Post your gpu's ASIC quality

[Masteredx]

aw well that sucks. im not to up to date on the different memory types and there downfalls =/

 

[Vellinious]

aw well that sucks. im not to up to date on the different memory types and there downfalls =/

They Hynix and Elpida memory have a tendency to run a little hotter when overclocked really high, and will become unstable with more heat. The Samsung memory seems to keep going and going...like the energizer bunny.

Great ASIC quality though...should overclock pretty well.

 

[Masteredx]

They Hynix and Elpida memory have a tendency to run a little hotter when overclocked really high, and will become unstable with more heat. The Samsung memory seems to keep going and going...like the energizer bunny.

Great ASIC quality though...should overclock pretty well.

ah thats good to know i didnt play to over clock and if i do not very much. i messed around a bit on afterburner for the fan profile and stuff

 

[Vellinious]

ah thats good to know i didnt play to over clock and if i do not very much. i messed around a bit on afterburner for the fan profile and stuff

If you're not going to overclock, you're not going to know the difference. Nice card.

 

[Kanan]

Fedex just dropped this baby off...

and im in love.

Nice ASIC. Most 980 Ti I've seen so far have a low ASIC. The Vram isn't so important, Hynix memory will do just fine. But this should overclock very good.

 

[Masteredx]

Nice ASIC. Most 980 Ti I've seen so far have a low ASIC. The Vram isn't so important, Hynix memory will do just fine. But this should overclock very good.

i had a bit of trouble with bf4 but i did some reading and managed +55/+600 without doing anything to the voltage.

dunno if it matters. but it is an Evga classified Edition

 

[Kanan]

i had a bit of trouble with bf4 but i did some reading and managed +55/+600 without doing anything to the voltage.

dunno if it matters. but it is an Evga classified Edition

Matters, because an good custom card can be better overclocked than the reference Nvidia ones.

Try to overclock this way though:
First overclock the core as far as you can and then start with the memory. Memory isn't nearly as important as the GPU itself. If you have problems, reduce the clock by 10 MHz steps until its stable - same with the Memory, but just after you are finished with the core clocks.

 

[idylhours]

Decent score for my GTX 670.

 

[Masteredx]

Matters, because an good custom card can be better overclocked than the reference Nvidia ones.

Try to overclock this way though:
First overclock the core as far as you can and then start with the memory. Memory isn't nearly as important as the GPU itself. If you have problems, reduce the clock by 10 MHz steps until its stable - same with the Memory, but just after you are finished with the core clocks.

ohhh. i did the opposite. found the highest memory clock speed with stock core clock +1100 or so. then did core with stock memory. found its max i think it was 100 or like 105. then worked backwards from there.

 

[Kanan]

ohhh. i did the opposite. found the highest memory clock speed with stock core clock +1100 or so. then did core with stock memory. found its max i think it was 100 or like 105. then worked backwards from there.

Well, what's the exact maximum core speed you can read in MSI Afterburner? 1480? 1500+? Everything over 1500MHz core clock is really good with an 980 Ti.

 

[idylhours]

Decent score for my GTX 670.

2nd card is not near as good.

 

[Masteredx]

Well, what's the exact maximum core speed you can read in MSI Afterburner? 1480? 1500+? Everything over 1500MHz core clock is really good with an 980 Ti.

well im a tad confused now. the website for the card says.

• Base Clock: 1102 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1190 MHz

and

• Memory Clock: 7010 MHz

on the actual precision X program it shows. mem clock @ zero offset to be 3505mhz. and core clock is 1190, so i turned on Kboost, to see what they are at. and did a run of heavensbench
and it shows graphics @ 1582Mhz and memory @ 3505Mhz.

so im not sure where the discrepency is comming from. but offsetting it to the max thats stable it shows graphics well over 1600, something like 1650

so at +68 ofset for core clock in precision it shows 1258. \

 

[Kanan]

Thats normal. What you can see on the website is the minimum boost amount the card will do. The real amount is somewhat higher, Boost 2.0 works that way, that it trys to unlock everything within a power and temperature envelope + what you added with the overclock. That said, if you can really play with that 1582 MHz on core, this would be fucking awesome. Just do some stability testing, try Firestrike and Firestrike Ultra too perhaps.

 

[Masteredx]

Thats normal. What you can see on the website is the minimum boost amount the card will do. The real amount is somewhat higher, Boost 2.0 works that way, that it trys to unlock everything within a power and temperature envelope + what you added with the overclock. That said, if you can really play with that 1582 MHz on core, this would be fucking awesome. Just do some stability testing, try Firestrike and Firestrike Ultra too perhaps.

thats what i dont understand, it shows that but using a differnt program, i tried OC scanner, only lets it go to 1506mhz when it reaches 115% tdp, but its only using 81% of the gpu for that specific test.

 

[Kanan]

thats what i dont understand, it shows that but using a differnt program, i tried OC scanner, only lets it go to 1506mhz when it reaches 115% tdp, but its only using 81% of the gpu for that specific test.

Core clock always varies - if the card reaches the power maximum (115% for example), it can't boost further because it needs a higher voltage/power to do so. For example, when I play GTA 5 my core clock varies between 1100 to 1180, depending on the situation I'm in the game. What's really interesting, is therefore the average core clock, but everything over 1500 is really good.
81% GPU usage means, the program you used is not demanding enough to stress the GPU. Try Firestrike or a demanding game to test it further.

 

[Masteredx]

downloading it to try firestrike. im thinking 1506 is about what it stays at assuming 115% power. not sure where heavenbench came up with the numbers.

 

[Vellinious]

well im a tad confused now. the website for the card says.

• Base Clock: 1102 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1190 MHz

and

• Memory Clock: 7010 MHz

on the actual precision X program it shows. mem clock @ zero offset to be 3505mhz. and core clock is 1190, so i turned on Kboost, to see what they are at. and did a run of heavensbench
and it shows graphics @ 1582Mhz and memory @ 3505Mhz.

so im not sure where the discrepency is comming from. but offsetting it to the max thats stable it shows graphics well over 1600, something like 1650

so at +68 ofset for core clock in precision it shows 1258. \

Heaven and Valley don't show the correct core / memory speeds with NVIDIA cards for one reason or another..... Seemed to fix it once I flashed to a custom bios, but.....with a stock bios, and running 1550 / 1990 (GPUz), Valley showed my clocks at above 1700 on the core. lol The Unigine benchmarks are unreliable for clock / memory speed. GPUz will tell you what you're really running.

 

[Vellinious]

well im a tad confused now. the website for the card says.

• Base Clock: 1102 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1190 MHz

and

• Memory Clock: 7010 MHz

on the actual precision X program it shows. mem clock @ zero offset to be 3505mhz. and core clock is 1190, so i turned on Kboost, to see what they are at. and did a run of heavensbench
and it shows graphics @ 1582Mhz and memory @ 3505Mhz.

so im not sure where the discrepency is comming from. but offsetting it to the max thats stable it shows graphics well over 1600, something like 1650

so at +68 ofset for core clock in precision it shows 1258. \

Precision X is setting off of the double data rate, GPUz shows the base, and some benchmarks show the effective. So, if GPUz is showing you 1850, that'd be 3700 for Precision X, and 7400 effective. I believe Unigine also shows the double rate.

Like I said though....use PCX / Afterburner and GPUz for actual clock readings.

 

[Masteredx]

ok. gpu z shows 1361 boost clock. precision X shows 1512


looking at the hall of fame numbers im pretty impressed people got 20k+ with a similar clock speed.

 

[Vellinious]

ok. gpu z shows 1361 boost clock. precision X shows 1512


looking at the hall of fame numbers im pretty impressed people got 20k+ with a similar clock speed.

Open the sensors tab in GPUz. Top row...it'll show you what your highest boost is during any given benchmark / gaming session.

 

[Kanan]

Open the sensors tab in GPUz. Top row...it'll show you what your highest boost is during any given benchmark / gaming session.

Or just use Afterburner. This is the best tool I think, for watching clockspeeds etc. You can then see a estimation of your average clockspeed, not only the maximum.

 

[Vellinious]

Yeah, so does the sensors tab in GPUz, and will show you if you're hitting a perf cap. lol

 

[Kanan]

Yeah, so does the sensors tab in GPUz, and will show you if you're hitting a perf cap. lol

You're right, nvm. I just like to use AB more, because I have it started always anyway for overclocking.

 

[Jay-R]

Hi, I was hoping if somebody could help me. Just purchased a 2nd hand EVGA GTX 780ti sc acx which seams all good boost too 1127mhz wit about 1.16 - 7 but at times 1.20v and Max temps of 71-72'c at 70% fan speed. I decided to have a look at the ASIC quality and got a shock when I see 59.4%! I understand how the ASIC works (e.g leakage and needing more voltage to remain stable which produces more heat and might lower VRM lifespan).

I don't intend on overclocking the card just yet as I game on 1080p and just brought the card for Max eye candy and future updrade to 1440pp. My concerns are whether if this has/will reduce the lifespan on the card as its 2 year old already. Previous owner water cooled and overclocked to 1228mhz and swears it was stable at 1.212v for 1 andhalf years which in my opinion is v good. Or is it ?

Also I feel the temps are quite a bit hotter than I would like. If I lock the fan at 60% and run valley temps peak at 80-82c power target at 96% I know bench marks run hot but bf4 does the same. Is this normal for this GPU, cooler as my previous card 770 lightning overclocked to 1320mhz and never went above 70c at the same fan speed.

Your opinion on what you would do if you were in my situation and whether you would sell or keep the card would be appreciated.

Sorry for going on.

Regards
Jay

 

[jboydgolfer]

Powercolor LCS7970