Really crappy OC with a new GTX 260. Same performance as my 8800gtx. WTH?

[DeepSky]

The other day I replaced my BFG 8800gtx with a BFG GTX 260. I noticed a very minimal increase in my 3DM06 score, but the new card runs a hell of a lot cooler so its still better I guess.

Anyway, I can't seem to overclock the new card past 621 core & 1215 memory without getting the following message:


"Display driver nvlddmkm stopped responding and has successfully recovered."


How the hell are people clocking this card into the 700s? Is my PSU inadequate (Corsair 550W (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139004&Tpk=corsair%20550w)).

I've been out of the OC game for a while so any help would be appreciated.

[DeepSky]

Been doing a lot of research and it seems I'm not the only one that has trouble getting the card over the 700mhz hill. Most people report games crashing when they hit 700. I guess the Windows error is just my version of 'crashing'.

On a positive note I was able to push the core to 694 and memory to 1260 and so far its been good.

[CompuTamer]

I've seen 4850s do 700/1200 easy... mine won't do 660/1100 lol

I'm constantly going up and down on the clocks on my card... it seems to run good at 659/1060 so that's where i've got it now... some cards are just crappy clockers :/

[DeepSky]

After some more research it seems that the shader clock was the culprit. As soon as I set the shader over 1512 the drivers crash. With core/shader linking off I'm able to do 712/1512/1260.

Much happier about my purchase now :)

[wingman99]

The GTX 260 is only slightly better than the 880gtx, here are some bench tests.
LINK:http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-cards-charts-2009-high-quality-update-3/compare,1680.html?prod%5B3205%5D=on&prod%5B3239%5D=on

I would return it and get the GTX 275.

[don'tknow]

3DM06 is also very CPU dependent so it's not a good benchmark to rely on. Try games at high res with AA on, that's where the biggest difference will be.

[DeepSky]

Well the OC I had posted as "stable" turned out to not be so stable in MW2.

I played around with my clocks for about 4 hours tonight and it seems that the shader clock is the driver crashing culprit. Here were my results with 3dMark06:

648 / 1140 / 1134 = 13640 Marks
648 / 1440 / 1215 = 13708 Marks
675 / 1440 / 1215 = 13797 Marks
720 / 1440 / 1215 = 13922 Marks
720 / 1458 / 1215 = Driver Failure
702 / 1404 / 1215 = 13931 Marks

As soon as I go over 1458 on the shader clock I'm immediately screwed. As you can see lowering both the shader and core clocks rendered the same result as having the clocks slightly higher.

I'm pretty comfortable with my score of 13931. Is that score pretty standard with a Core 2 Duo/4gb ram?

[GatorChamp]

I myself only am able to push my 260 to 670 core. I am currently sitting at 670/1430/1205. Generally from my understanding people keep there shader clock around twice the core and that proves stable. I find that when my shader clock gets to far ahead of 2x the core, it does not run as smooth and the screen will flash every now and then with some games. I did break 16000 once with 3dmarks but usually I am around 15900s, however, I am using a different processor. Finally, do you crank your fan up to 100%? You should be able to squeeze a little more out of it if you are not.
But overall that is a good clock. What drivers are you using?

[MIAHALLEN]

The GTX 260 is only slightly better than the 880gtx, here are some bench tests.
LINK:http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-cards-charts-2009-high-quality-update-3/compare,1680.html?prod%5B3205%5D=on&prod%5B3239%5D=on

I would return it and get the GTX 275.
:confused:

The 8800GTX has 128 stream processors, the 260 has 216, the 275 has 240
128 to 216 is a 68% increase, 216 to 240 is an 11% increase....in other words, the difference between the 8800GTX and the GTX 260 is HUGE, compared to the difference between the 260 and the 275.

In most benches, of course the gap won't look like 68%, but it still stands that the processing power of the 260 is substantially higher than an 8800GTX.

3DM06 is also very CPU dependent so it's not a good benchmark to rely on. Try games at high res with AA on, that's where the biggest difference will be.
Depends on the CPU....DeepSky, is the CPU OC'ed? to what?

A better way to compare graphics card performance with 3D06, is not to look at the overallscore, but to compare the SM2.0 and SM3.0 scores ;)

Well the OC I had posted as "stable" turned out to not be so stable in MW2.

I played around with my clocks for about 4 hours tonight and it seems that the shader clock is the driver crashing culprit. Here were my results with 3dMark06:

648 / 1140 / 1134 = 13640 Marks
648 / 1440 / 1215 = 13708 Marks
675 / 1440 / 1215 = 13797 Marks
720 / 1440 / 1215 = 13922 Marks
720 / 1458 / 1215 = Driver Failure
702 / 1404 / 1215 = 13931 Marks

As soon as I go over 1458 on the shader clock I'm immediately screwed. As you can see lowering both the shader and core clocks rendered the same result as having the clocks slightly higher.

I'm pretty comfortable with my score of 13931. Is that score pretty standard with a Core 2 Duo/4gb ram?
Again...what is the CPU clocked at?
Also, have you tried giving the GPU any extra voltage?

[DeepSky]

I find that when my shader clock gets to far ahead of 2x the core, it does not run as smooth and the screen will flash every now and then with some games. Finally, do you crank your fan up to 100%? You should be able to squeeze a little more out of it if you are not.
But overall that is a good clock. What drivers are you using?

I'll keep that in mind, thanks :thup: I'm using the 197.25 beta drivers as they seem to provide the best performance in BC2 and crash a lot less when OC'ing than the past 3 releases.

:confused:
Depends on the CPU....DeepSky, is the CPU OC'ed? to what?

A better way to compare graphics card performance with 3D06, is not to look at the overallscore, but to compare the SM2.0 and SM3.0 scores ;)

Again...what is the CPU clocked at?
Also, have you tried giving the GPU any extra voltage?

I'll start trying to keep my eye on the SM2 and 3 scores rather than the overall.

My CPU is OC'ed: Intel Core 2 Duo e6600 [@ 3.2ghz, 1600mhz FSB, 1.2v]. From what I understand the voltage of the 55nm GTX 260's cannot be modified with software. Is that correct?

[MIAHALLEN]

My CPU is OC'ed: Intel Core 2 Duo e6600 [@ 3.2ghz, 1600mhz FSB, 1.2v]. From what I understand the voltage of the 55nm GTX 260's cannot be modified with software. Is that correct?

If you can get your SM2.0 score over 6500 and SM3.0 over 7K then you're in the right ballpark :thup:

Why don't you put up a screenshot for us to see :)

[jason4207]

I believe there are about 4 choices for voltages on the 55nm 260 if you're willing to do some gfx card flashing.



Generally from my understanding people keep there shader clock around twice the core and that proves stable. I find that when my shader clock gets to far ahead of 2x the core, it does not run as smooth and the screen will flash every now and then with some games.

OC software won't let you set the core above 2x the shader, and that's why you see that mentioned a lot. People are trying to OC, and their sliders keep going back to stock after they hit the OK button. I've never noticed the glitches you have as far as flashing and smoothness.

I just set both as high as I can get them each to run stable individually, and then throw it all together and re-test for stability. The Crysis benchmark is a good indicator if you're core and shaders are stable or not. If you can pass 10 loops w/ no artifacts you're doing good. I've also heard that the Physx test on Vantage is a good stress for the RAM on your gfx card.

[Sir-Epix]

Well the OC I had posted as "stable" turned out to not be so stable in MW2.

I played around with my clocks for about 4 hours tonight and it seems that the shader clock is the driver crashing culprit. Here were my results with 3dMark06:

648 / 1140 / 1134 = 13640 Marks
648 / 1440 / 1215 = 13708 Marks
675 / 1440 / 1215 = 13797 Marks
720 / 1440 / 1215 = 13922 Marks
720 / 1458 / 1215 = Driver Failure
702 / 1404 / 1215 = 13931 Marks

As soon as I go over 1458 on the shader clock I'm immediately screwed. As you can see lowering both the shader and core clocks rendered the same result as having the clocks slightly higher.

I'm pretty comfortable with my score of 13931. Is that score pretty standard with a Core 2 Duo/4gb ram?

I would drop the Memory from 1215 down to stock and run the cores/shaders higher. I know on my overclocks I have had trouble with the memory speed causing a crash.

I have a EVGA and a MSI and both are 100% stable crunching seti@home.

The eVGA I run at 702/1512/1052 <-----superclocked edition
The MSI I run at 742/1595/1050 <--- not the max I can run it at

[rainless]

The GTX 260 is only slightly better than the 880gtx, here are some bench tests.
LINK:http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-cards-charts-2009-high-quality-update-3/compare,1680.html?prod%5B3205%5D=on&prod%5B3239%5D=on

I would return it and get the GTX 275.

Tom's Hardware... DOES NOT COUNT.

I would know: I used to work for them.

Their charts are BS.

So I'm not taking their word that the 260 is only marginally better than the 8800GTX. ESPECIALLY not an overclocked 260... And particularly not the one with 216sps.

[EarthDog]

That link also doesnt show 'slightly better' except for a few tests. Otherwise its SIGNIFICANTLY better.

[wingman99]

That link also doesnt show 'slightly better' except for a few tests. Otherwise its SIGNIFICANTLY better.
Depends on your definition of significantly better.

QUOTE: from the OP Really crappy OC with a new GTX 260. Same performance as my 8800gtx. WTH?

I feel the same way hardly noticeable without a FPS counter. then I live to see a 50% upgrade on all games buying a new card.

[wingman99]

Tom's Hardware... DOES NOT COUNT.

I would know: I used to work for them.

Their charts are BS.

So I'm not taking their word that the 260 is only marginally better than the 8800GTX. ESPECIALLY not an overclocked 260... And particularly not the one with 216sps.
Give me the lowdown, how do they cheat the customer.

Also could you point me to a better site that is easy to compare real old video cards with new ones.

Also just because it's new technology doesn't give it double the power, there is a thing called diminishing returns. Im not in the busness of selling or designing video cards as you can tell, I just use them on games.

[Zap]

The other day I replaced my BFG 8800gtx with a BFG GTX 260. I noticed a very minimal increase in my 3DM06 score


As mentioned, 3Dmark06 isn't the best. Try 3DMark03 or 3DMark Vantage. Also, you can try benching with actual games.

I think roughly the GTX 260 should be around 50% faster than the 8800 GTX. It probably gets the best results from newer games.

How the hell are people clocking this card into the 700s? Is my PSU inadequate (Corsair 550W (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139004&Tpk=corsair%20550w)).


Your PSU is fine. YMMV when it comes to overclocking, and OC results posted in forums are likely skewed towards the high end because people with high overclocks will brag about it, while people with average or low overclocks probably wouldn't be posting about it in forums.