RTX 4070 - efficiency & undervolting

[Mussels]

Anyone has ideal settings for a 3070? What are thoughts about 3070 undervolting compared to a 4070 with as purpose ocasionally game at high settings (not ultra) in 1440p.
As I find the price gap between 3070 and 4070 significant, is dls 3 that much better than dls 2, better said is a 3070 not future proof enough?

It's different for every single physically existing GPU, let alone every single GPU variant or design. No two are identical.
Run a game/test that lets the GPU run at 100%, and see the MHz value and voltage it settles at once it's heated up and hitting power and/or thermal limits.

Then lock the curve flat to that value, and keep re-trying that same MHz value with lower and lower voltages. Spend time on each adjustment, and test multiple programs. What is stable in a DX11 test may not be stable in a DX12 test, and vice versa.

I'll see if i can find whats stable on my 3070, it's stable but i haven't bothered testing it out for more efficiency or higher clocks since it's running quite well on air already.

Edit:
1620MHz, 0.737v

I cant remember the wattage values, but i do remember it had it running less wattage than the stock wattage of the GTX 1080 it replaced

 

[THU31]

1620 MHz on a 3070 seems excessive. That card only has a 220 W TDP. And stock boost clock is higher than a 3080, so you'll losing as much as 15-20% performance in games with a lighter load.

@Chippendale Unless your card is really loud, I'd try going for 1905 MHz at around 0.9 V, or 1800 MHz at around 0.8 V.
For heavier games the first option would actually offer more performance at similar power to stock. The second option should drop power usage across the board, but you'd lose a bit of performance in lighter games. It's worth having two profiles and switching them depending on the game.

What I've personally used:
1080 - 1905 MHz @ 0.9 V
2070 S - 1905 MHz @ 0.95 V
3080 - 1800 MHz @ 0.8 V, second profile 1905 MHz @ 0.9 V (pretty much never used this one as the card was ridiculously power hungry)
4070 - 2610 MHz @ 0.91 V, second profile 2805 MHz @ 1.0 V (didn't need to use this one yet)

 

[tabascosauz]

1620 MHz on a 3070 seems excessive. That card only has a 220 W TDP. And stock boost clock is higher than a 3080, so you'll losing as much as 15-20% performance in games with a lighter load.

@Chippendale Unless your card is really loud, I'd try going for 1905 MHz at around 0.9 V, or 1800 MHz at around 0.8 V.
For heavier games the first option would actually offer more performance at similar power to stock. The second option should drop power usage across the board, but you'd lose a bit of performance in lighter games. It's worth having two profiles and switching them depending on the game.

What I've personally used:
1080 - 1905 MHz @ 0.9 V
2070 S - 1905 MHz @ 0.95 V
3080 - 1800 MHz @ 0.8 V, second profile 1905 MHz @ 0.9 V (pretty much never used this one as the card was ridiculously power hungry)
4070 - 2610 MHz @ 0.91 V, second profile 2805 MHz @ 1.0 V (didn't need to use this one yet)

Same here, I was 1920 @ 0.98V on the 2060 Super and 1980 @ 0.93V on the 3070 Ti. Before that was like 1900 @ 0.93V on the 1070 I think. The GA104 on that profile was essentially a 180-220W card. No need to dip so low to 1600 for a regular non-Ti.

I am really behind, I still gotta put together a undervolt curve for my 4070 Ti. Just haven't felt the need for Afterburner yet as it by default doesn't run as aggressive as the 3070 Ti. Ada also seems to throw a bit of a wrench into the works with its higher Vcore.

 

[Mussels]

1620 MHz on a 3070 seems excessive.

excessive meaning... what?
I'm happy with how it runs, doing 1440p 165Hz and my rift S like this

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

My 3070 can run at ~120W, the performance of a 2080Ti at the wattage of a 1660 Super

Same is possible on RX 6800 (if we don't count RT perfromance which doesn't exist on AMD cards below 7900 series)

 

[Onyx Turbine]

It's different for every single physically existing GPU, let alone every single GPU variant or design. No two are identical.
Run a game/test that lets the GPU run at 100%, and see the MHz value and voltage it settles at once it's heated up and hitting power and/or thermal limits.

Then lock the curve flat to that value, and keep re-trying that same MHz value with lower and lower voltages. Spend time on each adjustment, and test multiple programs. What is stable in a DX11 test may not be stable in a DX12 test, and vice versa.

I'll see if i can find whats stable on my 3070, it's stable but i haven't bothered testing it out for more efficiency or higher clocks since it's running quite well on air already.

Edit:
1620MHz, 0.737v
View attachment 306712

I cant remember the wattage values, but i do remember it had it running less wattage than the stock wattage of the GTX 1080 it replaced

interesting ty

 

[tugrul_SIMD]

Ventus 2x oc edition won't let me do lower than 0.91V according to gpu-z. Below 910mV, it only reduces frequency. At 920mV, I'm using 2580 MHz, making it about 150Watts and cool the hot-spot below 90C (guessing 90C+ is bad for other components on mobo).

 

[Deleted member 182555]

asus dual 4060 biosmod... 0,675v-1,1v (0,88v-1,065v) voltage unlock 170w (+32w) tdp

biosmod also defeats extreme oc mod.... 12665 vs wip 12680 with my much worse CPU score around 1/4

The Overclock Page - Hardware, reviews e overclock

Hardware, reviews e overclock

theoverclockingpage.com

 

[Gica]

3070 Ti
The custom profile is 26 months old. Rock stability.
It offers the same performance (results with +/- 1%, within the margin of error) with a lower consumption of ~50W only on the GPU. The advantages are obvious, from consumption at the outlet (~ -70W) to noise and temperatures.
I can use memory overclocking to reduce consumption even more, but... no. This video card must be used until at least 2025 because it killed my wallet in 2021.

Default: 284 W peak
Custom: 234 W peak
Note:
The nVidia recording program is not perfect but it is free. It affects the performance by about 2-5%, depending on the game.