Thursday, June 16th 2016
MSI and ASUS Send VGA Review Samples with Higher Clocks than Retail Cards
MSI and ASUS have been sending us review samples for their graphics cards with higher clock speeds out of the box, than what consumers get out of the box. The cards TechPowerUp has been receiving run at a higher software-defined clock speed profile than what consumers get out of the box. Consumers have access to the higher clock speed profile, too, but only if they install a custom app by the companies, and enable that profile. This, we feel, is not 100% representative of retail cards, and is questionable tactics by the two companies. This BIOS tweaking could also open the door to more elaborate changes like a quieter fan profile or different power management.
MSI's factory-overclocked GeForce GTX 1080 Gaming X graphics card comes with three software-defined clock-speed profiles, beginning with the "Gaming Mode," which is what the card runs at, out of the box, the faster "OC mode," and the slower "Silent mode," which runs the card at reference clock speeds. To select between the modes, you're expected to install the MSI Gaming software from the driver DVD, and use that software to apply clock speeds of your desired mode. Turns out, that while the retail cards (the cards you find in the stores) run in "Gaming mode" out of the box, the review samples MSI has been sending out, run at "OC mode" out of the box. If the OC mode is how the card is intended to be used, then why make OC mode the default for reviewers only, and not your own customers?
Above, you see two GPU-Z screenshots, one of the TPU review sample, next to the retail board (provided by Nizzen). Flashing the retail BIOS onto our review sample changed the clocks to match exactly what is shown on the GPU-Z retail screenshot.
In case of the GTX 1080 Gaming X, the "Gaming mode" runs the card at 1683 MHz core and 1822 MHz GPU Boost; and the "OC mode" runs it at 1708 MHz core and 1847 MHz GPU Boost. The cards consumers buy will run in the "Gaming mode" out of the box, which presumably is the default factory-overclock of these cards, since they're branded under the "Gaming series."
The "OC Mode" is just there so consumers can overclock it a little further at the push of a button, without having any knowledge of overclocking. Now if the OC mode is enabled for review samples of one company and not for the others, this means that potential customers comparing reviews will think one card performs better than the other, even if it's just 1%, people do base their buying decision on such small differences.
With the case of the GTX 1080 at hand, we started looking back at our previous reviews and were shocked to realize that this practice has been going on for years in MSI's case. It looks like ASUS has just adopted it, probably because their competitor does it, too, "so it must be ok."
It's also interesting to see that not all cards are affected, whether this is elaborate or by accident is unknown.
While we don't have any statements of the companies yet, the most likely explanation is that reviewers usually don't install any software bundled with the graphics card, yet the companies want the cards to be tested in OC mode, which provides higher performance numbers, beating their competitors. That's probably how this whole thing started, nobody noticed and the practice became standard for reviews moving forward.
This issue could affect upcoming custom GeForce GTX 1070 review samples too, we will be on the lookout.
MSI's factory-overclocked GeForce GTX 1080 Gaming X graphics card comes with three software-defined clock-speed profiles, beginning with the "Gaming Mode," which is what the card runs at, out of the box, the faster "OC mode," and the slower "Silent mode," which runs the card at reference clock speeds. To select between the modes, you're expected to install the MSI Gaming software from the driver DVD, and use that software to apply clock speeds of your desired mode. Turns out, that while the retail cards (the cards you find in the stores) run in "Gaming mode" out of the box, the review samples MSI has been sending out, run at "OC mode" out of the box. If the OC mode is how the card is intended to be used, then why make OC mode the default for reviewers only, and not your own customers?
In case of the GTX 1080 Gaming X, the "Gaming mode" runs the card at 1683 MHz core and 1822 MHz GPU Boost; and the "OC mode" runs it at 1708 MHz core and 1847 MHz GPU Boost. The cards consumers buy will run in the "Gaming mode" out of the box, which presumably is the default factory-overclock of these cards, since they're branded under the "Gaming series."
With the case of the GTX 1080 at hand, we started looking back at our previous reviews and were shocked to realize that this practice has been going on for years in MSI's case. It looks like ASUS has just adopted it, probably because their competitor does it, too, "so it must be ok."
While we don't have any statements of the companies yet, the most likely explanation is that reviewers usually don't install any software bundled with the graphics card, yet the companies want the cards to be tested in OC mode, which provides higher performance numbers, beating their competitors. That's probably how this whole thing started, nobody noticed and the practice became standard for reviews moving forward.
This issue could affect upcoming custom GeForce GTX 1070 review samples too, we will be on the lookout.
162 Comments on MSI and ASUS Send VGA Review Samples with Higher Clocks than Retail Cards
You'll also note that W1zzard lists clocks in his reviews on the first page, and the review lists the "OC" clocks for both the cards in question. He didn't copy numbers from marketing material; he likely tested the card with his own tool, GPU-Z, that he wrote, and got the clocks from there.Um, I hate to break it to you, but there is no such thing in the real world as review standards. I do motherboard, memory, mini-PC and other reviews for this very site. Our "standards", if you want to call it that, are dictated by us, and by W1zzard. There is no REIVEW STANDARDS BOARD or REVIEW ETHICS COMMITEE that all reviewers are a part of. I am pretty much free to do whatever I like in my own reviews, as long as I stick to FACTS.
FACT: The GPUs in question were tested as they were provided.
FACT: The review states the clocks the cards were tested at
FACT: The review tested the card at those clocks.
FACT: When it was discovered that the tested clocks were not the same as retail, something was done about it.
FACT: Each of these GPUs is "verified" by the OEM to run these clocks if using a tool, and just because some users do not like the tool, doesn't mean the review is posting wrong information. Software tools at this day an age do not affect performance.
FACT: Amazon and Newegg reviews are posted by general users, not by "reviewers", and tend to have more favoritism in them and BS than I am comfortable with.
I am going to guess we get the cards in "OC Mode" as those two have apps with higher clocked profiles. I don't believe EVGA does have the little penny app that does that for you with one button. I know, like TPU (which huge +1 to Dave's post above), they mention what the clocks are. I know I have mentioned a card comes in overclocked mode and list the ACTUAL (like from a real time monitor that shows true boost) clocks on top of it.
I can't say I feel deceived. Perhaps more aware than some others maybe?
www.overclock3d.net/articles/gpu_displays/msi_release_an_official_statement_regarding_oc-mode_on_msi_gaming_x_gpus/1
There is a difference here. Reviews are being read not just by nerds :rockout:, but by all consumers. I still think it is a rather shady business, just like motherboards with a 1% clock bump.
Since I do the motherboard reviews here. you'll note I myself include CPU-Z screenshots for expressly that purpose (as do most other websites).
I could do a review with absolutely ZERO benchmarks, and still get my point across, but everyone wants benchmarks, so they get included. If "normal" users are reading reviews, they should also notice things like BCLK speeds, and things such as what this thread is about, too.
There is also advance Turbo profiling in some board's BIOS that affect performance as well. I do make a point of mentioning it in my reviews if it is present. I hounded ASUS about this in my reviews, and today if they use an advanced Turbo profile (such as when XMP is enabled), they give a pop-up in BIOS asking if you would like to enable it.
To me, it seems as most users complaining about this are quibbling about minor details, however, thanks to this, MSI is releasing the same BIOS for the GPU in question to the general public, or you can get these BIOSes here on TPU in our BIOS database.
The issue is that these companies advertise these speeds, and do support them via software in retail units, but the units provided for reviews do not require the software. That makes the reviewed item and the retail item different, which may miss-inform the end user reading a review.
In the end, the differences in performance are small though.
MSI has gone as far as responding, and then releasing the BIOS on the review cards to the general public, which is a fantastic move by them. With that done, users that do not want to run any software for OC have a supported BIOS that can be run, and do not have to "OC", as you put it.
Wanting what the end user gets to be exactly the same as what is sent to reviewers is worth taking action.
It is however, real, not hype. It has been admitted. It was something two separate sites noticed and investigated. If anything, it has strengthened the credibility of TPU for not being complicit in the deception.
Had as in other cards this OC Mode Setting been activated by flipping a toggle switch on this card, would we even be talking about this?
Flashing BIOS to a card can go wrong in so many ways, so easily in comparison to flipping a switch.
What makes it even more weird is that it is done for such small increases.
The difference between these modes is for the ability to tout it's performance per watt efficiency. Had it been stated more clearly that this spec was solely based on the mid-range default BIOS setting, perhaps the retail cards could be shipped with the higher OC out of the box without conflict.
Personally, I'm just left confused by the whole thing. Both MSI and ASUS have great cards here. They don't need to do things like this to have their cards look great in reviews. MSI has a nearly silent cooling system, with aesthetics that are all their own.
ASUS has their own style, with built-in non-disclosed features for OC. Completely different product focus between the two of them. The actual clockspeeds of the GPUs aren't that important when the differences are so small, yet design focus is so different.
There used to be a day where we could expect a 10% overhead in GPU clockspeed, attainable by OC. Having a BIOS that boosts GPU speed a bit reduces that percentage overall.
There was no warning from MSI that retail out of the box performance would be inferior to review sample out of the box performance. That's what has annoyed many of us.
NB: For anyone with a retail MSI Gaming 980ti the "real" BIOS can be downloaded here:
www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/173582/msi-gtx980ti-6144-150622
That kind of difference only matters in reviews. Because all 1070 customs designs will be virtually identical, that 1-2% can make one card (artificially) appear a hair faster than another. This can sway one's buying decision. Personally, I think it's more insulting having 3 supposedly "overclocking" profiles, all within 100MHz.