Also helps to have more phases...Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
Reference GTX670 = 4+2
ASUS GTX670 DirectCUII TOP = 6+2
Gigabyte GTX670 OC = 5+2
Printable View
Also helps to have more phases...Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
Reference GTX670 = 4+2
ASUS GTX670 DirectCUII TOP = 6+2
Gigabyte GTX670 OC = 5+2
doesn't matter if it has 3x8pin and 15 phases since they're all voltage locked
HuH?Quote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
Power quality and consistency actually can and will affect oc's some.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
The 8+6 pin models have their stock voltage raised to 1.175v though.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
Hmmm. Are you sure about that?Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
I will have results on Tuesday from my Gigabyte OC.. If I can do 1250 boost on water I'll be happy. Anything higher is gravy.
More NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 Reviews
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=29607&all=1
http://www.bjorn3d.com/articles/GIGA...0_OC/2236.html
http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews/video-cards/18838
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/NVIDI...-and-Gigabyte/
http://ht4u.net/reviews/2012/nvidia_...x_670_im_test/
http://lanoc.org/review/video-cards/5786-nvidia-gtx-670
http://www.ninjalane.com/reviews/video/gv-n670oc-2gd
http://www.ocaholic.ch/xoops/html/mo...l_lang=english
http://tbreak.com/tech/2012/05/nvidi...dition-review/
Post 98. The card just automatically overvolts itself to 1.175v when it hits the 1200 Mhz boost at default settings, adding +100 mv forces the voltage to 1.175v.
I'm having a problem with my card throttling itself if the temperature goes over 70 degrees though, the voltage reduces to 1.162v, and the GPU clock reduces by 50 Mhz :(
The gigabyte card is also doing a 200 Mhz boost up to 1189 MHz, so would be needing 1.175v for stability, also Zotac are also releasing an 8+6 pin card identical to the KFA2, 1006 MHz base frequency, +200 MHz boost which will also need 1.175v.
Throttling at 70C and again at 80C is a known "feature" with Kepler.
any rumours on 660 release?
"rumors" say 3-4 months, but who knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mech0z
Isnt that for the TI version? I just want any 660 version or even 650Quote:
Originally Posted by LexDiamonds
I've managed to get my temperature to stay at below 70 degrees by reseating the cooler and using my spotcool fan. Now for some reason I can clock the ram by another 200 Mhz:Quote:
Originally Posted by LexDiamonds
http://i.imgur.com/rZdJa.png
1250 / 7300 Mhz. 1250 Mhz is really just an average GK104 GPU.
I didn't notice that the Gainward Phantom GTX 670 still has the short PCB but with all memory chips on the front.
EDIT: In italy is pretty difficult finding those non-reference versions. The best for the price I can find is the EVGA GTX 670, that seems to clock good in the guru3d review (that was the SC model but it should clock the same, no?).
Well I know I've been singing praise about the KFA2 card I got throughout this thread, but now I'm dissapointed:
http://i.imgur.com/8gOvR.png
Stock settings, 60% fan speed (any higher is audible and loud), 70 degrees in unigine heaven and throttling. Hopefully I can get it changed to a Gigabyte Windforce under OCUKs new 14 day satisfaction guarantee. Im not bothered at all about the average overclocks I had, but it shouldnt be reaching 70 degrees and throttling at stock settings with the fan on 60%.
And yes, I've already reseated the cooler with MX3, and added a side fan which dropped my maximum temperatures by 5 degrees, and its still throttling at factory settings!
says who?Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
all these cards are performing the same. and people are bonking heads, unknowingly complaining and complimenting the same things.
Everyone that have bought these KFA2 and Gigabyte Windforce cards have been posting their results in this thread here:Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...php?t=18400740
The stock temperatures on mine are the highest anyone has reported on either of these cards while running heaven.
To state the obvious there are a plethora of varriables which impact thermals, not limited to ambient temperature and air flow, which is why comparing thermal performance without taking these varriables in to account is completely cats and dogs.
For example in my TJ07 my warmer 680 can peak in the high 80s where as in the same circumstances in a FT02 it wont break 80 all the while running at a rpm 10% lower and noticeably quieter.
I'm sure that is not throttling, my Gigabyte GTX 680 stay at normal clock (1000mhz + 80Mhz offset= 1080Mhz) during Mass effect 3 and goes to boost clock (1256Mhz) in the Witcher 2 and my temp are below 60 degrees at all times, I think it only goes to boost clock when it is necessary, i.e low fps and not throttling like bhavv said. Although if you want good thermals you can always get the Gigabyte Winforce GTX 670 :D, in my room the temp is around 26 degrees and my GTX 680 only goes to 57 degrees at max
If the temperature stays below 70 the boost clock doesnt reduce. As soon as it hits 70 degrees the voltage and GPU clock reduce. Thats throttling.
Its not a fault of the card, its a 'feature' implemented by Nvidia into these cards. At 70 and 80 degrees the cards throttle and the GPU boost clock reduces.
As you say your Gigabyte GTX 680 stays below 60 degrees with a boost clock of 1256 Mhz? I'll be changing my card to the Gigabyte version then. Its not ok with me that I get throttling at stock settings.
jup, I didn't do anything to my card, Oced it to 1256Mhz (boost clock) 6800Mhz on the mem without changing the cooling profiles and the temp never goes above 60. Btw have you increased the power limit ?
I did increase the power limit up to 125%.
I should be ok now, I tried reseating the cooler again because the first time I accidentally used too much thermal paste:
http://i.imgur.com/1FEUU.png
At this same setting, the card was running at 69-71 degrees out of the box.
After the first termal paste reaplication, it went down to 65-67 degrees, but 75% fan speed is too loud.
After the second thermal paste reapplication, and using a much smaller minimal amount, the temperature is now down to 62-63 degrees, and I can run the fan at 70% which is barely audible and keep the temperature below 65 degrees now. The card and the cooler on it are completely fine and high quality, it just needed correctly applied thermal paste.
Graphics card manufacturers are terrible at applying thermal paste, MORE IS NOT BETTER!
The fans on this card are silent up to 60%, barely audible at 65-70%, and then at 72-75% they become loud. So as long as I can keep the temperature well below 69 degrees at 1250 Mhz with a 70% fan speed which should be possible now, its completely fine and my clock speed wont reduce.
I believe now that there is only one single variable that impacts thermals on similar components - correct application of thermal paste :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Chickenfeed
well that's very nice to see 8 degrees difference with better application of TIM :D, as for me I see there is no need at the moment, until we can overvolt the GPU via software I think the limit for the clock is around 1250-1290mhz. Anyways looks like you have very good Mem clocks, I'm jealous >_< (My max mem clock is at 6880mhz until ECC kicks in and reduce 3dmark score), what is your 3dmark11 score ? here is my temps
Attachment 126731.
And thats proof that I should have gotten a Gigabyte lol. I'm not bothered though as long as I can stop the GPU from throttling at such a mild OC of 1250 Mhz.
Heres a screenshot showing the throttling on these cards - at 1250 Mhz boost clock, if the GPU reaches 70 degrees it reduces to 1238 Mhz, and at 80 degrees it reduces to 1228 Mhz:
http://i.imgur.com/qifA8.png
Which is very anoying if you're trying to keep the card at its maximum OC, and even more annoying if you lost the gamble on getting a 1300+ Mhz card.
The memory overclocks on these cards are very random. All of them use the same Hynix chips rated for 1500 / 6000 GDDR5 speed, but overclocks vary from 6800 - 7560 on a card to card basis. While I only got a 1250 Mhz capable GPU, I also got 7300+ Mhz memory.
This Asus top got 7560 Mhz on its memory:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A..._Cu_II/31.html
But from the look of it, it has to be a handpicked sample and not a random purchase, especially since the card cant be bought anywhere yet.
@bhavv
Can you do a 3d mark fully stock vs. a 3dmark with just mem OCed?
Curious if the mem OC adds a meaningful increase by itself or if this is only seen when paired with a OCed core.
Big gains with just mem OC obviously show Kepler is a bit bandwidth limited on 256bit bus..
@bhavv: you can try disable boost clock on the driver (power management mode) and try for the maximum oc. Should have waited until overvolt is usable when you made your bet :-/
Here is with my GTX 680
No Oc
Attachment 126740
Mem oced to 6800Mhz
Attachment 126741
200 Pts (1.8%) increase with 400Mhz overclock (13%), seems like the GK104 in not really bandwidth craving that much, then again I'm benching at 1280x720.
Im trying to do the tests for you, but 3Dmark11 keeps getting this error in the final combined test:
Workload work failed with error message: Process exited unexpectedly
I cant seem to get it to work.
This is a bug in 3Dmark11. Change the option "GPU Count" from Automatic to be either 1 or 2 depending on if you have 1 GPU or 2 if you have a GTX590/690 or SLI, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
This will stop this error from occurring.
I had the same problem with my new 3770k @4.6GHz build yesterday. Perfectly stable with LinX.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
Same error message in final combined test and also in Vantage final tests.
I had to raise the cpu voltage a little bit and problem solved... (+0.015v)
Results: 3d11: P11553, 3dVantage: P38171 (gtx580s here not 6x0s)
You know I've never liked reference design coolers. I always saw them as low quality / inferior compared to all the custom built cards / coolers that the AIBs made, but compared to the reference GTX 670, all the rest of these reference coolers look like the most high end and premium quality coolers you can get:
http://i.imgur.com/nEJri.jpg
^ Wow, with GTX 560 Ti cooler on GTX 670 it would probably already never pass 60C load haha. Not suprising that manufacturers try to save as much up on costs as possible and GTX 670 runs very cool and stays under 80C with that cooler so what problem is there (from Nvidia point of view)? :P Still for a $399 card you'd expect a little better cooler though for sure.
The card could run very cool, but at 70 degrees it throtles maximum boost clocks by -12 Mhz, and voltage by 0.025v, and at 80 degrees -25 Mhz and 0.05v.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Nvidia made a card with these slight thermal throttles at 70 and 80 degrees, but put such a poor heatsink on it that it runs past 80 degrees at stock speeds and activates the 25 Mhz and 0.05v throttle.
If they used a better heatsink, even just the 560 ti cooler, it would be staying under 60 degrees at stock speeds like the Gigabyte Windforce does. My KFA2 stays under 70 at 1250 Mhz, which is enough to prevent the overclocked frequency from reducing. It doesnt matter at all for games as there wont be any difference, but when your trying to run benchmarks to see what the card is capable of, its no good that the GPU boost feature automatically reduces the clocks.
I'll be setting my CPU and GPU speeds back to factory settings now anyway as I'm done stressing my card. Lots of people have been returning their KFA2s to OCUK to replace with a Gigabyte Windforce or Asus non top because at stock speeds and even with a full 75% fan profile, the card cannot keep itself under 70 degrees, while the Gigabyte Windforce stays under 60 degrees at 1250 Mhz and stock fan settings.
They went and increased the prices too as a result on the gigabyte and asus cards, the KFA2 is still £360, the Gigabyte £370, and the Asus non top is £380? Thats just daft when the GTX 680 reference design is only £399.
I wouldnt reccomend that one, seriously. Its the exact same cooler as the KFA2 / Galaxy card but with an extra heatpipe:Quote:
Originally Posted by rusty
http://i.imgur.com/WuB7h.jpg
Its not as good as the direct heatpipe contact coolers from Asus and Gigabyte.
Depends on the base clock of each model, and some are varying. The average boost clocks that most people are getting are:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanek
915 Mhz base, 1084 Mhz boost
980 Mhz base, 1189 Mhz boost
1006 Mhz base, 1215 Mhz boost.
But I've seen people on OCUK who have bought either the Gigabyte or KFA2 that are getting lower than those, and one person even got a better KFA2 with 1228 Mhz boost clock, and it was overclocking to 1359 Mhz! In all these cases, a GPU-Z screenshot confirmed that the base clock was as advertised (980 or 1006 Mhz), but those people with lower boost clocks had gotten chips that werent stable up to 1200-1250 Mhz.
If you dont have the boost clocks mentioned above, which happened with very very few people only, I'd send the card back. Everyone that got a Gigabyte or KFA2 card working at the correct boost clocks above managed a minimum stable overclock of 1250 Mhz. People with lower boost clocks were getting instability when clocking to, or a little over 1200 Mhz.
In most cases, buying the 980 or 1006 Mhz base clock cards should guarantee you a 1200+ Mhz chip, but a few that slip past quality control checks are not boosting up to or stable at the correct boost clock fequency.
I'd imagine from the look of current results that fewer than 1% of chips are clocking past 1300 Mhz, and the same number are incapable of 1200 Mhz (on the 980 and 1006 base clock cards that is). When buying a 980 Mhz (Gigabyte / Asus TOP), or 1006 Mhz (KFA2 / Galaxy, Zotac, Palit, Gainward), you should be getting a handpicked 1215-1250 MHz capable chip at the least, unless the card slipped through being tested.
I'd also definitely stick to either the Gigabyte or Asus card if getting one of these custom designs, their direct contact heatpipe coolers are around 10 degrees lower than the KFA2 / Galaxy cards are, giving around 60 degree temperatures on the Gigabyte at 1250 Mhz. I havnt seen any user results from the Asus card yet, and wouldnt trust the review results as official as they use cherry picked cards, but the cooler that Asus use is the same quality as Gigabyte's with one less fan.
From the information I've seen so far from across reviews and user results:
KFA2 / Galaxy - 81 degrees at stock settings, 71 degrees at maximum fan speed, <66 degrees up to 1250 Mhz after a cooler reseat to elimitate throttling (my own results).
Asus - 70 degrees at stock settings (turn up the fans a little and enjoy no throttling, results from techpowerup).
Gigabyte - 60 degrees at stock fan profile with the card clocked up to 1250 Mhz (results from users such as Krizby in this thread).
I have a 680 vs 670 run on 3DM11, talk about close!
So far the suckers been going through 4hrs of BF3, gonna get some D3 torture later though.
Any chance you could test them clock for clock (same boost not base clocks)? If you dont have your 680 anymore, just run the 670 at the same frequencies to the results you already have.Quote:
Originally Posted by nascasho
It would be nice to see how much, or how little difference the disabled SMX unit makes.
A GTX 670 and 680 with the same base clocks (1006 Mhz) perform almost identically due to the 670s higher boost clock.
Bhaav can you check the Asic quality of your 670 ? ( with GPU-z, it work for AMD cards, should work too on Nivida one's ).
If i have ask you what was the boost clock on yours, is due to the fact it differ on lot on the 680 retail cards... due to Asic quality, whatever is write, some do some do 1058 some 1084 and ofc the best 1110
mhz . ( dont get the right number in head, will correct them if needed when i got the article of hardware.fr , note all press sample was 1110mhz ones ) ..
So basically this will ofc rely on the performance throttling on the boost clock, but ofc certainly with the 125% limit. It is well possible many 670 non reference goes higher due to the Asic quality and specially as the tdp limit is higher or same of 680 on some case, with 1 smx disabled they go higher.
Ofc temp influence tdp... so the limit is maybe faster reach. On certain model ..
Now i will be honest with you, when i have seen the gigabyte and Asus, the choice was easy, higher pcb and cooler quality. the choice is easy. ( specially for the difference on price )
Both were run at 1260/3444 in AB. Don't have my 680 anymore as I was waiting for one that would make sense to WC it.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
During the run I was monitoring the core freq and temp with the latest AIDA64 and it was locked at the 1260/3444 (6888) and 1.175V. Same with the 680, but I only have a results that I was trying to compare to my 480 I had.
Have a few Crysis and metro runs too if you want me to compare.
Also made this earlier yesterday:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9sd_HJLVo4&hd=1
EDIT: Also, wanted to check my ASIC and GPU-Z read 100%? Guessing it's not reading it correctly for these cards yet?
Lol yes surely, as it is quite impossible to get 100%..Quote:
Originally Posted by nascasho
What soft ware you using for recording? fraps ?
NCIX got in a decent amount of stock on the Gigabyte 670 OC so I cancelled my Asus preorder. For $10 over reference Gigabyte is offering one hell of a card so it looks hard to go wrong.
MSI AfterburnerQuote:
Originally Posted by Lanek
http://www.abload.de/img/untitledibu9u.jpg
i was not find the quality excellent when use MSI, but this was a long time ago, will try it again. so i have allways use fraps ( with the big problem of fraps who is the size of the files )
I didn't know that about the Asic quality, my boost clock is 1215 Mhz like most people are reporting for this card. Good GPU, high quality PCB, shameful cooler performance. MSI video recording quality is perfect, just remember to change the slider from the default 75% which will blur everything to 100% and compress it after.
yep will try it... I own fraps since a long time and the quality is good, but for long recording, it is better to have a lot of place on the HDD you use for recordings.... MSI for recording on the fly should be a bit more practical.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
would AMD bring 7970 price to 670 level (as 6970 vs 570) ?
Hey guys, been thinking of upgrading from my SLI GTX 580 3GB MSI Lightning Xtreme Edition cards to 2 x GTX 670.
Is it worth it? And how would the performance compare in 2D Surround with a 5760 x 1200 resolution?
Another reason I was thinking of changing over is because of the power usage. Would it make much difference or would the extra I pay for the GTX 670s cards nullify the power savings.
Also, what is the deal with the throttling on the GTX 670s. I've seen it mentioned that they throttle when they reach certain temps? Does that happen on the GTX 680s too?
The power savings would be offset by the cost of upgrading but if want want to be more environmentally friendly theres that angle...
They will be no doubt be cooler runnner and quieter as well however. You'd be looking at 150-200 watts less at load. Obviously you'd get better performance as well.
When people are refering to throttling thats kind of misleading. Basically the gpus boost functionallity is very similar to the Turbo functionallity in Intel cpus. If there is thermal and tdp headroom, the card can clock higher, if not it will run lower but no lower than its base clock, no different than a cpu. I wouldn't call this throttling whatsoever... It's about increasing efficiency by keeping the card as close to tdp thus as busy as possible.
Given you are using 3GB buffer cards now, I'd try to get a hold of 4GB 670s given your intent to use surround.
Thanks a lot, appreciate the info, so the power savings would be negated by the cost of upgrading, which is pretty much what I thought. It basically comes down to performance then. I'd prefer the 4GB cards for Surround, but for some reason, in Australia, they seem to jack the prices up a lot higher for the 4GB cards. The 2GB GTX 670s here range from $480-$550. The 4GB cards are probably going to cost $600, which is out of my price range for two of them. If we had prices closer to the US prices I'd have two GTX 680s already.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chickenfeed
So it's pretty much between the 670 2GB SLI Vs GTX 580 3GB SLI. What do you think? Not worth it, or would it still be a worthwhile upgrade?
So for the throttling it won't go lower than the base clock even if it hits 80 plus degrees? Thanks for explaining that, I thought it might actually down clock under the base clock. So if I want to OC them and keep them there I need cards with good cooling. What cards would be best for SLI? They'll have a two slot gap between them on my MB.
side note: I still havent seen good evidence that the smaller boards are any worse than the bigger boards. I would love to be proven wrong, but it still looks to me like the board isnt a constraint. the cooler on it maybe, but not the board.
in less than 12 months a gtx 780 will make both of those configurations look poopyQuote:
Originally Posted by Ice009
Yeah, sure it will, but I'm not waiting 12 months to upgrade. What do you think I should do now? Stick with the 580s or try 670s? I just wonder if the 2GB of RAM will be a hindrance in Surround Vs my 3GB cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
Planning to get a pair of Gigabyte 670's in SLI, is there any issues with the cards or not?
Its kinda funny that GTX 680's are somewhat hard to find but GTX 670's are plentiful in stock, not to mention the 670 performs very close to the 680 and is cheaper too.
Mine kick ass! No issues. Run cool. I run them at +60 on the core & +400 on the memory in SLI, though totally not necessary. Every game gets demolished by these cards, including BF3, at 2560x1600. In fact, two of them is probably overkill but I like 4xMSAA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Detector
New sig below...
i scored a evga FTW from newegg. I think this and the asus are the best. but asus is not out.
I had a pair of Gigabytes in SLI but ended up returning one... my single 670 WindForce OC @ 1354mhz core full-time & +250 on the memory runs BF3 obscenely well, the only benefit I had from two was using 4x MSAA instead of none (I use post-process low now), & HBAO instead of SSAO... two is definitely overkill @ 2560x1600 even (which is what I play with as well). I run 70-80fps most of the time with minimums of ~60fps in 64-man conquest servers. Other games get great frames and quality also... I really intended to go for SLI again as I have the past few generations, but this time it was really TOO much power for me (I don't need 90fps with 100% visual quality when I can get 98% @ 70-80fps... and that's in my most demanding titles, only a handful). I'm still surprised Gigabyte let their custom-cooled OC version run the same MSRP as reference 670's.Quote:
Originally Posted by dstedman
I did briefly consider getting rid of one since two in SLI is definitely overkill, though I do enjoy 4x MSAA and with Adaptive V-sync I think they run a bit cooler than one working extra hard.
Yeah... the extra bit of quality is definitely nice :D always.
The gtx 670 is an awesome card but where are the rest of Nvidia's cards? I thought when they launch a new generation of cards they're supposed to have gtx 660, 660 ti, 650 ti and maybe even a 665 gtx that has a chance to unlock to a 670? I'm really disappointed, there's hardly any mention of midrange budget cards and even if they do launch them, i'm thinking they will be in short supply like the rest of there 28nm cards. This is a really craptastic launch.