I tried to set clock offset to -400 (maximum negative offset) and it decreseased boost limit by 400. GPU maximum boost was around 3060 MHz in that test.
It reached 294W TBP with 100% power limit and -70mV core offset. Before applying clock offset, max. reached boost clock (I have HwInfo sample rate set to 330 ms) was around 3170 MHz.
However, I did this test only twice, and as you might have read, I'm experiencing lower scores now for unknown reason, so it may not be accurate. Take it with grain of salt.
What seems to be 100% true is that clock offset applies to max boost limit which is shown in HwInfo.
My card has default limit set to 3450 MHz. Of course, even 110% power limit (363W) with -70mV on core voltage is not enough to reach this clock.
According HwInfo, there's a TDC limit (330A) which is hard coded and card won't go beyond that.
Anyway, when I apply clock offset, I see in HwInfo it immediately increases or decreases max. boost limit accordingly. That's in HwInfo.
Actually, raising power limit may cause instabilities when core is undervolted.
This is just for ilustration, I made up those values:
View attachment 400378
Undervolt will allow card to boost further (higher), because undervolt decreases power draw and remaining power draw headroom is used for auto OC (maximizing boost).
Higher power limit will allow card to boost further, because it increases power draw headroom and auto OC algorithm causes card to boost further.
Voltage-frequency curve is not linear. You require more and more voltage to reach stability at higher frequencies.
Thus, you may end up being unstable if you increase power limit and also apply undervolt, because it will try to boost higher and voltage might not be enough for that clock to be stable.
-90mV or -90MHz?
