nVidia GTX 465 flashing to GTX 470: Fact or Fantasy?

[EarthDog]

A GTX460 1GB and a GTX465 are equal performance wise, but the GTX465 consumes more power. The GTX465 is better than a GTX460 768MB since the disabled ROPS really hurt the GTX460's performance, not to mention dropping below 1GB of memory actually does have an effect on certain current games.



The GTX560 just barely beats it, and again that is because nVidia went way conservative with the first fermi clock speeds. I haven't seen a GTX470 yet that couldn't do 800MHz/1000MHz, and at 800MHz/1000MHz, a GTX470 beats any overclocked GTX560.

Like I said, you have to overclock the 560 to be fair. And we arent talking about Nvidia's marketing strategy on reference clocks here bro. Beats it plenty, 5% or more in all tests. And it overclocks pretty darn well too... Soooooooo yeah. It beats it, period.

With the facts straight, the only question here is if that $50 is worth it to the buyer.

 

[newtekie1]

Like I said, you have to overclock the 560 to be fair. And we arent talking about Nvidia's marketing strategy on reference clocks here bro. Beats it plenty, 5% or more in all tests. And it overclocks pretty darn well too... Soooooooo yeah. It beats it, period.

With the facts straight, the only question here is if that $50 is worth it to the buyer.

I'll repeat myself for the hard of reading:

and at 800MHz/1000MHz, a GTX470 beats any overclocked GTX560.

And last I checked the GTX560 really didn't overclock all that well thanks to nVidia pushing the card pretty close to its limits already. The GTX470 that gives a 30% overclock overclocks pretty darn well in my eyes, the GTX560 that can barely muster 15% isn't doing all that well in my eyes. So, no, it doesn't beat it overall.

 

[cdawall]

I'll repeat myself for the hard of reading:



And last I checked the GTX560 really didn't overclock all that well thanks to nVidia pushing the card pretty close to its limits already. The GTX470 that gives a 30% overclock overclocks pretty darn well in my eyes, the GTX560 that can barely muster 15% isn't doing all that well in my eyes. So, no, it doesn't beat it overall.

any suggestions on mine i can't come close to 800mhz core i also know for a fact that the 560 didn't clock for shit like 930 core max...

 

[newtekie1]

any suggestions on mine i can't come close to 800mhz core i also know for a fact that the 560 didn't clock for shit like 930 core max...

Do you have one of those recert ones? It is a refence PCB, so it should overvolt without a problem using Afterburner. I know I had to unlock the voltage on mine and push it to 1.15v to get it to do 800MHz stable, but it still did it.

 

[cdawall]

Do you have one of those recert ones? It is a refence PCB, so it should overvolt without a problem using Afterburner. I know I had to unlock the voltage on mine and push it to 1.15v to get it to do 800MHz stable, but it still did it.

i have the recert reference one and afterburner has volts greyed out

 

[newtekie1]

i have the recert reference one and afterburner has volts greyed out

Did you go into the settings and enable voltage control and monitoring in Afterburner? It is disabled by default.

 

[cdawall]

Did you go into the settings and enable voltage control and monitoring in Afterburner? It is disabled by default.

probably not i am pretty good at not paying attention to minor details how did you unlock yours to 1.15v?

 

[plunx]

go into afterburner's installation directory, find the MSIafterburner.cfg file and change the unnofficialoverclocking value from 0 to 1. you should be able to have voltage control just by going to 'settings' and enabling it in there through the program itself.

 

[newtekie1]

probably not i am pretty good at not paying attention to minor details how did you unlock yours to 1.15v?

I had to flash it with a modded BIOS, actually an eVGA SuperClock bios that I modified to unlock the voltage maximum to 1.212v, but 1.15v is the highest I'll go.

go into afterburner's installation directory, find the MSIafterburner.cfg file and change the unnofficialoverclocking value from 0 to 1. you should be able to have voltage control just by going to 'settings' and enabling it in there through the program itself.

That won't allow you to overvolt past 1.087v, you need to modify the BIOS on the card to go beyond that.

 

[plunx]

you're right, i forgot all about the 1.087 limit, but just curious, were there any 460 or 470 superclock BIOS that let you go higher with the voltage? or is this just with the GTX 560?

 

[newtekie1]

you're right, i forgot all about the 1.087 limit, but just curious, were there any 460 or 470 superclock BIOS that let you go higher with the voltage? or is this just with the GTX 560?

Yeah, all my cards are flashed with BIOSes that allow up to 1.212v. The GTX560 is limitted to 1.15v by default, but there are BIOSes available that allow 1.212v as well, the GTX570/580 both can do 1.212v without a modified BIOS.

 

[plunx]

alright cool, that's a really good thing to know. with the GTX 460 i was able to use for about a day, i overclocked it a bit but I wasn't able to get much more than an 870 MHz core at the 1.087v, i'm thinking that if i were to go ahead and get a GTX 460 like the one i tried, i could get it to higher clocks if i was able to use higher voltages, but i also don't think i'd go much higher than 1.15v without being worried.

 

[Benetanegia]

Wow I must have an exceptional GTX 460 that's being pretty much wasted in my hands. Mine did 845 Mhz on the stock voltage (0.95V) and 865 Mhz with 1.0V when I tried it, I just didn't want to go further and that's why I say it's being wasted lol. Actually I just didn't want to waste more time when even at 800 Mhz is capable of playing everything just fine. I have it at 830 with stock volts now.

In both cases I think it was 100% stable, but who knows for sure. For every OC, I tested stability with 5 mins of Furmark, because I just don't trust t much and temperature didn't raise after the second minute, then 2 loops of Vantage, 2 loops 3Dmark06, 2 loops 3Dmark11, 2 loops heaven, 2 Crysis, 2 Mafia.

 

[cdawall]

I had to flash it with a modded BIOS, actually an eVGA SuperClock bios that I modified to unlock the voltage maximum to 1.212v, but 1.15v is the highest I'll go.



That won't allow you to overvolt past 1.087v, you need to modify the BIOS on the card to go beyond that.

1.05 is enough for 800c/1600s/1800m so sounds like a keeper for now

 

[EarthDog]

I'll repeat myself for the hard of reading:



And last I checked the GTX560 really didn't overclock all that well thanks to nVidia pushing the card pretty close to its limits already. The GTX470 that gives a 30% overclock overclocks pretty darn well in my eyes, the GTX560 that can barely muster 15% isn't doing all that well in my eyes. So, no, it doesn't beat it overall.

And I'll say for the oblivous to the obvious...(just having fun with j00 man!!!). Stock clocks on th 560ti are at 820 core in the first place... So explain how the hell a card with less Shaders is faster clock for clock than an overclocked 560ti? Does the memory bandwidth really make that big of a difference? Can you post some screenshots of this actually happening or should I trust you b/c of post count?

(that is a serious question actually)

 

[cdawall]

And I'll say for the oblivous to the obvious...(just having fun with j00 man!!!). Stock clocks on th 560ti are at 820 core in the first place... So explain how the hell a card with less Shaders is faster clock for clock than an overclocked 560ti? Does the memory bandwidth really make that big of a difference? Can you post some screenshots of this actually happening or should I trust you b/c of post count?

(that is a serious question actually)

i think maybe just maybe the 470 has more shaders but thats just a guess not based off of fact or anything

oh wait yea it is here is the review in fact

 

[EarthDog]

Sweet jebus... thought it was less for some reason. Thanks for the correction!

 

[newtekie1]

i think maybe just maybe the 470 has more shaders but thats just a guess not based off of fact or anything

http://img.techpowerup.org/110228/Capture063.jpg http://img.techpowerup.org/110228/gtx470.png

oh wait yea it is here is the review in fact

Not to mention more ROPs and a larger memory bus. How else would a GTX470 still be so close to the GTX560 with only a 620MHz core clock?

 

[cdawall]

Not to mention more ROPs and a larger memory bus. Else would a GTX470 still be so close to the GTX560 with only a 620MHz core clock?

well it has better shaders not more of them

 

[largon]

I bought two Point of View GTX465s in June '10, soon after reports of their unlockability appeared. The first thing I did with them after unboxing was I took the coolers off just to confirm both cards had 10 RAM chips and GF100-275-A3 cores onboard.
Stuffed them buggers both with a plain GTX470 bios.
Aaand presto!
Two fully working GTX470s in SLi, ever since.

 

[Shihab]

Lucky you. Mine is a real GTX 465. Why didn't I take that 460

 

[JEskandari]

Lucky you. Mine is a real GTX 465. Why didn't I take that 460

because you made the mistake of not buying a Point of View or MSI Teine Frozer Golden Edition or PNY With Black Board .
by the way why hit your head to the wall your GPU have far more Compute Capabilities
than Mine.

 

[Shihab]

I read somewhere that ZOTAC's was also unlockable. Should have done more research >_<
The reason why I regret getting this one instead of teh 460 is the damned heat !. I stand by the opinion that Fermi isn't hot. But this Fermi is smokin' !

 

[newtekie1]

I read somewhere that ZOTAC's was also unlockable. Should have done more research >_<
The reason why I regret getting this one instead of teh 460 is the damned heat !. I stand by the opinion that Fermi isn't hot. But this Fermi is smokin' !

You really shouldn't regret it all that much, the amount of heat the GTX465 puts out is only marginally more than the GTX460. You're talking when sitting idle maybe 10w more, and when under load maybe 25w more. That really isn't all that much more heat. I don't think you'd be all that much more happy with a GTX460 if heat was your concern.

 

[plunx]

i ordered a Zotac just to check it out; it has 10 memory chips, but it has the GF100-030-A3 GPU. that sucks, at least it seems to overclock well.

also, this gets REALLY hot. when i first got it and took the heatsink off of the GPU, there was enough thermal paste there for three or four Fermi GPUs. i took it all off and used some crappy silicone stuff instead, but it only dropped the temperatures by about 4 C. overall (this could have just been because it was making better contact after than before; there are small 'grooves' in the heatsink inbetween the copper pipes that touch the GPU and there were two noticable places that weren't making very good contact in the first place). i'm hoping to get some mx-2 or actic silver some time this weekend and try that out, i think the heat is the main problem because as soon as it gets around 85 or 86 C. you start seeing bad artifacts.

if i run this at 800/1600/1833 or something around there i -must- run the fan at 100% to be able for it to keep up with the heat and it still barely does, plus the fan gets really really loud after 90%. seems like everything runs fine until it starts getting close to 86 C., then artifacts will start to show (plus that's just a bit too hot for my liking anyway, personally, even if someone told me it was safe at that temperature).

i can only find a few GTX 465/470 coolers and they're really expensive.. i think a cheaper one i saw was around $45 and another one that was around $65. either way, i think if the heat could be dealt with, the GTX 465 is 'okay' if you manage to overclock it nicely, keep it cool, and you're not running super high resolutions.

a day after i placed the order, one of my two 2GB sticks of patriot 1333mhz ram died so I had to send both sticks back in order to RMA it (came as a 4GB kit). i've been using 4GB of 1600mhz ram, but i have to run it at 1333mhz because that's the highest this motherboard supports. plus, the ram i was using before was running at 7-7-7-20 for the most part, and the stuff i'm currently using is 9-9-9-24. i'm noticing some other slowdowns just in windows itself, so i'm hoping that's a ram issue and not something having to do with the GTX 465. luckily the model of ram i had previously isn't produced anymore, so i was offered 4GB of the Viper II Sector 5 stuff, which i remember being some of the best stuff back when i first originally bought the patriot 1333 4GB kit (i think at that time the Viper II Sector 5 stuff was about $60 more for the same amount, but it runs at 7-7-7-20, i believe).

but.. yeah, i don't think the GTX 465 is the best bet if you're looking for super high resolution stuff, but if you can find one really cheap and at least say.. $30, $40 less than a GTX 460; i say go for it, and hope that the card you get overclocks well. hell, hope you get a card that has both 10 memory chips and the GF100-275-A3 GPU instead of the GF100-030-A3 GPU. i had a strong feeling i was either going to see 8 chips or the GPU, and i saw all ten chips but then saw the 'real' 465 GPU. i'm actually somewhat happy it came as a 'true' GTX 465 and not one of the kind that has all 10 memory chips and the GF100-275-A3 but still doesn't flash; then i'd probably be sitting here with a brick right now. heat seriously IS an issue with the 465 cards, the PNY GTX 460 OC or whatever i used was nearly 18 C. less at all times (at 80% fan, compared to 100%) than this one runs, plus the fan was a lot less 'noisy' on the GTX 460.