Weird + terrible results

[BIOHazard87]

Well i flashed my x850 pro to a modded x850 pro bios with 16 pipes, to an XT bios in the bios collection that fits my card just fine (correct memory, has vivo) all that, and i tried that because i wanted to try ATI Overdrive, i did the auto detect thing, it detected 540/621 which is abosolutly crazy, so i was like "wtffff..........." so i went into ATITool (beta 11) and tried 540/590 which are XT PE speeds, and it ran it for 2 minutes stable, i didnt run longer, then i tried playing games, i kept benching CSS Stress test, i noticed it was very jumpu, but no artifacts, i tried stock, which is 520/540 for an XT, and it got 110 FPS then i kept experimenting like 533/567, 533/560, 540/567, everything, andit HATED the high memory, even if it was ATITool + CSS Stress test stable, it just hated it, so i went back to the pro bios, seemed a bit less jumpy and tried 540/590, it could do it "stable" but again had bad scores, originally i could bearly do 540/567 stable, so i finally decided to use 533/567, meh


so basiclly it was getting way better scores at stock (520/540 on the xt bios) then 540/590

 

[AMDCam]

Wierd dude. But hey, at least you did flash it with no trouble. I've had 2 cards, one infamous Sapphire 9800 Pro that no one on earth has flashed successfully (it was my first flash too so it discouraged me a little bit), and a 6800 GT that NVFlash knows better than me if it can be flashed or not (ERROR: BIOS's not the same.......WHY WOULD THEY BE?!?!?!), so I gave up the whole flashing thing. But congrats and sorry dude.

You got 16 pipes though anyway, awesome.

 

[BIOHazard87]

why would you flash a 6800GT?

 

[AMDCam]

So I can say "I have an Ultra" and have proof, and games recognize it as more power. But also, if I say I don't want to flash it, everyone says "the Ultra has so many advantages and uses resources better, you should do it" but when I want to flash it, everyone says what you say, "Why? They're pretty much the exact same thing, just have different clock speed". I don't know who to believe frankly

Is that your max overclock on your GT? If so, WOW, the A400 heatsink from leadtek makes a helluva difference, even more than I thought (check my dropdown specs)

 

[BIOHazard87]

i have a leadtek 6800GT also, it idles at like 52, its terrible, also they dont have exactly the same parts, the Ultra has looser memory timings and 2 molex plugs, mabey something else is different too

 

[AMDCam]

So why is your GT clocked so low? Mine runs hot too, but look at what I get (448/1180). And that's stock. All 6800's run hot I hear, but that doesn't stop my clocks. I mean something as easy as applying Arctic Silver 5 or blowing cold air into the case could get it to Ultra Extreme Edition speeds.

What do you mean 2 molex plugs? And also, that should mean my GT at Ultra speed outperforms an Ultra at stock because it's got better timings right?

 

[wazzledoozle]

I have found high overclocks on my 6800 to be "jumpy", although stable. I think it is caused by the video cards power circuit not being able to supply enough constant power to run at those speeds.

 

[AMDCam]

Okay, that does make sense. At 448/1180 it's very true for me too, I can keep it stable on it but on games like Doom 3 and stuff, it does get strange. Like non-artifacts artifacts (makes screen look wierd but it's not wierd colors, I can't really explain it), and every once in a while it'll freeze.

Thanks for that thought though wazzle, that sounds like the problem. I've been wondering for a while, proper cooling, no artifacts, stable, etc. and I didn't think of anything else.