/sec memory bandwidth, frankly I wouldn't expect to. I don't know what could be THAT memory limited in any modern game, seriously. Consider that it's substantially more than 100GB/sec faster than the 192GB/sec GTX 680 shipped with, or 224GB/sec the GTX 770 ships with. The performance difference from 7GHz in Firestrike benchmark (which would show a memory bottleneck thanks to its GPGPU and heavy texture dependency) compared to 6600MHz and compared to 6400MHz is negligible in my system, worth a dozen 3DMark points or so. That's within the margin of error and you can get them back or lose another 10 or more just by running the benchmark again. I don't know of any games now or in development that are going to be at all bandwidth limited by the 680 (192GB/sec), the 770 (224GB/sec), or the 780 at stock with 288.4GB/sec. Thanks to its wide memory bus, a few hundred effective MHz leads to substantial boosts. 400MHz effective (100MHz base clock) overclock is good for an additional 20GB/sec, and it's probably not even doing much of anything. Give up memory OC first if you suspect instability. If it doesn't change instability, drop the core. Once things are stable again, raise the memory back up. It can't hurt anything, there's ample TDP on the 780 to have your cake and eat it too. No balancing act like with the 680 where you had to hit a balanced point that raised memory bandwidth and core simultaneously, or else you'd not get the benefits of the core clock. 192.2GB/sec is a bit thin, though you could hardly tell in real-world performance until you start overclocking it substantially.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
I'm surprised to see the driver crash recovery actually has a difference with later models, is this a Nvidia limitation? I always assumed this was a part of the spec for GPU drivers since Win7. Have a 7700 Radeon which during a hot week I had overclocked too much and got several "restarts" in various games during the day, and repeated over several days till I found a more stable profile. However the game just paused, screen flashed a couple of times, then kept going. Overclocking settings were not reset (albeit that may actually be a feature in Nvidia's drivers).
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 00:43
|
|
|
Agreed posted:Found another cool thing I am liking about the 780 vs. 580 and 680: its driver crash and recovery behavior doesn't actually take you out of the game. Resets your overclock, but all you have to actually deal with is a black screen for a few seconds while it resets the driver then you're still in-game. Previously you'd usually have to ctrl+alt+delete and kill the process. Cool. Huh, how does that even work? Driver crashes go beyond the good old D3D device losses of yore... Unless the engine explicitly tries to handle and recover from such an event, I don't see how it could work for all games. I mean, you could argue that the driver could remember all the allocations, make a copy of every render target on a driver crash and then restore everything, but then why not do that for all GPUs, not just the 780? Is there something particular to its architecture that could handle that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
Jan posted:Huh, how does that even work? Driver crashes go beyond the good old D3D device losses of yore... Unless the engine explicitly tries to handle and recover from such an event, I don't see how it could work for all games. No clue, but with the 680 during preliminary OCing it would not recover such that the game was playable. By contrast, the 780 flashes black for a bit while the driver resets to stock clocks with no overvolting, and then you see the game again without having to ctrl+alt+del kill the process. But it could be, as I said earlier, something weirdly idiosyncratic about my system specifically. No idea. I won't be remarking on it in the guide I'm writing to overclocking Boost 2.0. Which could be titled "Overvolt, Power Target Max, Thermal Target Max, Prioritize Thermals, dick around with memory, especially important for 770 and under, exhaustive testing, DONE" if those weren't somewhat novel concepts for a lot of people who haven't used Boost 2.0 or haven't OC'd at all but want to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 02:45
|
|
|
What fresh bullshit is this. < > I was all excited to try out Blood Dragon on this fancy new 680, and it won't clock above 540 MHz. It's a beautiful 20 FPS slideshow. There's nothing on the Googles and no newer drivers for me to update to, either. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 03:05
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:What fresh bullshit is this. < Is it stuck on the wrong power state 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
Yeah. It's working fine elsewhere... bluh. Oh well, Blood Dragon is not really an eye candy game, and I've already finished it to boot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
Agreed posted:No clue, but with the 680 during preliminary OCing it would not recover such that the game was playable. By contrast, the 780 flashes black for a bit while the driver resets to stock clocks with no overvolting, and then you see the game again without having to ctrl+alt+del kill the process. My 670 does that too. When it's straight up too fast it'll still crash, but a step down from that will cause it to reset to stock and continue on. Gracefully recovering from crashes seems to be like the holy grail of driver programming, in a couple more generations overclocking might become as simple as enabling overclock mode and playing games long enough for the drivers to collect enough information about the capabilities of your card. Factory Factory: What do the power % and GPU usage percent look like in Precision? I agree it sounds like it's not switching into the 3D state. (If I remember right 540Mhz is the high power 2D state, it's not even in the range of 3D power states)
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 03:45
|
|
|
99% utilization, 33% power. It clocks between full idle and high-2D/3D idle clocks., but doesn't go beyond.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
Is power management mode in the Nvidia panel set to prefer maximum performance? I can't think of anything else that would cause it since the drivers are detecting the utilization correctly and it's not maxed out on power yet. It's probably sticking to .987v too, right?
craig588 fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Jun 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 04:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 23:23 |
|
|
Does multi monitor power saver for nvidiainspector work on 600s? You can try that to kick it into P0.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2013 04:48
|
|