Strix or Giga G1 overclock more or is it a silicon lottery?

[EarthDog]

Sorry about your Silicon lottery loss K. I understand why you feel that way about the card. Consider though, your 4 (oops, 11) datasets versus the thousands that are sold.... and I just posted reviews showing less as well.

SILICON. LOTTERY. is the only difference, really.

 

[Johan45]

In my case i am completely buggered, even with a modded BIOS mine cant go above 1492mhz without graphical errors and driver crash. My 4 mates that bought a Strix ended up at my OC or lower, the other 7 that bought a Gigabyte are ALL 1530mhz+, too many coincidences form a pattern.

Where did you get the BIOS or did you mod your own? That makes a huge difference.

 

[NZKshatriya]

*need more popcorn*

BTW, what are these stars on the profile for exactly?

And why is this thread starting to look like a philosophy debate?

 

[Kenrou]

Consider though, your 4 (oops, 11) datasets versus the thousands that are sold.... and I just posted reviews showing less as well.

11 versus the thousands ? what ? again with this ? Tiny example. In you own reviews the Giga performs better and you're still going at it ? cmon m8 give it a rest, i have proven my point over and over again.


In the middle of all this i would like to hear the OP, or is this gonna turn out to be another thread that he posts and disappears ?

- - - Updated - - -

Where did you get the BIOS or did you mod your own? That makes a huge difference.

Overclockers.net forum, took the basics from there and tweaked my own. Was more stable, locked and unlocked speed but still never went above what i have now even at 1.281v. Doesn't matter anyway, back to stock.

 

[Johan45]

i have proven my point over and over again.

This I don't really see, you had a bad experience, take that into context your GPU doesn't overclock like you were hoping it would. You can quote all the sites you like it still comes down to the CHIP. I could get lucky when I get one that run 1600 core without even raising the voltage. That's part of the point here it's not a matter of voltage being lock or low power limits. All these cards have them and without hard modification on the majority of them you won't get around it. I have two identical GTX 580 DCII at home one will clock 50MHz higher than the other. It has nothing to do with ASUS it's all about chip quality. You can say that Giga, or MSI, I don't care who is going to OC higher out of the box than another brand but there will always be the ones out there that "prove" you wrong. What we're trying to say is you.me E_D can't tell anyone which GPU is going to clock better since we don't know until we clock it what kind of ceiling that particular chip has.

 

[Kenrou]

You can say that Giga, or MSI, I don't care who is going to OC higher out of the box than another brand but there will always be the ones out there that "prove" you wrong. What we're trying to say is you.me E_D can't tell anyone which GPU is going to clock better since we don't know until we clock it what kind of ceiling that particular chip has.

Does anyone really read what i write ? im not basing solely on my own experiences (that would be stupid to say the least), im basing it on averages and the averages say Strix overclocks less. The ones that prove me wrong seem to be the exception, not the rule. Overall there are a lot more people with Gigabyte or other brands getting 1500mhz+ then Strix, just check forums. That has been my whole point all along. Strix is slower. Even if the potential to be better is there, we cant get it without modifications that the majority of consumers just wont do.

Its wrong of nVidia or ASUS to lock us down like this, i actually raged on ROG forums because of this and the stupidity of GPU Boost vs old overclocking in my point of view.

 

[Johan45]

Does anyone really read what i write ? im not basing solely on my own experiences (that would be stupid to say the least), im basing it on averages and the averages say Strix overclocks less. The ones that prove me wrong seem to be the exception, not the rule. Overall there are a lot more people with Gigabyte or other brands getting 1500mhz+ then Strix, just check forums. That has been my whole point all along. Strix is slower. Even if the potential to be better is there, we cant get it without modifications that the majority of consumers just wont do.

Its wrong of nVidia or ASUS to lock us down like this, i actually raged on ROG forums because of this and the stupidity of GPU Boost vs old overclocking in my point of view.

I've read it all and for a game player/ average user it doesn't matter if one card gets 2 FPS more than another. When I want to know which card I'M going to get I have a different source this




Now tell these guys that they're wrong. Ha ha

 

[Kenrou]

There you go, WITH MODIFICATIONS the 12+2 actually does a excelent job, without them it would be behind the other brands.

If it doesn't matter for the average gamer you might as well tell everyone to get a standard 980 Ti because by that chart is still better then all the rest

 

[Johan45]

That's what I would tell them go fast and cheap. It doesn't matter. If you want some quality behind your card get something non reference say an ASUS STrix. Quiet and fast you get all that clean power in a nice looking card for a reasonable price and it barely makes a sound.
Like I said before, I've ran many different video cards, you get good and poor clockers in every bunch.

 

[Kenrou]

Cown, for your uses, ANY of the cards (aftermarket, not reference) will be fine. If you don't plan on overclocking and want the fastest one "out of the box" grab the Zotac AMP! Edition. They both have the highest factory overclock of them all starting at 1253Mhz base clock.

This. We have already said this several times along the tread. This makes my point

 

[Johan45]

This. We have already said this several times along the tread. This makes my point

This whole discussion has been pointless. It's the same with CPUs, you don't know until it's in your system. Remember that discussion. Silicon is silicon and only a small percentage of chips come out great. The rest are just average.

 

[EarthDog]

This. We have already said this several times along the tread. This makes my point

I'm not sure you know what your point is. I feel its changed at least once or twice in the thread...

First it was "the board" causing it, then the voltage was locked (like every single other card), then... they are ALL good now!


**** this...another exercise in futility brought to you by "the facts and the ignorant". Its hard to believe anyone if they don't know if they are coming or going in the first place.

Tired of forums...

 

[Kenrou]

I haven't changed anything so far, you're twisting my words again Strix is slower on average because of voltage lock, because of lower OC capability, forums prove it, you proved it, and you're still arguing it !!! FFS you're right you "educated" people makes these forums tiresome. I'm out.

 

[EarthDog]

I didn't twist anything that was the order which things came out... read your posts above!

Again, voltage lock - all cards have it (goes back to ASIC quality about what any card can do at a given voltage... AKA Silicon Lottery!).

Nobody has proved o/c ability is lower... look at the reviews and see they are both all over the place. If we went by your logic, the Giga would be slower because it had a review where it only reached 1429 Mhz...

I haven't seen you link any forums showing a list of clocks for either card. All we have is are the reviews.


If only the ignorant would listen...or prove what they are saying... none of that has happened here.




Later Kenrou!

 

[Kenrou]

Don't snippet, put the argument from the start let people choose not just you and Johan like usual. You have twisted my words several times now and its getting really infuriating. YOU BOTH have proven my point and you have the fcking nerve to call me ignorant... and the argument isn't even between the G1 and the Strix, the G1 was used as an example like the rest.

 

[EarthDog]

This is the entire discussion... the only posts deleted was the ever so frequent off topic commentary by NZK.

Wait.. shoot... let me get your first post. I left it in the other thread... I will copy it over as it has merit in both. My fault.

EDIT: Done! Its all there now!

EDIT2:

and the argument isn't even between the G1 and the Strix, the G1 was used as an example like the rest.

Even better! Refer to my passages from reviews in post 5, the first EDIT.

I didn't twist your words.

 

[Kenrou]

OFC you only forgot my original comment right ? the one you agreed with, lemme copy :

"As a Strix 980 Ti owner ill tell you right now : pick another brand. Gigabyte, EVGA, Zotac are better for gaming/overclocking, the Strix is better for day to day and "light" gaming because of its 0db implementation (it does zero noise until it reaches 60c and the fans kick in). It has locked voltage - 1.237v and unless you mod your BIOS you will never reach your full OC potential, add to that at least in my case coil noise.

Do not mistake what i am saying, it is still one of the best in the market and well worth its price tag BUT we are "hamstrung by the board" from the start."

"Cown, for your uses, ANY of the cards (aftermarket, not reference) will be fine. If you don't plan on overclocking and want the fastest one "out of the box" grab the Zotac AMP! Edition. They both have the highest factory overclock of them all starting at 1253Mhz base clock. "

 

[EarthDog]

I agreed with AN underlying point in that post, yes! However I took exception to your reasoning behind you shunning the Strix.

See where I said "hamstrung by the board"? That is one point I tried to explain.

See where I also took exception to the voltage being locked at 1.23v? While true, its true across ALL cards... this lending merit to the silicon lottery statement. In other words, different silicon can reach different clocks with the same voltage!

Nowhere did I disagree with the statement 'if you are not overclocking and want the fastest stock(out of the box - no overclocking) card get.........yada'. That was never the talking point to me.

If the G1 was just an example, that is another new point you just made as I do not recall you once referencing anything BUT the G1 in your links... SMH.

EDIT: Quote Originally Posted by EarthDog View Post
Cown, for your uses, ANY of the cards (aftermarket, not reference) will be fine. If you don't plan on overclocking and want the fastest one "out of the box" grab the Zotac AMP! Edition. They both have the highest factory overclock of them all starting at 1253Mhz base clock.
This. We have already said this several times along the tread. This makes my point

If your point was stock clocks out of the box, then yes. But your first post explicitly talks about its overclocking abilities and THAT is why you would choose other cards over the Strix... here is (part of) your post again....

As a Strix 980 Ti owner ill tell you right now : pick another brand. Gigabyte, EVGA, Zotac are better for gaming/overclocking, the Strix is better for day to day and "light" gaming because of its 0db implementation (it does zero noise until it reaches 60c and the fans kick in). It has locked voltage - 1.237v and unless you mod your BIOS you will never reach your full OC potential, add to that at least in my case coil noise.

Saying overclocking means overclocking. Messing with voltages is overclocking as well. Saying you will never reach your OC potential means overclocking too.. If you meant stock clocks (out of the box clocks), you didn't say so out of the gate!

 

[Kenrou]

"See where I also took exception to the voltage being locked at 1.23v? While true, its true across ALL cards... this lending merit to the silicon lottery statement. In other words, different silicon can reach different clocks with the same voltage!" - "All NVIDIA cards have voltage limits and power limits. Some are higher than others (power limits). But the voltage is all relatively close (there is always some variance there)" - Gigabyte and Zotac and Classified (there may be more, i don't know) have a higher voltage limit OUT OF THE BOX then the Strix therefore higher OC capability regardless of "silicon lottery".

"If the G1 was just an example, that is another new point you just made... SMH" - i made this point in my very 1st post, i used 3 brands as example.

"Nobody has proved o/c ability is lower... look at the reviews and see they are both all over the place. If we went by your logic, the Giga would be slower because it had a review where it only reached 1429 Mhz..." - troll the forums a bit, i don't mean just this one, count how many people go YAY my gigabyte went above 1500mhz and then do the same with the Strix. You will find many more Gigabyte then Strix. Same i am noticing now for the EVGA and Zotac.

 

[MattNo5ss]

If we are talking about OC potential with stock BIOS, then the card with the most unlocked stock BIOS would have the most potential for better clocks. However, having more potential doesn't guarantee higher clocks. There is also the "silicon lottery" which just means variance in the chips themselves, they're all different and have varying clocking potential before they're even soldered to a PCB. So, what we have is a difference in OCing because of BIOS limitations and a difference in OCing from chip variance. These two variances, BIOS vs chip, are both small enough that it's impossible to tell if OCing results, good or bad, are a cause of BIOS limits or chip variance.

Example binary combinations (could be broken down even more):

• good chip + good BIOS = best potential
• good chip + bad BIOS = avg potential
  
• bad chip + good BIOS = avg potential
• bad chip + bad BIOS = worst potential

It can get muddy in the highlighted cases since even having a good BIOS can result in equal or lower clocks when you're unlucky and get a sub-par chip, than when you have a good chip and bad BIOS. This is where luck of the draw comes into play. So, having a good BIOS can definitely increase your odds of getting good OC results (avg to best potential from my above example), but it doesn't guarantee above avg clocks. So, what it looks like in this thread, to me, is that the OC results of both cards are close enough that it can't be said with 100% confidence whether the differences are from the BIOS, silicon lottery, or both.