NVIDIA's shady trick to boost the GeForce 9600GT

[OutSider]

source:http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/

[KALISPIMENTA]

Another Nvidia scam for sales.But because they make billion nothing will ever be done about it

[v_rr]

Nice find.
It´s now resolved the case of 9600GT SLI in one SLI Nvidia board is better (in some games) then one HD 3870X2 in the same Nvidia board:

It is certainly nice for NVIDIA to see their GeForce 9600 GT reviewed on NVIDIA chipsets with LinkBoost enabled where their card leaves the competition behind in the dust (even more). Also it could send a message to customers that the card performs considerably better when used on an NVIDIA chipset? Actually this is not the case, the PCI-Express frequency can be adjusted on most motherboards, you will see these gains independent of Intel/AMD CPU architecture or Intel/NVIDIA/AMD/VIA chipset.

[NotFred]

Interesting, has huge implications for the review much discussed in this thread:
Clicky (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=178491)

So what are they doing then, basically automatically overclocking thier cards when using Nforce chipsets. Would be somewhat amusing if this made Nvidia cards and chipsets incompattible (for cards that have little to no overclocking headroom in them... there are always some...)

[Syn.]

So what are the actual default clocks for 9600GT?

[Rattle]

or it could just be that rivatuner reads the card wrong ?

nvidia drivers and gpu-z always read the card the same, but on every card I have at least one of the clocks reads different on riva tuner hardware monitor....

if they are all eminating from the same source then who is wrong?

my shader cores have been off as much as 30mhz on all the g80s'g92's
I havnt seen such a huge discrepancy in core clocks though.

from what it looks like there saying a stock 650 9600gt should read about 708 in riva tuner then ?

[hollo]

slightly misleading of nVidia, but not so much of a problem once people are aware of it...

but it implies that every 9600 GT can handle a 25% overclock on stock volts.
you put a 650mhz 9600 GT in a linkboost enabled board and it clocks it to 125/100 * 650mhz = 812.5mhz... is that gonna work????
or are a lot of nforce 590i boards gonna be mysteriously buggy while running 9600 GTs in SLI :rofl:

[DMH]

I believe linkboost is out since the 680i chipset was launched

[OBR]

I believe linkboost is out since the 680i chipset was launched
exactly, i can overclock my 9600GT on 780MHz, with this theory is running my GPU highly above 850MHz and it is not possible!

[mascaras]

So what are the actual default clocks for 9600GT?


according to techpowerup , it depends on PCI-E frequency


http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/9220/pciaa3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)




regards

[OBR]

it depends on PCI-E frequency


regards

when is Linkboost disabled too?

[Tuvok-LuR-]

so to sum up, every 9600gt review on nv chipset with linkboost enabled should be trashed?
is g94 the only affected chip up to now?

[v_rr]

I believe linkboost is out since the 680i chipset was launched

This feature was pioneered with the NVIDIA 590i chipset and is present in the NVIDIA 680i chipset too
...

[mascaras]

when is Linkboost disabled too?

i realy dont know OBR , someone try it !

i will receive a BFG 9600Gt OC for tests next monday , but i have a Asus P5E , i will test with different PCI-E frequencies and see in 3dmark if the score " goes up" , then i report !


:up:

[Eastcoasthandle]

This examples a whole lot.

[Tonucci]

Interesting...I thought its awesome performance could be due to an tweaked arch., or maybe at the cost of IQ, but never because of this.

[Morais]

Very well find dude...Bad trick from nV :shakes:

[DilTech]

Link boost has been around for quite some time.... ATi has a form of it in their RD600 as well. All it does is overclock the PCI-E bus automatically when it senses the card brand of it's choice. All this is is merely NVidia finally making a board that can take advantage of the pci-e bus clocking feature that's been around for almost 2 years now.

So, if this is true and not shens, does that mean the reviews where they overclock the cards and still hit 800mhz+ actually closer to 1000mhz? After all, just 850 * 25% would be 1062 mhz.

Calling this shady, I don't know about that one. It boosts the cards performance for the end user without worry of voiding warranty or requiring any work at all. That's not shady, that's called increasing performance. Nothing wrong with that at all.

[Tuvok-LuR-]

is linkboost related only to SLIed cards or also to sinle card?

[Tuvok-LuR-]

Link boost has been around for quite some time.... ATi has a form of it in their RD600 as well. All it does is overclock the PCI-E bus automatically when it senses the card brand of it's choice. All this is is merely NVidia finally making a board that can take advantage of the pci-e bus clocking feature that's been around for almost 2 years now.
the performance increase has nothing to do with linkboost itself, with wider bandwidth or higher pci frequency, it's just a gpu overclock
So, if this is true and not shens, does that mean the reviews where they overclock the cards and still hit 800mhz+ actually closer to 1000mhz? After all, just 850 * 25% would be 1062 mhz.

Calling this shady, I don't know about that one. It boosts the cards performance for the end user without worry of voiding warranty or requiring any work at all. That's not shady, that's called increasing performance. Nothing wrong with that at all.
actually, there's no problem in bringing to the average Joe an auto-overclocking and dummyproof performance increase
what makes it a cheat and a **** is:
- it's not documented/advertised by nvidia
- the driver reports the non-overclocked frequency
so basically looks like nvidia wants to hide this and make people think their cards at stock frequencies are faster then they actually are.

[Vapor]

I hope this is implemented on 9800GX2 and GTX :D

I think it's pretty sweet. :party:

[Morais]

actually, there's no problem in bringing to the average Joe an auto-overclocking and dummyproof performance increase
what makes it a cheat and a **** is:
- it's not documented/advertised by nvidia
- the driver reports the non-overclocked frequency
so basically looks like nvidia wants to hide this and make people think their cards at stock frequencies are faster then they actually are.

:yepp:

[highoctane]

Allot of folks by oc'd cards and pay extra for them, this is basically no different other than not paying extra for an oc edition card.

It's free performance so I don't personally see anything wrong or shady about it.

[hollo]

it depends on PCI-E frequency


http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/9220/pciaa3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)




regards

default clock is 650mhz
http://www.techarp.com/article/Desktop_GPU_Comparison/nvidia_4_big.png

but in that article they must have been using an overclock model 9600 GT

actual clock = 25mhz (dependant on PCI-e frequency) * 29 = 725mhz (reported by GPU-z and rivatuner overclocking)
there's also 27mhz * 29 = 783mhz from rivatuner monitoring, which the author says is incorrect
Please also note that RivaTuner's monitoring clock reading is wrong. It uses 27 MHz for its calculation which is incorrect. When the PCI-E bus is 100 MHz, the core clock is indeed 650 MHz on the reference design. A RivaTuner update is necessary to reflect GPU clock changes cause by PCI-E clock properly though.

[Jowy Atreides]

slightly misleading of nVidia, but not so much of a problem once people are aware of it...

but it implies that every 9600 GT can handle a 25% overclock on stock volts.
you put a 650mhz 9600 GT in a linkboost enabled board and it clocks it to 125/100 * 650mhz = 812.5mhz... is that gonna work????
or are a lot of nforce 590i boards gonna be mysteriously buggy while running 9600 GTs in SLI :rofl:

I can confirm this,
I have a p35 chipset and my card can play ingame at 820Mhz stable on the stock cooler - cheap zotac card

[DilTech]

actually, there's no problem in bringing to the average Joe an auto-overclocking and dummyproof performance increase
what makes it a cheat and a **** is:
- it's not documented/advertised by nvidia
- the driver reports the non-overclocked frequency
so basically looks like nvidia wants to hide this and make people think their cards at stock frequencies are faster then they actually are.

The same average joe you speak of wouldn't know how to check the driver for the non-overclocked frequency in the first place. Also, linkboost IS an advertised feature, this is just the first card to truly take advantage of the increased PCI-E frequency.

Finally, stock is stock. You take your card, pull it out of the box, put it in your computer and run it? That's stock. All this means is, stock speed on a NVidia chipset is different than stock speed on a different chipset.

Personally, I really like the idea of the new feature, as I'm sure a lot of people here will.

I do want to know one thing though.....

Why doesn't the guru3d testing show the same issue?. Guru3d use rivatuner in their sli review of the 9600GT to show temps(page 4 of the review (http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/504/4/)), which is done on a 680i. The inno3d card is still at 700mhz, using the same tool tech powerup said showed the issue.... So can someone explain what's going on here with this?

[hollo]

I can confirm this,
I have a p35 chipset and my card can play ingame at 820Mhz stable on the stock cooler - cheap zotac cardhmm, then there's factory overclocked cards... eg the card used in the techreport article had a default clock of 725.
if they put it in a linkboost board, 725 * 125/100 = 906.25mhz = crash?

[Jowy Atreides]

hmm, then there's factory overclocked cards... eg the card used in the techreport article had a default clock of 725.
if they SLI'd it in a linkboost board, 725 * 125/100 = 906.25mhz = crash?

admittedly my card is factory clocked at 675 Mhz

[Luka_Aveiro]

I can confirm this,
I have a p35 chipset and my card can play ingame at 820Mhz stable on the stock cooler - cheap zotac card

Auto overclocked by linkboost or manually overclocked?

[Tuvok-LuR-]

Also, linkboost IS an advertised feature, this is just the first card to truly take advantage of the increased PCI-E frequency.
It does not take advantage of the increased PCI-E frequency, it takes advantage of the increased GPU frequency

Finally, stock is stock. You take your card, pull it out of the box, put it in your computer and run it? That's stock. All this means is, stock speed on a NVidia chipset is different than stock speed on a different chipset.
So that's not shady at all?
The point is, if nobody would have spotted this thing:
average joe goes on the web, looks for vgas benches, finds a 9600gt bench on 680i with linkboost enabled, thinks, wow, that card is fast!
Average Joe buys a 9600gt for his P35 mobo.
Average Joe PC will perform lower than what he thought

[Tuvok-LuR-]

Auto overclocked by linkboost or manually overclocked?
linkboost is nv mobos only feature

[Frank M]

Allot of folks by oc'd cards and pay extra for them, this is basically no different other than not paying extra for an oc edition card.

It's free performance so I don't personally see anything wrong or shady about it.

How's about having it reviewed on nv chipset boards, and forgetting to
mention that it only does so well on their chipsets, but on others, that
speed advantage is gone? :)


IMO techreport should've made a test: performance on nv and performance
on non-nv chipsets. It would be much better proof, these are just theories.

[hollo]

remember, linkboost is only for SLI
edit: my bad, it's automatic on all link-boost enabled chipset and gfx card combinations

a feature that overclocks SLI setups (more than just the PCI-e bandwidth, which does basically nothing) is bad enough, if nVidia made a feature that overclocked single nVidia GPUs on nVidia chipsets they'd get teh rape from the tech-press

[Jowy Atreides]

Auto overclocked by linkboost or manually overclocked?

manually clocked by the manufacturer,
gpu-z reads 675 as default

[Luka_Aveiro]

manually clocked by the manufacturer,
gpu-z reads 675 as default

And the hardware monitor in rivatuner, your readings are...?

http://i1.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/images/clocks.gif

This is the basis of TechPowerUP theory, it could just be a reading error, afaik.

[metro.cl]

It does not take advantage of the increased PCI-E frequency, it takes advantage of the increased GPU frequency


So that's not shady at all?
The point is, if nobody would have spotted this thing:
average joe goes on the web, looks for vgas benches, finds a 9600gt bench on 680i with linkboost enabled, thinks, wow, that card is fast!
Average Joe buys a 9600gt for his P35 mobo.
Average Joe PC will perform lower than what he thought

Since when you can run SLI on P35? and if average Joe look for SLI benchs to buy a Single card, he did it wrong.

I like this you get more performance for you $$$ out of the box, every guy that has seen a review saw it on nf680i or nvidia chipset and if they want to use this they have to buy a nf680i so they will get the boost. If they want single card they wont get it as linkboost only works on SLI.

It is still nice to know about this feature, also does everycard out there do this?

[metro.cl]

And the hardware monitor in rivatuner, your readings are...?

http://i1.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/images/clocks.gif

This is the basis of TechPowerUP theory, it could just be a reading error, afaik.

That always happends, and is because clock speeds arent linearly selectable, they have jumps, if this is all the basis of TPU review means they havent messed with cards in a long time.

[DilTech]

I guess no one read my post pointing out that guru3d shows the readings off of rivatuner, and nothing out of the ordinary showed up on their testing.

[Tuvok-LuR-]

That always happends, and is because clock speeds arent linearly selectable, they have jumps, if this is all the basis of TPU review means they havent messed with cards in a long time.
I think that who wrote that stuff actually knew what he was talking about, and also
"Acknowledgments: I would like to thank Unwinder and Sampsa for their great input and discussions on this topic."

[Tuvok-LuR-]

remember, linkboost is only for SLI
Since when you can run SLI on P35? and if average Joe look for SLI benchs to buy a Single card, he did it wrong.
Linkboost works also in single card mode

[STaRGaZeR]

Why doesn't the guru3d testing show the same issue?. Guru3d use rivatuner in their sli review of the 9600GT to show temps(page 4 of the review (http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/504/4/)), which is done on a 680i. The inno3d card is still at 700mhz, using the same tool tech powerup said showed the issue.... So can someone explain what's going on here with this?

Mainboard

nVIDIA nForce 680i SLI (eVGA)

What a coincidence it is that some NVIDIA chipsets offer a feature called "LinkBoost" that automagically increases the PCI-Express clocks. This feature was pioneered with the NVIDIA 590i chipset and is present in the NVIDIA 680i chipset too, but has recently been disabled as far as I know.

You'll have to ask Guru3D to know if they have LinkBoost enabled or disabled, or if they have a BIOS that automatically enables or disables it.

This "feature" is very good for overclocking noobs.

But it's a VERY BAD marketing procedure, not telling the reviewers about it, increasing the scores WITHOUT even know it, looks like the card is much better than it really is. You can't review a card saying that its clocks are X, which in fact are X+something due to LinkBoost or the reviewer manually increasing PCI-E frequency on any other chipset, overclocking the card and showing overcloked results. So, again, :clap: NVIDIA for another lamentable marketing move.

But this time we have caught you :lol: :owned:

[hollo]

Linkboost works also in single card mode

oh yeah true, the link-boost diagrams always show SLI setups, but the product description says it'll do it automatically for any link-boost enabled card

[Luka_Aveiro]

Guys, you haven't realized yet this has nothing to do with linkboost...

It has to do with PCI-Express frequency, once techpowerup considers PCI-Express frequency/4 is the clock generator for gpu frequency, as 100mhz/4=25mhz, that should be a regular crystal clock generator, but that doesn't exist on the 9600GT!!!!

When looking at the PCB, the only crystal we could find is a 27 MHz one, so where is the magical 25 MHz coming from ?

As many of you know, the PCI-Express bus clock frequency which connects the card to the rest of the system is running at 100 MHz by default. What NVIDIA did is to take this frequency and divide it by four to get their reference frequency for the core clock.

On systems where the PCI-E bus runs at 100 MHz, this results in the 25 MHz used for the default clock indeed. But once the PCI-E clock is increased beyond that, the GPU will magically run at higher clock speeds, without any changes to the graphics configuration, BIOS, driver or any software.

On "normal" VGA cards, when you increase the PCI-Express bus frequency you increase the theoretical bandwidth available between card and the rest of the system, but do not affect the speed the card is running at. On the GeForce 9600 GT, a 10% increase in PCI-Express frequency will make the card's core clock run 10% faster! (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/2.html)

So, taking their example: 725mhz/25mhz(clock generator powered by pci-express@100mhz)=x29;
If PCI-Express Frequency= 110mhz-> 110:4=27,5; 27,5x29= ~798mhz

Let's take it to stock clocks:
650/(100/4=25)=x26
(110/4)=27,5; 27,5x26=715mhz

So, 715-650=65; 65=10% of 650
So if you increase PCI-Express by 10%, you will increase your core clocks by 10%.

I wish I had a 9600GT in my hands to confirm this, it just seems too good to be true :D

[hollo]

Guys, you haven't realized yet this has nothing to do with linkboost...

It has to do with PCI-Express frequency,

well, linkboost bumps the PCI-e frequency from 100 to 125mhz on certain nvidia chipset/gfx card combinations, and since very few people change their PCI-e frequency that's the only way this could be much more than trivia

and since a 25% overclock would crash a lot of 9600 GTs, not to mention that it would be widely interpreted as nvidia 'cheating' to make their chipsets look better, i'd bet the 9600 GT isn't linkboost enabled

or it is linkboost enabled, but the card automatically changes the ratio so the new PCI-e frequency is accounted for
eg
normal = 100mhz/4 * 26 = 650mhz
linkboost = 125mhz/5 * 26 = 650mhz

[ToTTenTranz]

So the card automatically overclocks.

If it doesn't affect stability, it's great.

If it does, even if a little bit, then nVidia should pay for it. Hard.

[wittekakker]

I guess it's all true guys. I have been running 9600GT's clocked at 720MHz out of the box, but the card never remained stable in my tests. I got in another sample, same :banana::banana::banana::banana: happened. Now, due to rushing things, I have left my sources wondering what the problem could be, but now it all seems to come down to the simple fact where my PCIe bus speed could have been the problem all the time. I have it overclocked to 110MHz all the time which makes the GPU run at 780MHz instead of 720MHz, downclocking the GPU solved it so I guess PCIe speed did affect card clocks. Makes sense, I really don't know why else my three samples couldn't clock further then 710MHz with 110MHz PCIe speed.


I have an Intel X38 chipset. Those wondering if it will work on any chipset, please spend some time reading the article. It counts only 4 pages and you will not have to spend time posting 10 times here on XS in order to find out. It is based on PCIe speed, nothing to due with Linkboost instead that Linkboost will now overclock your VGA GPU too further increasing the total system performance.

[Luka_Aveiro]

I have it overclocked to 110MHz all the time which makes the GPU run at 780MHz instead of 720MHz, downclocking the GPU solved it so I guess PCIe speed did affect card clocks. Makes sense, I really don't know why else my three samples couldn't clock further then 710MHz with 110MHz PCIe speed.

FIY, if you had your PCI-Express frequency defined as 110mhz and you wanted to run GPU at 720mhz, it should have been running at 720x1,10= 792mhz not 780... What programs did you use for readings?

Man I'm so excited with this that I really want a 9600GT NOW!

Do you realize with extreme cooling/voltage we could easily achieve past 1GHZ frequency?

THIS IS A MAJOR TWEAK!

[saaya]

lame! thanks for making this public!

[Cybercat]

I've not heard of a card that uses a 25MHz multiplier anyway. They all use 27/54MHz multiples.

[ToTTenTranz]

Do you realize with extreme cooling/voltage we could easily achieve past 1GHZ frequency?

THIS IS A MAJOR TWEAK!

If you still need extreme cooling/voltage to achieve 1Ghz+ frequency, why is pci-e based overclocking a "MAJOR TWEAK"?
On some mobos, increasing the pci-e frequency even causes the hard drives to malfunction.

[wittekakker]

FIY, if you had your PCI-Express frequency defined as 110mhz and you wanted to run GPU at 720mhz, it should have been running at 720x1,10= 792mhz not 780... What programs did you use for readings?

Man I'm so excited with this that I really want a 9600GT NOW!

Do you realize with extreme cooling/voltage we could easily achieve past 1GHZ frequency?

THIS IS A MAJOR TWEAK!

Tweak? This is a overclock, nothing more, nothing less. 1Ghz is less great when the GPU seems to be less efficient then expected. K, you got the 1GHz screenshot, but performance wise it doesn't change a thing.
I used Rivatuner 2.06 and GPU-Z 0.1.5.

I've not heard of a card that uses a 25MHz multiplier anyway. They all use 27/54MHz multiples.

Crystal /= multiplier :) I've seen 29MHz too, but like only once until now. Custum boards are also affected.

[STEvil]

When looking at the PCB, the only crystal we could find is a 27 MHz one, so where is the magical 25 MHz coming from ?

As many of you know, the PCI-Express bus clock frequency which connects the card to the rest of the system is running at 100 MHz by default. What NVIDIA did is to take this frequency and divide it by four to get their reference frequency for the core clock.

On systems where the PCI-E bus runs at 100 MHz, this results in the 25 MHz used for the default clock indeed. But once the PCI-E clock is increased beyond that, the GPU will magically run at higher clock speeds, without any changes to the graphics configuration, BIOS, driver or any software.

On "normal" VGA cards, when you increase the PCI-Express bus frequency you increase the theoretical bandwidth available between card and the rest of the system, but do not affect the speed the card is running at. On the GeForce 9600 GT, a 10% increase in PCI-Express frequency will make the card's core clock run 10% faster! (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/2.html)

I guess it's all true guys. I have been running 9600GT's clocked at 720MHz out of the box, but the card never remained stable in my tests. I got in another sample, same happened. Now, due to rushing things, I have left my sources wondering what the problem could be, but now it all seems to come down to the simple fact where my PCIe bus speed could have been the problem all the time. I have it overclocked to 110MHz all the time which makes the GPU run at 780MHz instead of 720MHz, downclocking the GPU solved it so I guess PCIe speed did affect card clocks. Makes sense, I really don't know why else my three samples couldn't clock further then 710MHz with 110MHz PCIe speed.


I have an Intel X38 chipset. Those wondering if it will work on any chipset, please spend some time reading the article. It counts only 4 pages and you will not have to spend time posting 10 times here on XS in order to find out. It is based on PCIe speed, nothing to due with Linkboost instead that Linkboost will now overclock your VGA GPU too further increasing the total system performance.

Quoted for those who miss it.

[grimREEFER]

who does this really effect? ppl who want to overclock their pci express bus and not worry about changing their graphics cards frequency's?
i dont understand the con's

[Luka_Aveiro]

If you still need extreme cooling/voltage to achieve 1Ghz+ frequency, why is pci-e based overclocking a "MAJOR TWEAK"?
On some mobos, increasing the pci-e frequency even causes the hard drives to malfunction.

Vai spammar para outro lado pah, alguém te perguntou as horas?

It's a major tweak because it increases the clock generator frequency, similar to FSB incrasing when overclocking CPUs.

On nVidia chispets, afaik, PCI-Express frequency does not affect in any way hard-drives malfunction, as NB<->SB is made by HT Link.

[Eastcoasthandle]

who does this really effect? ppl who want to overclock their pci express bus and not worry about changing their graphics cards frequency's?
i dont understand the con's

The execution of this from NVIDIA's side is less than poor in my opinion. They did not communicate this new feature to reviewers at all, nor invented a marketing name for it and branded it as a feature that their competitors do not have.
Even when asked directly we got a bogus reply: "the crystal frequency is...". No, there is no 25 MHz crystal and its frequency is not fixed either. I'm not accusing the sender of the E-Mail of course, I just believe he didn't know, maybe this fact wasn't communicated to the marketing team at all. However, if you would get such an inquiry wouldn't you look into this further if it was your job to properly promote a product?
source (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/4.html)

[Luka_Aveiro]

Guys, the fact is rivatunner is buggy, and it does not read your final clock by increased PCI-Express frequency, appears it always multiplies the GPU internal multiplier by 27mhz, as it might refer to the physical existing clock generator (memory ones) according to techpowerup.

http://i1.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/images/crystal_small.jpg

[Zorlac]

I hope the GPU-Z author is willing to update the utility to show driver reported clocks and actual clocks.

[largon]

That always happends, and is because clock speeds arent linearly selectable, they have jumps, if this is all the basis of TPU review means they havent messed with cards in a long time.The fillrate measurements W1zzard made (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/2.html) are conclusive:
PCIe link OC-% = G94 GPU OC-%

[Luka_Aveiro]

FYI, a friend of mine has a 9600GT and I am asking him right now to do some tests regarding the confirmation of this theory, please wait :)

[Cybercat]

who does this really effect? ppl who want to overclock their pci express bus and not worry about changing their graphics cards frequency's?
i dont understand the con'sI don't understand either. Apparently NVIDIA's the big bad wolf for implementing this.

People should be glad it can be done on chipsets other than NVIDIA's. If NVIDIA blocked it off to only 590i and 680i chipsets, then you can say it's a little shady.

[Tuvok-LuR-]

I wish I had a 9600GT in my hands to confirm this, it just seems too good to be true :D
I missed the good part :confused:

[WeStSiDePLaYa]

I think something is wrong with TPU's bench system.

They are the only people who have this "problem".

Also, linkboost support is now gone since 590sli.

Also, since when did linkboost increase the card clocks?

Linkboost never increased the card clocks, only the pci-e and chipset buses.

Also, since when is the core clock dependent on pci-e bus?

I don't think TPU knows much,. and they are just spreading misinformation.

[destr0yer]

Hello

I have a e-VGA 9600 GT and this "feature" confirms!

1º, rivatuner report:
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj290/joaopgod/Untitled-1.jpg

this clocks is equal for PCI-E @ 100 mhz or 110 mhz, but the 3dmark 2006 fill rate multi texturing is not equal!

PCI-Express=100mhz
1-Results at 675mhz GPU: 16349
2-Results at 743mhz GPU: 18284

PCI-Express=110mhz
3-Results at 675mhz GPU: 17948

at 743 mhz, rivatuner report 800 mhz core. Its REAL clock or bug?

if true, its amazing tweak :D at 125 mhz the core clock is pushed to 844 mhz! Interesting, Graphics OC "driveless" :D

but, higher PCI-E frequencies is dangerous to the hard disks?

[WeStSiDePLaYa]

Also, does this "conspiracy theory" even make sense?

Why would nvidia want to show lower clocks? It does not make sense. There is no reason for it.

And raising the pci-e frequency has given me a performance boost on ALL my cards from the 7900GS up. But it does not change the core clock.

[mascaras]

And raising the pci-e frequency has given me a performance boost on ALL my cards from the 7900GS up. But it does not change the core clock.


yes , but only performance in Max OC of Card , not in bench scores or games with "default" card clocks .. (like 9600GT )

regards

[Eastcoasthandle]

Also, does this "conspiracy theory" even make sense?

Why would nvidia want to show lower clocks? It does not make sense. There is no reason for it.

And raising the pci-e frequency has given me a performance boost on ALL my cards from the 7900GS up. But it does not change the core clock.

It makes perfect sense. You should never rely on your PCIe frequency as a de facto to OC your GPU as going to high (on some MBs) can effect stability (in particular your HDD). The PCIe frequency was never designed to OC the GPU.

[Frank M]

I don't understand either. Apparently NVIDIA's the big bad wolf for implementing this.

Think about reviews then.
Without the reviewers and the readers knowing it, they are comparing an
overclocked 9600GT with the other cards, which are still at stock speeds.
It's easy to perform well that way. In the sports world, this would be called
doping.

[Luka_Aveiro]

Also, does this "conspiracy theory" even make sense?

Why would nvidia want to show lower clocks? It does not make sense. There is no reason for it.

Man, you all read too fast :rolleyes:

This is the deal:
Core clock is affected by PCI-Express frequency. Why?
Because there's no crystal clock generator chip in 9600GT's.
So how is the clock generated? By using a quarter of PCI Express frequency.

Do you got it 'till here? Good.

Now, what if I increase PCI-Express frequency??? What's the real life consequence?
You raise your core clock. If you increase PCI Express Frequency to 110mhz, you will bump your core clock by 10%.

As my friend destroyer (olá, meu :D) has shown (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2807202&postcount=63), the results speak for themselves...

Apparently shader clock is not affected by this overclocking method, as 743mhz core achieved by PCI-Express frequency is slower than 743mhz manually overclocking.

Once AGAIN, linkboost has nothing to do with this, it olny has to do that it could have raisen core clocks a bit higher than a regular mobo.

[WeStSiDePLaYa]

It makes perfect sense. You should never rely on your PCIe frequency as a de facto to OC your GPU as going to high (on some MBs) can effect stability (in particular your HDD). The PCIe frequency was never designed to OC the GPU.

I don't think you understood what I was saying.

[Lightman]

I think something is wrong with TPU's bench system.

They are the only people who have this "problem".

Also, linkboost support is now gone since 590sli.

Also, since when did linkboost increase the card clocks?

Linkboost never increased the card clocks, only the pci-e and chipset buses.

Also, since when is the core clock dependent on pci-e bus?

I don't think TPU knows much,. and they are just spreading misinformation.


Did you know that author of that article is also a creator of GPU-Z, Atitool, SPDtool, SysTool, etc??
I think he knows quite a bit about GPUs and chipsets :)

Lets wait till we can confirm this by independent sources. Validation should be easy, just test FillRates at different PCIe freq... :up:

[kryptobs2000]

If this were a 'trick' then I don't see how it really benefits nvidia? All the same, it seems like 90% of the people posting here didn't actually read why it does this. I'm not going to bother retyping, or requoting, so many of you seem to just be ignoring the numerous other explanations so w/e.

My question is, now that we know why this happens, to those claiming this is a benefit, how so? It's not like you can't overclock the cards otherwise. You were never limited because of the crystals clock before. This makes no difference. If your card can reach 800mhz it doesn't matter how you achieve that clock, 800mhz is 800mhz (for videocards anyways). Am I wrong?

[hollo]

destr0yer's results add up the same:

25mhz x 27 = 675mhz in rivatuner overclocking (correct clock)
27mhz x 27 = 729mhz in rivatuner monitor (needs a program update)

and 3dmark fill-rate increases (nearly linearly) with PCI-e frequency.

PCI-e 100mhz, 3dmark fillrate = 16349
PCI-e 110mhz, 3dmark fillrate = 17948 vs 16349 x 1.1 = 17984

[grimREEFER]

Think about reviews then.
Without the reviewers and the readers knowing it, they are comparing an
overclocked 9600GT with the other cards, which are still at stock speeds.
It's easy to perform well that way. In the sports world, this would be called
doping.

here's the part i don't understand, dont reviewers leave the pci express frequency at stock?
this seems like it was just an innocent attemp by nvidia to get motherboards to do hardware overclocking of graphics cards without relying on the drivers, thus adding another tool in the already bloated overclocker's toolbox.

[mascaras]

Lets wait till we can confirm this by independent sources. Validation should be easy, just test FillRates at different PCIe freq... :up:

confirmed !! (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2807202&postcount=63)


PCI-Express=100mhz
Results at 675mhz GPU: 16349


PCI-Express=110mhz
Results at 675mhz GPU: 17948




w1zzard from techpowerUp its correct

:up:

[destr0yer]

Man, you all read too fast :rolleyes:

As my friend destroyer (olá, meu :D) has shown (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2807202&postcount=63), the results speak for themselves...

Apparently shader clock is not affected by this overclocking method, as 743mhz core achieved by PCI-Express frequency is slower than 743mhz manually overclocking.

Once AGAIN, linkboost has nothing to do with this, it olny has to do that it could have raisen core clocks a bit higher than a regular mobo.

(Olhó o luka, como estás :D)

Testing @ 743 mhz, with Shader Clock defaut (1675), unlinked mode, the results are equivalent at the test 100% defaut. The Shader clock is already raised with PCI-E @ 110 mhz:D

[Luka_Aveiro]

If this were a 'trick' then I don't see how it really benefits nvidia? All the same, it seems like 90% of the people posting here didn't actually read why it does this. I'm not going to bother retyping, or requoting, so many of you seem to just be ignoring the numerous other explanations so w/e.

I feel the exact same :rolleyes:

My question is, now that we know why this happens, to those claiming this is a benefit, how so? It's not like you can't overclock the cards otherwise. You were never limited because of the crystals clock before. This makes no difference. If your card can reach 800mhz it doesn't matter how you achieve that clock, 800mhz is 800mhz (for videocards anyways). Am I wrong?

Sure there's a big difference between overclocking 25x27 than 27,5x27, I don't know it yet, but you could achieve higher frequencies this way, as internal multiplier remains the same (27, in destroyers case ;))

[STaRGaZeR]

I think something is wrong with TPU's bench system.

They are the only people who have this "problem".

Also, linkboost support is now gone since 590sli.

Also, since when did linkboost increase the card clocks?

Linkboost never increased the card clocks, only the pci-e and chipset buses.

Also, since when is the core clock dependent on pci-e bus?

I don't think TPU knows much,. and they are just spreading misinformation.

So now you have trolled enough go and grab a 9600 to confirm it yourself. Jeez... :rolleyes:

[LordEC911]

here's the part i don't understand, dont reviewers leave the pci express frequency at stock?
Yes but since most reviewers are testing SLI as well, they will be testing the cards in Nvidia motherboards.
Linkboost AUTOMATICALLY adjusts the PCI-e frequency which, as a result, AUTOMATICALLY overclocks the core clock.

[Luka_Aveiro]

Yes but since most reviewers are testing SLI as well, they will be testing the cards in Nvidia motherboards.
Linkboost AUTOMATICALLY adjusts the PCI-e frequency which, as a result, AUTOMATICALLY overclocks the core clock.

That is not totally true, as when I had 8800GT SLI, the PCI-Express's frequency were 100mhz @ BIOS, using the rig at my SIG.

Linkboost does not exist anymore in 680i, afaik...

[hollo]

a 25% overclock would instantly crash a lot of factory overclocked 9600 GTs. we can pretty much assume nvidia wouldn't allow that, the 9xxx series probably aren't link-boost enabled

[BullGod]

I don't know what the problem is really? When I saw the specs for the 9600GT I knew Nvidia had to do a tweak or something to pull it off with this card. It's not like we're talking about the high-end here. This is just a boost to this mid level card to make it run decent. Manufacturers have used many similar tricks in the past to raise performance in video cards. I never heard anyone complaining back then. As long as the card performs better with this feature I'm all for it. And btw, who said that RivaTuner is the ultimate tool for Nvidia cards? It's just a program made by a russian dude to overclock cards. If no other tool out there confirms this I'm not buying it...

[mascaras]

And btw, who said that RivaTuner is the ultimate tool for Nvidia cards? It's just a program made by a russian dude to overclock cards. If no other tool out there confirms this I'm not buying it...


3dmark 2006 Fill Rate Multi-Texturing with different pci-e frquency and same clocks = different score

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2807253&postcount=74


Btw:

3dmark 2006 with 675mhz & pci-e auto = 10900 marks

3dmark 2006 with "675mhz" & pci-e 110Mhz = 11600 marks

3dmark 2006 with 743mhz & pci-e auto = 11500 marks

3dmark 2006 with "743mhz" & pci-e 110mhz (817Mhz) = Crash


:up:

[Luka_Aveiro]

For those who are asking themselves how to calculate the internal multiplier and final REAL clock, this might be helpful:

Using 9600GT reference clocks:

PCI-Express=100mhz
GPU= 650mhz
Internal Core Clock= 100mhz/4 = 25mhz
Internal Core Multiplier = 650/25 = 26

PCI-Express=110mhz
GPU=650mhz (fake, as you will see further)
Internal Core Clock=110mhz/4=27,5mhz
Internal Core Multiplier=26 (it remains unchanged comparing to PCI-Express 100mhz, unless you manually overclock using rivatuner or ati tool, it increases 1 point at every 25mhz)
REAL CORE CLOCK= 26x27,5= 715mhz

In a lot easier way, to calculate RealCoreClock, using the example above: 650x1,10=715

Shaders clock is not affected.

[op1e]

HOLY S! I was wondering why I couldnt clock my cards much past 700. My PCI-E bus was set to 110 originally, then 105 as of right now. If this is the case, I would rather set it to 100 and clock the cards manually to affect the shader clock. I noticed a discrepancy in the Hardware Monitor plugin, but brushed it off as a bug.

Also, I am trying to see if theres an option for bios vmod, but I cant open nibitor in Vista x64. Any help would be appreciated.

[Tuvok-LuR-]

And btw, who said that RivaTuner is the ultimate tool for Nvidia cards? It's just a program made by a russian dude to overclock cards. If no other tool out there confirms this I'm not buying it...

the whole fact is not based on rivatuner's readings (that are actually wrong as well), they only started to raise doubts, confirmed by the fill rate benchmarks, so there's no way this can be all false.
I don't see how this can be a good thing for the users since, if they are gonna set an auto overclock on their cards this means that they can all run at that speed...and if they can all run at that speed why not release the cards with that clock?

[Luka_Aveiro]

HOLY S! I was wondering why I couldnt clock my cards much past 700. My PCI-E bus was set to 110 originally, then 105 as of right now. If this is the case, I would rather set it to 100 and clock the cards manually to affect the shader clock. I noticed a discrepancy in the Hardware Monitor plugin, but brushed it off as a bug.

Also, I am trying to see if theres an option for bios vmod, but I cant open nibitor in Vista x64. Any help would be appreciated.

You CAN overclock shaders unlinked from core frequency ;)

I cannot help you with nibitor though, hope you find your way ;)

I don't see how this can be a good thing for the users since, if they are gonna set an auto overclock on their cards this means that they can all run at that speed...and if they can all run at that speed why not release the cards with that clock?

Because if they released it with a higher core clock, by raising pci-express frequency, the core clock would be even higher, leading to crashes.

It is always a nice thing to know, and might be helpful knowing your limits and how to get over them. It is nice to know how the game is made, so you can play it well ;)

[Cybercat]

Think about reviews then.
Without the reviewers and the readers knowing it, they are comparing an
overclocked 9600GT with the other cards, which are still at stock speeds.
It's easy to perform well that way. In the sports world, this would be called
doping.Um, they would need a 590i chipset to do it! Not even all 680i chipsets support Linkboost (if any)! Everyone else is running the card at stock speeds.

You are blowing this WAY out of proportion.

[dinos22]

have a look at their mobile GPUs guys ;)

they have a similar thing going on

i don't think they change PCI frequency on laptops do you :p:

[jaredpace]

If they are gonna set an auto overclock on their cards this means that they can all run at that speed...and if they can all run at that speed why not release the cards with that clock?

yeah good point.

anybody?

[Metroid]

I do not feel that exists any shady trick on it If it turns to be the LinkBoost feature. Newer cards starting from 7900 GTX have the feature added in it. It boosts 25%. Not sure but I think only Nvidia motherboards have this feature added on bios.



LinkBoost

One of the features unique to the nForce 590SLI and 680i SLI MCP is a system called LinkBoost. If a GeForce 7900 GTX or GeForce 8800 is detected on either MCP then LinkBoost will automatically increase the PCI Express and MCP HyperTransport (HT) bus speeds by 25%. This increases the bandwidth available to each PCI Express and HT bus link from 8GB/s to 10GB/s.

Since this technology increases the clock speed of the PCI Express bus by 25% to the x16 PCI Express graphics slots, NVIDIA requires certification of the video card for this program to work automatically. In this case, the 7900GTX and 8800 series are the only compatible cards offered, although you can manually set the bus speeds and achieve the same results depending upon your components. We feel this feature is worthwhile for those users who do not want to tune their BIOS and go through extensive test routines to find the best possible combination of settings.


In essence, NVIDIA is guaranteeing their chipset's PCI Express and HT interconnect links are qualified to perform up to 125% of their default speeds without issue. While LinkBoost is an interesting idea, the 25% increase in PCI Express x16 slots and HT bus speeds yielded virtually the same performance as our system without LinkBoost enabled in most cases.

Its actual implementation did not change our test scores in single video card testing but did provide a 1%~2% difference in SLI testing at resolutions under 1600x1200 in several game titles. The reason for the minimal increases at best is that the performance boost is being applied in areas that have minimal impact on system performance as the link to the CPU/Memory subsystem is left at stock speed thus negating the true benefits of this technology.

Source (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2869&p=5)

So probably some people have this feature enabled or might be probable that drivers enable this when it is being installed after a hard restart.

I think it should show the exactly clocks even after the clocks had been upped by the Linkboost feature. Well some softwares do not work correctly anyway.

Metroid.

[NotFred]

I think something is wrong with TPU's bench system.

They are the only people who have this "problem".

Also, linkboost support is now gone since 590sli.

Also, since when did linkboost increase the card clocks?

Linkboost never increased the card clocks, only the pci-e and chipset buses.

Also, since when is the core clock dependent on pci-e bus?

I don't think TPU knows much,. and they are just spreading misinformation.

Please re-read the article. Your question "Since when did linkboost incrase the card clocks" (all fo the different ways you phrase it) are answered. The answer is "since the 9600GT was released" and was in fact the whole point of the article. They even test this with an 8800GT and show that the 8800GT shows no change with pci-e frequency, only the 9600GT.

As far as this being a major tweak goes, this allows you no more overclocking than could be acheived using normal methods, so I can hardly see any advantage.

The disadvantage I can see is that to many reviews it will make the card look like it performs far better at stock setting than it does, as the nvidia chipset will automatically overclock the card, potentially to the point of instability for some samples. It would also, in a review of chipsets, make an Nvidia chipset look like it performed far better than an Intel one, simply by applying automatically the same overclock that could be applied manually on an Intel card.

I can confirm that Linkboost exist on the 680i chipset, and that its function is indeed to increase the pci-e speed when an nvidia card is used, unless you take direct control of this frequency.

[PhilDoc]

the whole fact is not based on rivatuner's readings (that are actually wrong as well), they only started to raise doubts, confirmed by the fill rate benchmarks, so there's no way this can be all false.
I don't see how this can be a good thing for the users since, if they are gonna set an auto overclock on their cards this means that they can all run at that speed...and if they can all run at that speed why not release the cards with that clock?

I can only see one reason that Nvidia would do this and then keep it quiet. That's to try to sell more cards, but more likely to increase chipset sales. The unknowing public would think they'd have to have a Nvidia based mb to get the most from their video card.

I see no problem in doing this. In many respects its a nice feature, but they should have been up front about it. Personally, I'd rather OC the card myself.

[dinos22]

8600/8700 Mobile chipsets are the same as per screenshot

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3261/signature485a2a12rp8.jpg

[Luka_Aveiro]

Please re-read the article. Your question "Since when did linkboost incrase the card clocks" (all fo the different ways you phrase it) are answered. The answer is "since the 9600GT was released" and was in fact the whole point of the article. They even test this with an 8800GT and show that the 8800GT shows no change with pci-e frequency, only the 9600GT.

As far as this being a major tweak goes, this allows you no more overclocking than could be acheived using normal methods, so I can hardly see any advantage.

The disadvantage I can see is that to many reviews it will make the card look like it performs far better at stock setting than it does, as the nvidia chipset will automatically overclock the card, potentially to the point of instability for some samples. It would also, in a review of chipsets, make an Nvidia chipset look like it performed far better than an Intel one, simply by applying automatically the same overclock that could be applied manually on an Intel card.

I can confirm that Linkboost exist on the 680i chipset, and that its function is indeed to increase the pci-e speed when an nvidia card is used, unless you take direct control of this frequency.

Well, assuming that linkboost increases PCI-Express frequency by 25%

650mhzx1,25=812,5mhz

Holly crapp, 9600GTs have been running at 812,5mhz while doing reviews!

Do you really believe it or do you WANT to believe it?

And, oh, I don't know about you, but my EVGA 680i SLI doesn't have the link boost option, can you still confirm it exists? Did you know it was an option on first BIOS for 680i boards? And now it is not?

I can confirm I had 2 8800GT SLI and PCI-Express frequency was 100mhz on Slot 1 and 2, so link boost still exists? :rolleyes:

Come on man, do you really think those cards were running at 800mhz core? That would be awesome, wouldn' it?

Peace

[op1e]

You CAN overclock shaders unlinked from core frequency ;)

I cannot help you with nibitor though, hope you find your way ;)



Because if they released it with a higher core clock, by raising pci-express frequency, the core clock would be even higher, leading to crashes.

It is always a nice thing to know, and might be helpful knowing your limits and how to get over them. It is nice to know how the game is made, so you can play it well ;)

And leads to people like me being up to midnight on a work night bashing their heads into the keyboard thinking they got horribly binned cards cause they didnt know this little hook.

[jaredpace]

I'm confused here. Does this mean that the 9600GT has been having an unfair advantage over 8800GT in terms of core clocks?

[destr0yer]

Some 3dmark 2006 results (win XP everyday, no special tweaks, LOD's, etc)

3dmark links:

Core 675, PCI-E 110 mhz -> 11602 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5499640

Core 743, PCI-E 100 mhz -> 11523 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5499628

Core 675, PCI-E 100 mhz -> 10971 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5499566

Core 743, PCI-E 110 mhz -> don't run!

Its really more faster than 8800 GTS 320 mb!:eek:

[Luka_Aveiro]

And leads to people like me being up to midnight on a work night bashing their heads into the keyboard thinking they got horribly binned cards cause they didnt know this little hook.

You are right about that. I would be pissed of as well if that happened to me, but I guess I would try a "load default values" at bios and then test it, is I have already done to some cards, but I would never figure out that internal clock was PCI-Express frequency related, and it was holding me back ;)

I'm confused here. Does this mean that the 9600GT has been having an unfair advantage over 8800GT in terms of core clocks?

If PCI Express frequency is above 100mhz, probably YES.

[Frank M]

I don't think TPU knows much,. and they are just spreading misinformation.

Nice.
Some days ago, you were saying that johnnyGURU doesn't know much,
today you are saying w1zzard doesn't know much, maybe tomorrow
you'll be saying Charles is a noob :ROTF:

here's the part i don't understand, dont reviewers leave the pci express frequency at stock?

It's the chipset automatically increasing the clock, that's what started
this whole debate.

Um, they would need a 590i chipset to do it! Not even all 680i chipsets support Linkboost (if any)! Everyone else is running the card at stock speeds.

You are blowing this WAY out of proportion.

I think you have some reading up to do... start with the article, for example.

[Eastcoasthandle]

Wait, isn't LinkBoost similar to what Asus Peg Link did? From my understand (correct me if I am wrong here) Link Boost bump up the PCI-Express link from 100 MHz to 125MHz. Also link boost increased PCI-E buses up to 3250Mhz from 2500mhz and SPP<->MCP HT bus from 1000 to 1250Mhz.

And

Why are people saying the 780i doesn't use link boost when the techreport review clearly implies that the 780i using "an extreme version" of link boost?

Using the nForce 200 seems like a convoluted way to bring PCIe 2.0 connectivity to the 780i SLI. New chipsets from AMD and Intel put PCIe 2.0 right into the north bridge and offer full end-to-end 5.0GT/s signaling rates without the need for a third chip. So why is Nvidia using the nForce 200? I suspect it's because the nForce 780i SLI SPP isn't really a new chip at all. Nvidia MCP General Manager Drew Henry told us the 780i SLI SPP is an "optimized version of a chip we've used before," suggesting that it's really a relabeled nForce 680i SLI SPP.

If you recall the last couple of Nvidia SPP chips, you'll remember a feature called LinkBoost, which cranked up the link speed for the chipset's PCI Express lanes. Nvidia was adamant that this wasn't overclocking since the chipset had been fully validated to run at higher speeds. I think we're seeing an extreme version of LinkBoost in action here, with the 780i SPP simply being a 680i SPP whose 16-lane PCIe 1.1 link has been coaxed into running at 4.5GT/s and validated at that speed. This approach would be fitting considering that second-generation PCI Express is really just gen one cranked up to a faster signaling rate. But it's a shame Nvidia didn't manage to nail 5.0GT/s on the button.
techreport (http://techreport.com/articles.x/13790)

[Cybercat]

I think you have some reading up to do... start with the article, for example.I did read the article. You have to manually change the PCIe frequency for this to kick in. Otherwise Linkboost will do it, but again, not a lot of reviews would be affected by that.

[NotFred]

Holly crapp, 9600GTs have been running at 812,5mhz while doing reviews!

Do you really believe it or do you WANT to believe it?

And, oh, I don't know about you, but my EVGA 680i SLI doesn't have the link boost option, can you still confirm it exists? Did you know it was an option on first BIOS for 680i boards? And now it is not?


I can confirm that on my Abit IN9 32X-MAX board, Linkboost is an option (with latest bios) and does influence pci-e frequency if this is not set to manual control. What else can anyone do apart from test things on the hardware they have access to or simply repeat things they have read elsewhere?

No, I do not believe these cards have been running at 800 odd mhz during reviews, I believe they have been running at the speeds stated in the review, which was notably different from the values advertised for the card. I believe this is due to a different PCI-e bus speed. Others on this thread seem to have have confirmed this behaviour, which is not seen on previous cards.

[Tuvok-LuR-]

so they disabled it on 680i and left it on 780i to make people think that 780 has some real advantage apart from pci express 2.0
lmao would be too lame if true

[Luka_Aveiro]

Why are people saying the 780i doesn't use link boost when the techreport review clearly implies that the 780i using "an extreme version" of link boost?

No one said 780i doesn't use linkboost, at least I said my Evga 680i doesn't ;)

[Eastcoasthandle]

No one said 780i doesn't use linkboost, at least I said my Evga 680i doesn't ;)

But other(s) do so that offsets what you have ;)

[jaredpace]

this could explain why when going from 9600gt to 9600gt sli, the performance looks soooo much better than sli setups on 7 or 8 series.

Perhaps this is why geforce 9 sli setups scale so well? nvidia looks gayer and gayer as each day passes leading up to this launch.

They shouldn't even call it a launch, more like a "squirt" or something.

[GAR]

so clocks go up with pci-e mhz???? is this whats happening???

[DilTech]

this could explain why when going from 9600gt to 9600gt sli, the performance looks soooo much better than sli setups on 7 or 8 series.

Perhaps this is why geforce 9 sli setups scale so well? nvidia looks gayer and gayer as each day passes leading up to this launch.

They shouldn't even call it a launch, more like a "squirt" or something.

Linkboost effects single AND dual-cards. So that scaling IS due to how well the cards scale, not just the pci-e frequency.

[g1raffe]

I don't see a real problem here, just gives easy overclocking for novice users?

I would rather be able to set the clock myself, then run the highest possible PCIe frequency though, for a few extra 3DMark points. ;)

[yonton228]

So let me get this clear....If I am reading this correctly:

Its a pretty good card (for the price) with an auto overclock "feature" when used with compatible boards? However this "feature" can lead to overclocks that are too high to be stable?

However you can just not use the auto "feature" and manually overclock it as much as you can until it becomes unstable and then back down till its stable?

Does that make sense?




-yonton228/timmy

[Ugly n Grey]

They shouldn't even call it a launch, more like a "squirt" or something.

LOL.. so well said. Marketing guys will be greatly offended however.

Any improvement you build into your product performance wise is fine. How is this different from auto cpu upscaling on mobos? It's not. Turn it off if you don't like it I figure.

[op1e]

Some 3dmark 2006 results (win XP everyday, no special tweaks, LOD's, etc)

3dmark links:

Core 675, PCI-E 110 mhz -> 11602 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5499640

Core 743, PCI-E 100 mhz -> 11523 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5499628

Core 675, PCI-E 100 mhz -> 10971 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5499566

Core 743, PCI-E 110 mhz -> don't run!

Its really more faster than 8800 GTS 320 mb!:eek:

Thats pretty interesting. Gonna try the stock clocks (675) with the 110 bus. Cant seem to do much better than 750 right now (700 set in riva).

UPDATE; Ran at 680 (read 734) and saw some artifacting, but posted my highest 06 so far, breaking the 17k barrier. Overall it was less than 100 point increase from what I was running before (700-shown as 756 with pci-E at 100). Maybe the artifacting was due to the vram, I'm not sure how far the mem on these can go. Currently at 1100.

[Tuvok-LuR-]

well at least with this discover we can now set the gpu to intermediate clocks instead of going by steps...find the limit at 100 mhz bus then slowly rise bus freq
ie limit at 100 mhz -> 25*30 = 750 (775 unstable)
rise bus to 101 -> 25,25*30 = 757,5 (stable)
rise bus to 102 -> 25,5*30 = 765 (unstable)
rise bus to 105 -> 26,25*29 = 761,25 (stable! you fine tuned your gpu clock and gained 11,25 mhz ^^)

[jimmyz]

part of the issue is that due to Nvidia only allowing sli on their chipsets means reveiwers are required to use the nvidia chipsets to test. when you place an ati card in the board it does not get the boost where the nvidia does. had the tests been on intel chipsets (like the overwhelmong majority of single cards) the 9600's scores would have been lower.

The point being made is that on intel those boost do not exist and the consumer who buys the card based on the fact it beat the ati card by a few percent winds up getting the slower card. It is shady like W1zzard said, is it wrong...no. they should have simply called it a feature and acknowledged it. instead they deny that it is true.

[OBR]

score of Radeon HD3870X2 is too bigger with higher PCIexpress ...

maybe it is new standard - read reffrence clock from PCIe, not from crystal on board ...

[oublie]

I don't see this as a problem more of an added feature. Judging from what some of you have posted its a nice way to establish a base overclock prior to tweaking. Think of it this way how many of you will setup your overclock on the motherboard bios and then use set fsb, memset etc to gain that little bit extra for a spi run? I would consider this to be similar and just like clocking your fsb past it's boot limits if you go too far with this youll crash. However, once your in windows if may actually be a benefit to balance the pcie overclock with a driver level overclock and get better results. I wish i'd waited now and got the 9600 instead of 8800s but id like to see some tweaking to see if a pcie and driver balanced overclock can get you a better 3dmark score.

[bustamove44]

Allot of folks by oc'd cards and pay extra for them, this is basically no different other than not paying extra for an oc edition card.

It's free performance so I don't personally see anything wrong or shady about it.

Free performance? didnt the end user buy the card to start with?
so its not free, its like having a card at stock speeds the ocing it yourself, its not free performance you just unlocked some of whats already there, which you paid for when you handed over your money:)

[flopper]

its time to stop buying Nvidia boards.
Tests should be fair to offer the same variables when testing.
Unless they do, performance cant be known.

I will from now on never trust a review using Nvidia boards.

[OBR]

honestly, i have on every nForce board Linkboost DISABLED! Because some GFX hate it ... any experienced user turn off this feature everytime, and because first GFX with refference clock from PCIe i dont want to sell my nForce boards ...

[cowie]

I don't see this as a problem more of an added feature. Judging from what some of you have posted its a nice way to establish a base overclock prior to tweaking.
However, once your in windows if may actually be a benefit to balance the pcie overclock with a driver level overclock and get better results. I wish i'd waited now and got the 9600 instead of 8800s but id like to see some tweaking to see if a pcie and driver balanced overclock can get you a better 3dmark score.

i agree with you
:up:

i think linkboost has been gone from the evga's680's since p19 or p20?
---------------

and to you who put down uni and tpu:down:

[xoqolatl]

Why are people saying the 780i doesn't use link boost when the techreport review clearly implies that the 780i using "an extreme version" of link boost?

What they are saying is that NForce 680i (the silicon not the platform) can handle much higher PCI-E frequency than 100MHz. On 590i and 680i platforms LinkBoost took andvantage of this; on 780i, instead of overclocking PCI-E to 125MHz when Nvidia card is present, they overclocked PCI-E to 180MHz and connected a Nforce 200 chip. They ditched LinkBoost in 780i in order to get enough bandwidth out of PCI-E 1.1 to handle two PCI-E 2.0 cards.

[Luka_Aveiro]

part of the issue is that due to Nvidia only allowing sli on their chipsets means reveiwers are required to use the nvidia chipsets to test. when you place an ati card in the board it does not get the boost where the nvidia does. had the tests been on intel chipsets (like the overwhelmong majority of single cards) the 9600's scores would have been lower.

The point being made is that on intel those boost do not exist and the consumer who buys the card based on the fact it beat the ati card by a few percent winds up getting the slower card. It is shady like W1zzard said, is it wrong...no. they should have simply called it a feature and acknowledged it. instead they deny that it is true.

FYI, read this review (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/666/1/). Made with an X38 chipset, compare XFX9600GT to HD3870. No nVidia tricks here :rolleyes:

[jimmyz]

FYI, read this review (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/666/1/). Made with an X38 chipset, compare XFX9600GT to HD3870. No nVidia tricks here :rolleyes:

that review was nothing but Nvidia tricks. get real! what kind of review doesn't even show cpu clockspeeds or use the 8.2 drivers which were available when the test was run. the 06 scores were 2,000 points higher than TPU. that would be like me reviewing 3850's and showing that they do 23,000 in crossfire on 06 and not mentioning the overclock. besides the cpu speed they do not mention pci-e clocks either.

besides the obvious what did you expect that review to prove to me? how is it in any way related to the subject of this thread? did the author even mention the clockspeed change.....NO. quit spreading your crap and trying to draw people away from the issue. the issue here is clearly stated in W1zzards review.

[BrowncoatGR]

FYI, read this review (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/666/1/). Made with an X38 chipset, compare XFX9600GT to HD3870. No nVidia tricks here :rolleyes:

LOL those numbers dont add up. Something is fishy here. Not surprising really, its Legit Reviews after all.

[jaredpace]

FYI, read this review (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/666/1/). Made with an X38 chipset, compare XFX9600GT to HD3870. No nVidia tricks here :rolleyes:

my friend did test on intel motherboard, raising pci-e freq with 9600gt at stock.

works on intel p35 & x38 as well. 3dmark scores go up, yet core clock reads the same:

Ok ive just done 2 benchies of 3dmark 06 heres the setup

Q6600 @ 3.2Ghz
2048 DDR2 XMS2
9600GT @ Stock 650/1625/900
P35C DS3R Rev 1.1 Intel P35 chipset.

Scores with PCI-e @ 100Hz

3dMark score 11527
SM2.0 4683
SM3.0 4387
CPU 5091


Score With PCI-e @ 110Hz

3dMark Score 12176
SM2.0 5003
SM3.0 4667
CPU 5081


So a little jump in performance there

[ghost101]

If marketed correctly, this could boost nvidia's motherboard sales. Since linkboost is a feature of the motherboard, you cannot call this a lock in and have the usual anti-trust allegations.

However, not telling reviewers was clearly a mistake.

Also, it isnt unfair in terms of comparing the 9600gt to ati cards. Effectively, the stock frequency is higher than what people originally thought. But people on intel/amd motherboards deserve to know this.

[Jakko]

Nvidia plays dirty again.

And no, this is not just an undocumented feature.
If ati made drivers that overclock cards but make it appear as if stock speeds are used it's foul play as well.
The question is not whether or not some gpu's can handle the overclock (obviously ati cards could handle it as well), neither is this about nvidia making it easier to overclock gpu's (it has always been easy).

This is about :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing up reviews and benchmarks, just like nvidia has done before. (Remember the early Crisis drivers that set your Crisis detail settings to low automaticly?)

No nvidia for me.

[hollo]

And leads to people like me being up to midnight on a work night bashing their heads into the keyboard thinking they got horribly binned cards cause they didnt know this little hook.

haha i feel for you man

nvidia would have only had to attach a little note saying "PCI-e clock and GPU-Core clock are linked" to all the samples they sent to review sites to have stopped this from happening.

oh well :shrug:
none of these companies are very good at supporting tweakers and overclockers, except maybe intel. AMD won't even release the AM2 pinout

[G80]

Gosh people, calm down.

[audiofreak]

So... does this mean that the base clock for those cards is PCI-Express bus frequency / 4?

Looks like just another way to save cents on BOM -- one crystal less on the board itself.

From that perspective, NVIDIA did the good thing because cards can be sold cheaper.

Unfortunately, the problem is they forgot to tell us so those people who overclocked their PCI-E bus will end up overclocking the GPU as well.

What I don't understand is this -- if reviewers tested 9600GT overclocking potential which method they have used to raise the GPU clock?

I mean if RivaTuner does that directly via PLL, then there is a chance they haven't actually managed to change the GPU clock at all. That would make all overclocking results invalid, right?

[op1e]

Cannot run stable at 110 pci-E even with stock clocks. 675 core 1050 vram and 105 pci-E gives best result for me.

[i found nemo]

And the hardware monitor in rivatuner, your readings are...?

http://i1.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/Shady_9600_GT/images/clocks.gif

This is the basis of TechPowerUP theory, it could just be a reading error, afaik.

....

[op1e]

The discrepancy in clocks is shown with or without increase in bus speed. What bothers me is the actual clocks are not shown, that I know of. 675 reads 734, I think, and is not stable with 110 set in bios. It is stable at 105, however.

[jimmyz]

I guess the part that bothers me is where will this stop. can amd now launch processors they claim run at 3ghz because they decided to change the math? there are organizations such as jedec that are supposed to govern these things.

[Luka_Aveiro]

....

Damn it man? have you read the whole thread or are you just nit-picking?

Here's your answer (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2807040&postcount=56) to that, it's a RIVATUNER BUG, READ IT.

Thank you.

I can't believe this is xtremesystems forums, all I see is noobs.

[v_rr]

Damn it man? have you read the whole thread or are you just nit-picking?

Here's your answer (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2807040&postcount=56) to that, it's a RIVATUNER BUG, READ IT.

Thank you.

I can't believe this is xtremesystems forums, all I see is noobs.

It´s not rivatunner bug.
Actualy is right the article in the first post.

[zakelwe]

I cannot see LINKBOOST in my Asus 780i BIOS nor is it in the evga 780i manual. Is this fully automatic then? If it used to be a BIOS option it is no longer there.

I would suggest that Linkboost set to disabled and PCI-e set to 100Mhz would be default BIOS options for most motherboard BIOS so I am not convinced how many reviews have been corrupted by this. It seems more like someone is excited to find this and other people are excited to beat nvidia with it :)

It should have been documented though as it can lead to instabilities if how the system works has changed.

Regards

Andy

[b1lk1]

I hardly see how this is nearly such a big deal that is being made of it. So what if it is clocked in any way that secretly makes it faster. I fail to understand the problem. After all, AMD's Ghz and Intel's GHz have always given different results.

I would be upset if they actually found a way to make 128 shaders appear as 64 shaders. That is what I have suspected about these cards. But so far, there has been plenty of rational explanations as to why it is so much faster with 1/2 the shaders. People need to be looking at this aspect, not a silly clock speed difference.

[ZoLKoRn]

On my default run ASUS 9600GT have this effect and this GPU clock show on everest from 120MHz pci-e by Striker II Formula

http://www.overclockzone.com/zolkorn/year2008/02/asus_en9600gt/Clip_3.jpg

[Luka_Aveiro]

It´s not rivatunner bug.
Actualy is right the article in the first post.

OMG LOLOLOLOL

The article says rivatuners bugs because it reads the final clock by using the gpu multiplayer x 27mhz ALWAYS, as you only find 27mhz crystal clock on the PCB, BUT this is the memory clock generator.

As I managed to test this bug with destr0yer, he's readings at stock clocks (675mhz) were 729mzh with rivatuner monitoring. Do you know why? Because:

675mhz:25mhz=27; multiplier27x27mhz= 729mhz

Then, I asked him to raise core clock 25mhz, so the multiplier would increase by 1. Like, 700mhz:25mhz=28
So, multiplier28x27mhz=756mhz, and he confirmed that happened, rivatuner was now reading 756mhz with hw monitoring.

Did you understand it or should I make a draw?

God damn it man, read the damn thread!

[highoctane]

It´s not rivatunner bug.
Actualy is right the article in the first post.

From the article:

"Please also note that RivaTuner's monitoring clock reading is wrong. It uses 27 MHz for its calculation which is incorrect. When the PCI-E bus is 100 MHz, the core clock is indeed 650 MHz on the reference design. A RivaTuner update is necessary to reflect GPU clock changes cause by PCI-E clock properly though."

[wittekakker]

However, not telling reviewers was clearly a mistake.

Board partners don't even seem to know this, or are they also playing the same game? :shrug:

I can't believe this is xtremesystems forums, all I see is noobs.

Yeah, disappointing, even with all the proof in front of their eyes they keep on telling its otherwise. Like... GET A CARD AND SEE FOR YOURSELF! :shakes:

[mascaras]

The discrepancy in clocks is shown with or without increase in bus speed. What bothers me is the actual clocks are not shown, that I know of. 675 reads 734, I think, and is not stable with 110 set in bios. It is stable at 105, however.


its stable with 105mhz because with 110mhz the clocks are higher



675Mhz with PCI-E 110mhz , real clock = 742,5Mhz

675Mhz with PCI-E 105Mhz , real clock = 708Mhz


regards

[STaRGaZeR]

I can't believe this is xtremesystems forums, all I see is noobs.

Because this is a thread for noobs and fanboys, you know. In one hand, NVIDIA fanboys playing their game. In the other hand... mixture :lol:

[v_rr]

OMG LOLOLOLOL

Did you understand it or should I make a draw?

God damn it man, read the damn thread!

Insulting other users like that you hardly pass or point of view and no one take you serious ;)

And yes the article is right. If you chage the PCI-E frequencie it will overclock the card:
675Mhz with PCI-E 110mhz , real clock = 742,5Mhz

675Mhz with PCI-E 105Mhz , real clock = 708Mhz

This leads to various problems. Instability, not advertized by Nvidia this thing and mostly is starting to appear some problems with the cards in some users.

[metro.cl]

I cannot see LINKBOOST in my Asus 780i BIOS nor is it in the evga 780i manual. Is this fully automatic then? If it used to be a BIOS option it is no longer there.

I would suggest that Linkboost set to disabled and PCI-e set to 100Mhz would be default BIOS options for most motherboard BIOS so I am not convinced how many reviews have been corrupted by this. It seems more like someone is excited to find this and other people are excited to beat nvidia with it :)

It should have been documented though as it can lead to instabilities if how the system works has changed.

Regards

Andy

NF780i shouldnt have linkboost on, since it uses a bridge and the actual PCI-Express works a lot higher to give more bandwith.

On NF680i at least EVGA the Linkboost is disabled at default, this has been for a long time, since bios 17 or 18, now they are in bios 31+.

[WeStSiDePLaYa]

I cannot see LINKBOOST in my Asus 780i BIOS nor is it in the evga 780i manual. Is this fully automatic then? If it used to be a BIOS option it is no longer there.

I would suggest that Linkboost set to disabled and PCI-e set to 100Mhz would be default BIOS options for most motherboard BIOS so I am not convinced how many reviews have been corrupted by this. It seems more like someone is excited to find this and other people are excited to beat nvidia with it :)

It should have been documented though as it can lead to instabilities if how the system works has changed.

Regards

Andy

Nvidia pulled linkboost months ago.

There is no more linkboost.

[zakelwe]

Then if no linkboost and default PCI-e clocks are 100Mhz by default then why are a few people claiming nvidia are cheating in reviews? Did they tell reviews to put the PCI-e clock up?

It just seems to me that a few people want to :slapass: :stick: :horse: nvidia because for some reason they do not like them, perhaps due to their actions in the past.

And Luka_Aveiro, do us all a favour and shut the feck up. All you've done on this thread is demeened other people because they don't seem to share the same viewpoint as yourself.

Regards

Andy

[GAR]

780i's default pci-e clock is 125mhz when using a pci-e 2.0 card....thats why in the bios you only have pci-e_3

[purecain]

the pci clock frequency becomes an issue when it is tweaked to one sides advantage. if this adnvantage can be reproduced for both sides, then a true like for like comparison can be made as to which is the superior product...

IN THIS CONTEXT ONLY , having gpu boosting bios settings for one card is unfair.

From a chipset performance standpoint this is good news, as it shows that all areas of the chipset that can be improved have been....

i've always kept my pci clock at 110-120 anyway as we all know it provides some performance....

[Luka_Aveiro]

Insulting other users like that you hardly pass or point of view and no one take you serious ;)

A slap in the face means more than 1000 words :p:

And Luka_Aveiro, do us all a favour and shut the feck up. All you've done on this thread is demeened other people because they don't seem to share the same viewpoint as yourself.

I am not asking others to share my point of view, I'm just asking them do read the damn review before they post $hit.

[Vapor]

Luka...that type of posting is unacceptable on XS. How you say things is just as important as what you say.

As far as I see, this topic has been beaten down. Everything that needs to be said has been said pending further developments. Since this thread has devolved into attacks, it's closed.

When something new comes up, make a new thread.