View Full Version : Overclocking ASUS Matrix GTX 580
Hey guys just got my GTX 580 in, what are we looking at for 24/7 safe voltages, I know right many people run 1.15v on the GPU, but i need more information on the memory chips, they are passively cooled by the air off of the heatsink, but they do not make contact with the heatsink.
I can easly reach 950 Core with 1.15v no problem, ran several tests for about an hour and it seems rock solid at 78C, i'm happy enough with that, i wanted to get the memory to 4.8ghz but now that i see they aren't cooled by a heatsink i'm just looking for some input.
I'm using ASUS's new OC tool, very awesome tool, it helped me with the GPU OC made it smooth and quick.
This is what the tool looks like, it's a screen shot before i began OC'ing just so you know. but there are alot of sensors and many options for tweaking.
Jhatfie
08-03-11, 04:14 PM
I am interested in this information as well, mine should be showing up today or tomorrow.
bennoculus
08-03-11, 05:57 PM
I've ran my memory all the way up to 4.8GHz+ before. No problem whatsoever. Just took a little more memory volts to get there.
Honestly, just bump it up to 4300 and enjoy it. The memory isn't going to put that much an impact on daily gaming. Benchmarks, maybe, but games, probably not.
I've ran my memory all the way up to 4.8GHz+ before. No problem whatsoever. Just took a little more memory volts to get there.
Honestly, just bump it up to 4300 and enjoy it. The memory isn't going to put that much an impact on daily gaming. Benchmarks, maybe, but games, probably not.
4300 with or without voltage bumps? I'm nervous about chips with no backplate cooling, and the 580 has a knowing to pop it's memory chips, or was that the 590, either way, the memory at stock is 1.58v
ChanceCoats123
08-03-11, 07:08 PM
Stock will be fine for 4300. It's less than a 10% overclock so no big deal, really.
Stock will be fine for 4300. It's less than a 10% overclock so no big deal, really.
Ok, Thanks, here is a 3DMark 11 score with the card at 900mhz Core 1.10v, and 4300mhz memory I can't remember the max temp, it was at or below 60C on this test.
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/1614997;jsessionid=3b2m8ljgl6dq?show_ads=true&page=%2F3dm11%2F1614997%3Fkey%3Dh8Eqvq4ZJX5kqNYzhC YfBpRwbCUnJq
I will bench some more tonight i'm going to play a few games and check stability.
ChanceCoats123
08-03-11, 09:12 PM
Have you tried pushing the core as far as it can on stock voltage? If you have a DMM, use that to find the actual vgpu, then use the buttons on the card to lower it. Most Matrix will run 900 core on stock volts.
Have you tried pushing the core as far as it can on stock voltage? If you have a DMM, use that to find the actual vgpu, then use the buttons on the card to lower it. Most Matrix will run 900 core on stock volts.
I don't havd a DMM, though this card has spots on it right on top designed for it, and it has solder points so you can modify the power leads and such, but that's way beyond me, they are even all labeled.
I have taken to 1.15v, and i was able to hit 950mhz with not issue, but i ran into heat issues at that point, i ran Furmark 800x600 and it got to 97C and the safty cut in on it, with the fans at 100% i might add, it took about 2-3 minutes to reach critical.
I will try it again later tonight if you want me to try something i may have done wrong.
I don't havd a DMM, though this card has spots on it right on top designed for it, and it has solder points so you can modify the power leads and such, but that's way beyond me, they are even all labeled.
I have taken to 1.15v, and i was able to hit 950mhz with not issue, but i ran into heat issues at that point, i ran Furmark 800x600 and it got to 97C and the safty cut in on it, with the fans at 100% i might add, it took about 2-3 minutes to reach critical.
I will try it again later tonight if you want me to try something i may have done wrong.
I wouldn't recommend using fur mark. I know people differ on this, but I don't like it because I see it as pointless. I have a Zotac Amp GTX 480 with an aftermarket heatsink. Its got a pretty decent OC on it, and the highest I've EVER seen it in a game is 75C, and that includes benchmarks like Heaven. But if I fire up something like Furmark, within 5 minutes I'm closing in on 100C. At a certain point, you just have to identify what is meaningful data and what just doesn't matter. If you pointed a room heater at your PC and turned it to max, its likely your system would fail from that as well. But if thats never going to happen throughout the course of the computers lifespan, you really don't need to factor that into your decision making about OC's.
ChanceCoats123
08-03-11, 10:27 PM
I don't havd a DMM, though this card has spots on it right on top designed for it, and it has solder points so you can modify the power leads and such, but that's way beyond me, they are even all labeled.
I have taken to 1.15v, and i was able to hit 950mhz with not issue, but i ran into heat issues at that point, i ran Furmark 800x600 and it got to 97C and the safty cut in on it, with the fans at 100% i might add, it took about 2-3 minutes to reach critical.
I will try it again later tonight if you want me to try something i may have done wrong.
I know plenty about the features of this gpu. ;) But I think 1.15 vgpu should get you closer to 1050 core. So definitely back down the vgpu. You should only need like 1.05 to hit 900 core.
I wouldn't recommend using fur mark. I know people differ on this, but I don't like it because I see it as pointless. I have a Zotac Amp GTX 480 with an aftermarket heatsink. Its got a pretty decent OC on it, and the highest I've EVER seen it in a game is 75C, and that includes benchmarks like Heaven. But if I fire up something like Furmark, within 5 minutes I'm closing in on 100C. At a certain point, you just have to identify what is meaningful data and what just doesn't matter. If you pointed a room heater at your PC and turned it to max, its likely your system would fail from that as well. But if thats never going to happen throughout the course of the computers lifespan, you really don't need to factor that into your decision making about OC's.
I never really thought of it this way, and that's very true, Final Fantasy XIV or The Witcher 2, you pick, is my most demanding games, FFIXV is one i plan to be playing for years to come on said OC and it uses it anywhere from 60-75% (i need to double check that) but i have it nearly maxed out, i opt'ed for 4xMSAA over 8xQMSAA or even 16xQMSAA but both games make it reach 61-63C max with a 1.1v OC 1.15v i'd guess 70C max, it's nice i'm getting a good amount of feedback on the temps, i still worry how 1.15v if i decided to see what OC that would yeild, would put this cards life span, i would like it to last atleast 3 years before i have to get another.
I never really thought of it this way, and that's very true, Final Fantasy XIV or The Witcher 2, you pick, is my most demanding games, FFIXV is one i plan to be playing for years to come on said OC and it uses it anywhere from 60-75% (i need to double check that) but i have it nearly maxed out, i opt'ed for 4xMSAA over 8xQMSAA or even 16xQMSAA but both games make it reach 61-63C max with a 1.1v OC 1.15v i'd guess 70C max, it's nice i'm getting a good amount of feedback on the temps, i still worry how 1.15v if i decided to see what OC that would yeild, would put this cards life span, i would like it to last atleast 3 years before i have to get another.
Yeah if its stable and the temps are within reason in actual games (or any other real world GPU demanding tasks) I'd say your fine. I have a 480 not a 580 though, so I couldn't tell you if 1.15 is considered a safe long term voltage. Doesn't seem outrageous by any means, but do some research on your own and see what people say.
Yeah if its stable and the temps are within reason in actual games (or any other real world GPU demanding tasks) I'd say your fine. I have a 480 not a 580 though, so I couldn't tell you if 1.15 is considered a safe long term voltage. Doesn't seem outrageous by any means, but do some research on your own and see what people say.
I don't think people really know for sure, it's like finding the max safe voltage for the 2600k, some say 1.37, others 1.42, and on the extreme side many people follow intels 1.52v, every site has had a different opinion on safe.
But either way, it's faily easy to find a max clock, for starters this OC utility gives you a reference clock-to-voltage to start from, so it links aprx. 935mhz to 1.15v, and it's pretty close, 950mhz stalled once on 3dMark 11, sent me back to the desktop no errors or anything, but it ran 3 more runs just fine after that with 67C max temp, and i ran 2 runs of Heaven 1920x1080 4xAA, 16xAF with Moderate tessa with no hiccups, 960mhz is wishy washy, sometimes it'll complete a bench, othertimes it just says the driver failed and recovered.
Update: 950mhz @ 1.15v fatal DX11 swap error on unigen on the 4th run, so 935mhz is probably about where it's going to top out. i will keep testing, i can increase the voltage up to 1.23v but i'm trying to stay at or under 1.15 atm.
Well this seems to be the most i can get out of this card, 1.15v 940mhz core, 4800mhz memory, max temp 72C. 950mhz isn't stable, and it only gets worse from there, even though i can hit 1.23v it doesn't seem like a very good idea.
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/1615934;jsessionid=g9axsq083l6s?show_ads=true&page=%2F3dm11%2F1615934%3Fkey%3DNdyEYmkqak9RSebLXk nyEjv0bACy9R
Well this seems to be the most i can get out of this card, 1.15v 940mhz core, 4800mhz memory, max temp 72C. 950mhz isn't stable, and it only gets worse from there, even though i can hit 1.23v it doesn't seem like a very good idea.
What voltage does it take to get 900mhz stable?
ChanceCoats123
08-04-11, 01:36 PM
Like I said via PM... Set the stock voltage and raise the gpu up until it crashes in a test. Only raise the vgpu when you need to. Setting 1.15 and then doing a relatively low clock is probably causing too much heat. From what I have seen Matrix cards do, 1.15vgpu is good enough for at least 1050 core. There is a such thing as too much voltage. ;)
What voltage does it take to get 900mhz stable?
It takes 1.1v to stabilize 900mhz, 1.088v failed, the next step up was 1.1v
Stock volts took it to 890mhz @ 1.075v, it was probably not very stable but it passed several benchmarks none the less.
Update: Bare with me, i'm doing more testing in increments, 1.1v is taking it beyond 900mhz, at 920 now and it ran fine.
So here is how it went:
1.075v
850 √
860 √
870 √
880 √
890 √
900 X
1.088v
900 √
910 X
1.1v
910 √
920 √
930 X
1.113v
930 X
1.125v
930 √
940 √
950 X
1.138v
950 X (Passes AvP Benchmark, Fails 3dMark11, Fails Heaven) Drivers crash
960 X Same as above Drivers Crash
970 X Same as above Drivers Crash
980 X Fails all tests Drivers Crash
1.150v
980 X
As i already suspected, it will not pass 940mhz
EarthDog
08-04-11, 04:45 PM
You are cranking the fan to 100% right?
You are cranking the fan to 100% right?
They have been on auto because the benchmarks don't really get it "hot" so to speak considering the cut off is 97C and auto keeps it under 75C.
this is the temps after the avp benchmark 940mhz 1.15v
EarthDog
08-04-11, 04:51 PM
The lower the temp, the further it will(should) go.
The lower the temp, the further it will(should) go.
Except i am looking to the max ideal 24/7 overclock and 100% fan speed isn't ideal, the Matrix is a loud card after 70% fan speed.
I can try 100% fan speed, but if i have to keep it at 100% all the time just to keep it from crashing all over the place it's not what i'm looking for.
This is 990mhz 100% fan speed 1.15v, crashed in just a few seconds on heaven and it was full of artifacts.
EDIT: 950mhz still fails, just a bad GPU, go figure iv'e never had anything OC like a review.
1000mhz / 100% fan speed / 1.150v instant crash before any 3D even renders.
This whole "Superior Overclocking" is all coming down to a load of marketing BS, iv'e bought a bunch of video cards and heat sinks with "Overclocker's friend" written all over them and they hardly go past a factory overclocked model, i could have paid $30 less for a 850mhz card and been in the same place, or better since i would have $30 more in my pocket right now. So far, as my second ever Nvidia card i am actually a little bit disappointed with the performance and overclock ability of this card at it's price range, i could have had 2x 6850's in crossfire for this one single card, why was it so expincive? My ultimate reason i have stayed away from Nvidia for the last 8 years, and my new reason to stay away another 8.
So here is how it went:
1.075v
850 √
860 √
870 √
880 √
890 √
900 X
1.088v
900 √
910 X
1.1v
910 √
920 √
930 X
1.113v
930 X
1.125v
930 √
940 √
950 X
1.138v
950 X (Passes AvP Benchmark, Fails 3dMark11, Fails Heaven) Drivers crash
960 X Same as above Drivers Crash
970 X Same as above Drivers Crash
980 X Fails all tests Drivers Crash
1.150v
980 X
As i already suspected, it will not pass 940mhz
If I were you, I would pick something in the 1.125 or lower area, that seems to be the point of diminishing returns for your card, an extra 10 or 20mhz isn't worth the extra heat and voltage your having to give it, and 900+MHz is still a great oc.
If I were you, I would pick something in the 1.125 or lower area, that seems to be the point of diminishing returns for your card, an extra 10 or 20mhz isn't worth the extra heat and voltage your having to give it, and 900+MHz is still a great oc.
To me it doesn't seem like it, it's a bit irritating but i'm used to ATi cards hitting 1000mhz core with less voltage and a lot less heat, i don't really have a way to compare actual benchmarks with xxx core to xxx core, this card was supposed to replace my 5970, and it falls very short, yes the 5970 is dual-gpu, but it has a much slower clock and it's 2 years older than this technology, there is no excuse for this $500 price tag to be worse than a 5970 which was $200 more 2 years ago, the 5970 should be a $500 today by the normal flow of things, i'm either going to send this card back or sell it on here and grab some 6950's, or a 6970, iv'e just jumped into the Bitcoin scene and this thing is a joke at 107MHash/s when my wife's $200 card triples that with no overclock.
Anybody want a GTX Matrix for $510 with orginal box/accessories? 2 days old lol.. i'm just frustraited, i bought this expecting 1000mhz core easy
To me it doesn't seem like it, it's a bit irritating but i'm used to ATi cards hitting 1000mhz core with less voltage and a lot less heat, i don't really have a way to compare actual benchmarks with xxx core to xxx core, this card was supposed to replace my 5970, and it falls very short, yes the 5970 is dual-gpu, but it has a much slower clock and it's 2 years older than this technology, there is no excuse for this $500 price tag to be worse than a 5970 which was $200 more 2 years ago, the 5970 should be a $500 today by the normal flow of things, i'm either going to send this card back or sell it on here and grab some 6950's, or a 6970, iv'e just jumped into the Bitcoin scene and this thing is a joke at 107MHash/s when my wife's $200 card triples that with no overclock.
Anybody want a GTX Matrix for $510 with orginal box/accessories? 2 days old lol.. i'm just frustraited, i bought this expecting 1000mhz core easy
You know that you can't compare clockspeeds between amd and nvidia like that right?
And yeah, unless the game scales poorly, a 5970 still usually has a 580 in performance. The only cards that can truly can beat it are the 590 or 6990.
You know that you can't compare clockspeeds between amd and nvidia like that right?
And yeah, unless the game scales poorly, a 5970 still usually has a 580 in performance. The only cards that can truly can beat it are the 590 or 6990.
No i completly understand that, what i was getting at is Price:performance, $500+OC should put you around the base clock of the next step up, even comparing to a 2 year old card.
No i completly understand that, what i was getting at is Price:performance, $500+OC should put you around the base clock of the next step up, even comparing to a 2 year old card.
I hear you, that sort of thinking kind of went out the window with dual gpu cards though. Can't expect a 580, even an oc'ed one, to compete with what amounts to crossfire 5870s at what sounds like 1ghz. Hell even the 295 still competes with the top single gpu cards in a good scaling environment.
Jhatfie
08-04-11, 08:11 PM
Based on the reviews I've read, the only ones that hit 1Ghz on the core stable were getting fed additional volts beyond the 1.15. I believe techpowerup needed 1.275 to hit 970mhz, gur3d's only did 912Mhz on 1.15, hitechlegion got 923Mhz at 1.15v, techpowerup got 970Mhz at 1.15v. So it really is luck of the draw.
From what I can tell based on reviews, the GTX 580 competes pretty close to my old 5850's in crossfire which to me is admirable. I just dumped my unlocked 6950's that I had to get this card since I am downgrading for a bit until the next gen comes out. I got my Matrix 580 for $400 (barely used).
Jhatfie
08-05-11, 01:35 AM
Update, for reference. I got my Matrix today and started to play with it. Have not had lots of time to fiddle but so far 970 @ 1.15v core and 4800 memory seem stable. Do not see any artifacts, tried several games for about 10 minutes each.
Did some comparisons to my unlocked HD 6950 @ 880/1375. All tests at 2560x1600, HD textures if possible, DX11 features all on if applicable. Same levels, but granted take these results with a grain of salt as I would need more and more complete tests. But performance gains ranged from 10-25%.
EarthDog
08-05-11, 06:31 AM
To me it doesn't seem like it, it's a bit irritating but i'm used to ATi cards hitting 1000mhz core with less voltage and a lot less heat, i don't really have a way to compare actual benchmarks with xxx core to xxx core, this card was supposed to replace my 5970, and it falls very short, yes the 5970 is dual-gpu, but it has a much slower clock and it's 2 years older than this technology, there is no excuse for this $500 price tag to be worse than a 5970 which was $200 more 2 years ago, the 5970 should be a $500 today by the normal flow of things, i'm either going to send this card back or sell it on here and grab some 6950's, or a 6970, iv'e just jumped into the Bitcoin scene and this thing is a joke at 107MHash/s when my wife's $200 card triples that with no overclock.
Anybody want a GTX Matrix for $510 with orginal box/accessories? 2 days old lol.. i'm just frustraited, i bought this expecting 1000mhz core easyThis isnt an ATI card though....so thats half your problem is your expectation s are out of whack.
In regards to Bitcoin, It has been well known that ATI cards, I believe the 5 series, perform better than Nvidia cards. At least, I see people scraping up 5 series cards all the time for it.
And like people, and yourself said, its a dual GPU card for pete's sake vs one and its damn near the same performane.
Sorry to be so.....truthful, but maybe a little more research would have helped you out as the information you are frustrated about is all around you. Im truely sorry you are dissapointed in such an expensive purchase though. :-/
Im truely sorry you are dissapointed in such an expensive purchase though. :-/
This is why i'm dissapointed in it, This is a common standard OC for the Matrix, not a reference card. I paid the extra premium to OC better, not to accept a 7% OC on the core with nearly maxed voltages.
970 @ 1.15v core and 4800 memory seem stable. Do not see any artifacts, tried several games for about 10 minutes each.
EarthDog
08-05-11, 12:57 PM
Every card clocks different. I wouldnt call 1000Mhz core a standard overclock for ANY stock clocked 580 with 1.15v and medium fan...thats crazy talk! On air these all seem to top out around 920-975. Again, and Im sorry, your expectations were just too high IMO, especially for 24/7 quiet operation.
This review = 965mhz (http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1207/pg13/asus-matrix-gtx-580-platinum-graphics-card-review-power-temps-noise-overclocking.html)
This one killed 1k!!! LOL! (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/45158-asus-rog-gtx-580-matrix-platinum-review-16.html)
915Mhz @ 1.15v (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_580_Matrix/30.html)
912Mhz @ 1.15 (http://www.guru3d.com/article/asus-gtx-580-matrix-review/20)
Should I go on or do you understand at this point? :)
Every card clocks different. I wouldnt call 1000Mhz core a standard overclock for ANY stock clocked 580 with 1.15v and medium fan...thats crazy talk! On air these all seem to top out around 920-975. Again, and Im sorry, your expectations were just too high IMO, especially for 24/7 quiet operation.
This review = 965mhz (http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1207/pg13/asus-matrix-gtx-580-platinum-graphics-card-review-power-temps-noise-overclocking.html)
This one killed 1k!!! LOL! (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/45158-asus-rog-gtx-580-matrix-platinum-review-16.html)
915Mhz @ 1.15v (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_580_Matrix/30.html)
912Mhz @ 1.15 (http://www.guru3d.com/article/asus-gtx-580-matrix-review/20)
Should I go on or do you understand at this point? :)
Please, go on, tell me why i'm not entitled to my opinion and personal expectations, then you can say you're "right".
I think you should have the understanding that if i choose to be disappointed because i didn't reach my goal, then that's for me to decide, and i can publicly voice my opinion the last time i checked. You treated my opinion on the cards overclock potential as facts or law, i could say "this card is a piece of junk and it's the worst card iv'e ever had in my life" and i would be absolutely in my right, i can't stand people who come back with "YOU'RE WRONG HERE IS THE LINK" It's my opinion based on my expectations and you or anyone else in this world can not take that away from me, i scorn people who are eager to just jump on someones opinion and call it wrong!
Should I go on or do you understand at this point? :)
EarthDog
08-05-11, 02:08 PM
Of course you are entitled to your opinion!!! Who said otherwise? Im just saying........:
This is why i'm dissapointed in it, This is a common standard OC for the Matrix, not a reference card. I paid the extra premium to OC better, not to accept a 7% OC on the core with nearly maxed voltages.This part however is not an opinion...and I fear thats what your dissapointment is based off of. Are you still allowed to be dissapointed? Sure. But where that dissapointment is centered is the real question to me. Its just not a common overclock for the card at that voltage and that fan speed. Again, sorry you are dissapointed and sorry if I offended you with posting up what average overclocks actually are.
Good luck to you sir. :)
From what I can tell based on reviews, the GTX 580 competes pretty close to my old 5850's in crossfire which to me is admirable. I just dumped my unlocked 6950's that I had to get this card since I am downgrading for a bit until the next gen comes out. I got my Matrix 580 for $400 (barely used).
Glad you mentioned this, the 580 overclocked to 960mhz is only about a 4-6fps difference from my 5970 on my games at 1920x1080.
I still haven't gotten a straight answer about the safety of 1.15v though, I can't see where anyone has said "iv'e ran a card on 1.15v for x amount of years no problems" , it almost seems like people run benchmarks on these cards at voltage increases and then turns them right back down, it may not be that way, that's just how it seems.
EDIT: Now that i have this, i kind of wish i had gotten a 2 slot card instead of 3, I almost want to SLI them for longevity. It's a shame new and better video cards come out every year, i can't keep up, i spent $750 in a 5970 last yeah, and now $530 in this one for a small step down, so why don't i just come out and straight up tell everyone what both me and my wife are looking forward to and from an unbiased point let me know what you think would do well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xNHs6pdotk
It runs on the Unreal Engine 3 and the Korean site advertises 50 vs 50 and 100 vs 100 scale pvp and that number keeps getting raised, i'd like to be able to keep this maxed out , now i don't know if that would make any performance impact on this GTX 580 but this game advertises "PhysX by Nvidia".
Jhatfie
08-05-11, 06:55 PM
I am going to run mine at 1.15v full time. Just make sure my fan profile is set so that temps stay below 70C under extended load periods. I am not to worried about it if I can do that, heat is the enemy, if you can control that I would think that it should be fine. It may shorten the life of the gpu ever so slightly, but honestly how long are you going to keep it?
I've OC'd and overvolted CPU's and GPU's for years, did volt mods by painting traces, soldering variable resistors, etc and not once have I burned up anything, ever. Now 1.2v+ or higher I would not do 24/7 on this with air cooling, but 1.15v I believe should be okay.
Thanks Jhatfie, I guess i should put that 3 year warranty to good use, i'm tryingt o figure out if my motherboard can actually hold a second GTX 580 Matrix, I have enough PCI slots and i will start using my corsair professional 1200 watt PSU, but that means i will have to put one of these in a 8x lane.
I'm not sure i can fit 2 of these on this board though. I think it would constrict the top cards airflow.
The Red 580 displays accurately the size of of my 580 on the board, the purple is just an estimate. There are 3 PCIe 2.0 slots.
MattNo5ss
08-05-11, 08:08 PM
Two will definitely fit on your board, but some of the headers along the bottom may be hard to get to. Restricting airflow and additional heat on the top card is the main issue with air cooled SLI/CFX setups. Native x8/x8 will be fine, native x16/x16 is only ~5% faster at most.
Jhatfie
08-05-11, 08:11 PM
I am not sure I would do it, personally. Based on your boards layout it should fit but I can tell you from running 5850's and 6950's in crossfire with decent spacing the one card always gets lots hotter (15C for me). So almost completely suffocating one I do not think it would be ideal. It certainly would kill your ability to OC very well and limit the ability of this card to stretch it's legs (which is why we bought a Matrix to begin with right?). It may be fine, but if you are set on doing 580's in SLI I would maybe get dual slot versions.
Also putting the second card in a 8x lane should not be an issue, the performance impact of running 8x versus 16x is very small.
Two will definitely fit on your board, but some of the headers along the bottom may be hard to get to. Restricting airflow and additional heat on the top card is the main issue with air cooled SLI/CFX setups. Native x8/x8 will be fine, native x16/x16 is only ~5% faster at most.
Hmm, how much of a air flow restriction are we talking, like it's going to cause a vacuum between the top of the second card within the gap? 10-15C hotter?
Also i was wrong, it looks like i have a 8x 2.0 on the center (where i mapped the purple card) and the very bottom is a x16. But even in a Antec 1200 with my PSU i can't squeeze it on the bottom.
(which is why we bought a Matrix to begin with right?).
You have a point i guess. I guess i will be dropping another $700 when the next cards come out. I just hope it's a "tick" and not another fermi, the fermi is great but something to compete with ATi's shader engines would be awesome.
Jhatfie
08-05-11, 08:31 PM
You have a point i guess. I guess i will be dropping another $700 when the next cards come out. I just hope it's a "tick" and not another fermi, the fermi is great but something to compete with ATi's shader engines would be awesome.
I suppose that depends on how the next gen cards perform. It is possible with the two die shrinks that a single GTX 680 or whatever will perform as well as 580's in SLI but while consuming a lot less power. You may only need to drop $500 to get the performance you want. lol.
I'll personally likely sell my Matrix when the new ATI cards come out if they perform like I think they will. A few months later when the new Nvidia tech comes out, if it has a noticeable advantage, I will sell my ATI and switch again. I have no loyalty. :p
MattNo5ss
08-05-11, 08:31 PM
Lol, no, not a vacuum :D But the top card can get quite a bit hotter depending on how hot the back of the bottom card's PCB gets. I would guess up to 10C hotter would be possible in some cases, I don't have much experience with SLI/CFX myself.
The top PCIE x16 is running at x16, the 2nd one is running at x8, and the bottom one is at x4. When two cards are used in the 1st and 2nd PCIe x16 slots, it runs at x8/x8.
Jhatfie
08-06-11, 07:05 PM
Wanted to give an update on my OC. 970 core eventually led to a couple freezes in a couple games after a bit. Currently at 965 core @ 1.15v and 4770 memory. 3dMark11 would get some light artifacting with the memory at 4780-4800, but right now everything seems to be happy.
Also tested a bit at lesser voltages at default fan profile (so no 100% fan). 935Mhz @ 1.125 seems to be perfectly stable. 915Mhz @ 1.10 seems stable as well. (stable as able to loop 3dMark11, Heaven and play Crysis 2/metro 2033 fine without crashing/artifacts).
3dMark11 seems to be the pretty sensitive, it will crash before games seem to.
Pvt.Dancer
08-07-11, 12:24 AM
Heres a link (http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=680563) to my thread on this card that might help you get higher clocks, and i didnt see if you found this out but you can run higher than the 1.15 thats the limit on the software just by pushing the + button on the card right next to the 100% fan button. At first i had no idea what they where thought they where an onboard fan control... i was way off. anyways you can hit better clocks with it and iv been running my card for a long time now at 940 at 1.15V and no issues nor do i expect any with the temps staying so low. hope this stuff helps.
Heres a link (http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=680563) to my thread on this card that might help you get higher clocks, and i didnt see if you found this out but you can run higher than the 1.15 thats the limit on the software just by pushing the + button on the card right next to the 100% fan button. At first i had no idea what they where thought they where an onboard fan control... i was way off. anyways you can hit better clocks with it and iv been running my card for a long time now at 940 at 1.15V and no issues nor do i expect any with the temps staying so low. hope this stuff helps.
I appreciate this information, i did know about it, i just pretended it didn't exist, kinda like a savings account, forgoetting the money saves the money, forgetting that button also saves me money lol, i just didn't want to pass 1.15v i'm enjoying the 67C max load on my main rig.
Pvt.Dancer
08-07-11, 01:31 AM
ok then just remember that these cards have better caps than most others... so iv read... so in theory extra voltage shouldn't hurt it as long as it stay cool
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.