512MB Gecube X1900XTX - I'm back

Yes i'm back and you get to watch me continuously post benchmarks with my new toy :D :woot:

I couldn't wait for Gecube to provide me with my X1900XTX/XT Crossfire cards for my testing on DFI CFX3200-DR http://i4memory.com/cfx3200dr/ so decided to fork out for half the setup myself, in the form of a 512MB Gecube X1900XTX card :)

The card arrived yesterday but since i have the flu and bad cough keeping me up at night :( I thought I'd give the card a whirl :D

System:

• FX-60 CCB2E 0536RPMW
• Kayl Black Frozen SS phase change for cpu cooling
• DFI NF4 UT SLI-DR R.AB0 406BTA
• 512MB Gecube X1900XTX stock HSF
• 2x 512MB OCZ PC3200 Gold UTT BH-5
• 4x 80GB Hitachi 7K80 SATAII Raid 0
• Pioneer DVD-RW + FDD
• 1KW PCP&C SLI power supply

WinXP Pro SP2 fully updated
6.70WHQL Chipset drivers
6.5 Catalyst Official drivers

Right now stock heatsink air cooled with fan speed at 100% I managed on GPU core using ATI Tool 0.24 beta 14.

GPU Overclocking

1.175v = 655mhz
1.400v = 684mhz
1.425v = 702mhz
1.450v = 712mhz
1.450v = 720mhz with ~63C load temps as monitored via Rivatuner RC16.
1.500V = 725mhz with ~66C load temps as monitored via Rivatuner RC16.
1.500V = 729mhz with ~66C load temps as monitored via Rivatuner RC16.

Here's one of my first 3dmark05 runs with ATI Tool and Rivatuner RC16 running in background.

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...load66C_tn.png

Video Memory Overclocking

As to memory clocking, seems like my 512MB HIS X1800XT, part of the puzzle is GPU voltage, as you increase GPU volts, mem clocks higher at some point. Here it seems to be at 1.525v GPU volts.

GPU/VDDC/VDDQ/VDDCI = GPU/Mem

Note: PASSED means ATI TOOL continued to run at that stated speed only.

1.500v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 725/801-805.5mhz PASSED
1.525v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 725/810-814mhz PASSED
1.525v/2.168/2.086/1.486v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 725/814mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.135/2.006/1.486v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 725/814mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.140/2.121/1.486v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 725/814mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.105/2.102/1.510v = Artifacts at 725/850-855mhz
1.525v/2.113/2.102/1.510v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 725/814mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.121/2.102/1.510v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 725/814mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.113/2.102/1.510v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 725/814mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.113/2.102/1.510v = PASSED dropping GPU by 5mhz = 720/846mhz
1.500v/2.113/2.102/1.510v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 720/823mhz heat up phase
1.500v/2.113/2.102/1.493v = Artifacts at 720/846-850mhz
1.500v/2.119/2.108/1.493v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 720/814mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.113/2.102/1.493v = Artifacts at 720/837mhz
1.525v/2.113/2.102/1.510v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 720/859mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.116/2.105/1.524v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 720/855mhz heat up phase
1.525v/2.119/2.105/1.510v = PASSED at 720/846mhz
1.525v/2.119/2.105/1.540v = Locked up in ATI Tool at 720/868mhz scanning artifact stage
1.525v/2.119/2.105/1.563v = PASSED at 720/855mhz load temp 75C

Haven't found the max yet for GPU or Mem, but at this point it seems the memory needs more GPU voltage to clock higher than 801-805mhz.

Seems for 3dmark05 at least 720/850 is achievable with 1.525/2.119/2.105/1.563 with load temps of ~67-75C.

3dmark05 = 13,885
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=2077846

While Rivatuner RC16 and ATI Tool were running in background.

@720/850 - 13,885 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=2077846
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...load69C_tn.png

@720/850 - 43,894 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8998288
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...05_1563_tn.png

@720/850 - 6,962 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=353082
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...05_1563_tn.png

Doesn't seem to be the best clocker, but not bad at all :D

Wow, very nice job eva! As usual I love to read your bench results as you are very thorough in describing all details such as clocks, volts and method of tests as well as pictures to backup your claims. Seems like you have a fairly strong card there. My card does 685/810 with 1.40v and it seems yours does the same. I will take some of your results as a test to see how much higher I can get on core with more volts. Keep up the great work as usual and have fun with your very fast new card.

14k with stock cooler is not bad :)

Nice work as always eva:toast: Very detailed. I reasently got a new xtx for my n ew setup, and havde been testing it a bit. by far the best card i ever owned:)
this was just testing a bit in my favorit bench with normal water setup. i will test further soon:) sorry for highjacking:)

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/9110/01test18lt.jpg

Great post and great results Eva, just like the one u did with the HIS x1800xt, i bought one because of that post.

Great post Eva keep us posted ...

Lol, Eva is at it again! As always awesome attention to detail. See you got your phase setup. Makes me wanna break out my old ghetto dice gear. ;)

@Sioux - Man! That card is sick! show us what it can do...

thanks guys more results later today i hope :)

Ply break out that ghetto DI gear hehe...

SIOUX, what voltages where that clock at ? and water and ambient temps for the GPU h20 cooling ? What did that card do on stock hsf air ?

I'm surprised that an XTX clocks so poorly... I have an X1900CF (625/725) same as XT... I am overclocked 729/828 with stock cooler and stock volts...

I thought XTX was supposed to be far better than XT?

Wish I had an FX processor...

Keep up the good work!

Yeah not that good an oc'er this card.. GPU can handle lower voltages but mem needs more GPU volts it seems

bad news of sorts.... seems my system with FX-60 just boots up into windows then shuts down :(

if i try to power it up again, it immediately shuts down ?

i removed the evap and insulation foam to dry things out, put a hair dryer on low heat to the cpu socket to ensure it's not condensation...

left it for a few hours, then installed the insulation foam again and remounted evap....

go into windows at 200x16 at 1.552v and tried stressprime dual prime test it went for around 5mins and then rebooted, and then shutdown itself again ????

the idle and load temps are like normal idle -18C to -20C and load +0C to +1C to +2C....

soooo what can be wrong ? still condensation in cpu socket ? with all the insulation i did of the board, could it still not be enough ?

any ideas guys ?




EDIT: The culprit seems to have been a pool of condensation/water on back side of motherboard http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post1528532 LOL

I want to say, thank you!

I have not seen such a nice compilation of x1900 voltages and clockspeeds :)

It will help me very much, along with your CFX3200 UTT settings :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

thanks guys more results later today i hope :)

Ply break out that ghetto DI gear hehe...

SIOUX, what voltages where that clock at ? and water and ambient temps for the GPU h20 cooling ? What did that card do on stock hsf air ?

---

1.55 / 2.34 / 2.151 / 1.575 :)


The water was ambient yes. 2x120mm radi + swiftech pump and a EK X1900 waterhead :)

I dont know what it does on air...never tryed:)

thanks good to have an idea of voltages used although it may differ from card to card heh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fhpchris

I want to say, thank you!

I have not seen such a nice compilation of x1900 voltages and clockspeeds :)

It will help me very much, along with your CFX3200 UTT settings :)

---

no probs that's what my CFX3200-DR guide is for hehe

had to go to air cooling on FX-60 to check if my cpu was okay after condensation on phase....

FX-60 @2940mhz 1.408v on stock heatsink air with X1900XTX @650/774 on stock hsf air too and rivatuner, mbm5 and ati tool running in background :)

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...4_12639_tn.png

Lol 12.6k stock clocks is pretty sick.

Thanks for the benchs :)

BTW, your '05 scores seems "low" to me, this is what I got with a 165 TTBT @ "only" 3003 and a X1900XTX@725/850 stock cooler 1.550/2.210/2.210/1.501:

3dk05 score: 13616
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=1996857

3dk06 score: 6651
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=268158

The 3dk01 is impressive, because of the +300mhz in the CPU. This is mine, 40544:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8966641

Thanks again, not trying to hijack your thread :p: your voltage tables are very handy :fact:

//EDIT: Now I see the project details, my '05 Firefly is higher than yours and Canyon is really close (70.7 vs 71).
In 3dk06 your score is higher because of the CPU score, the SM2&3 are really close, which makes sense as it's 3D and not CPU dependant.

I selected Texture and Mipmap quality to performance. No LOD.
BTW what speed was your RAM at? I can't find it in the post.
Hope this helps ;)

guys, im planning on getting the Accelero X2 for my Powercolor X1900XT.. do you guys think it's worth it?? and also i've tried to push down the palstic clips on the HS of the VR but it does not seem to be going down... i live in singapore so ambient temps are really high.. on idle my X1900XT is doing 55 degrees... lol

3rd party air coolers for x1900xt/xtx won't do much as temps would still be higher, for max clocks better off with stock x1900 heatsink @100% fan speed or water cooling heh

mursaat, nice scores, you can find my mem timings in my compare url descriptions or clicking the images for larger screenie as i'm running uplock 233 divider :)

3dmark05 won't change much at around same clocks you have 5mhz more GPU core than me 725 vs 720 hence GT2 higher...

I'm doing more voltage tests soon to see if i can make a break through regarding mem clocks hehe

Further voltage testing updates

GPU/VDDC/VDDQ/VDDCI = GPU/Mem

Note: PASSED means ATI TOOL continued to run at that stated speed only.

1.525/2.138v/2.009/1.564 = FAILED went up to 720/864-868mhz on memory before blanking out. Seems VDDQ can be lowered without too much detriment to mem clocks, wonder if raising VDDC only will get me higher :)

1.525/2.151v/2.015/1.564 = PASSED 720/864 ran scanning artifact fine. So it seems keeping VDDQ low is fine and just up VDDC :)

1.525/2.165v/2.015/1.564 = FAILED up to 720/868 and failed in heat up phase with 868mhz memory.. getting there though :)

1.525/2.176v/2.031/1.564 = FAILED up to 720/868 and failed in heat up phase with 868mhz memory

1.525/2.181v/2.020/1.564 = FAILED up to 720/868 and failed with 868mhz memory with 16 seconds left to completion in heat up phase!

1.525/2.192v/2.020/1.566 = FAILED up to 720/868 and failed with 868mhz memory with 9 seconds left to completion in heat up phase!

1.525/2.203v/2.020/1.564 = FAILED up to 720/868 and failed with 868mhz memory with 8 seconds left to completion in heat up phase!

1.525/2.203v/2.015/1.564 = FAILED up to 720/868 and failed with 868mhz memory with 15 seconds left to completion in heat up phase!

1.500/2.209v/2.020/1.564 = FAILED up to 720/868 and failed with 868mhz memory with 24 seconds left to completion in heat up phase!

1.550/2.203v/2.020/1.564 = FAILED locked up at 792mhz on mem.. guess 1.550v GPU volt too much for it on air cooling ?? Or maybe with 1.550v i can reduce VDDC volts ?

1.550/2.184v/2.020/1.564 = FAILED got up to 877mhz highest so far, after passing heat up phase at 868mhz, but artifact detecting knocked it back from 877mhz to 873mhz back to 868mhz :)

1.550/2.195v/2.023/1.564 = PASSED 720/868 - even passed heatup phase @873mhz on memory, then ran artifact scanning for 90 seconds before artifact detecting bumped it to 868mhz :D

Getting there hehe

very nice and thx a lot eva for the resume

will try some tips

I just got a gigabyte x1900xt, too afraid to oc it (im only 18, too much out of pocket if something goes wrong)

nice scores. really helpful.

Update: For now settled on 720/864 with 1.550/2.195v/2.023/1.564 - backing off on the mem a notch just for safe measure. 3Dmark05 ran perfectly fine at this speed.

3dmark05 = 14,028 with ATI Tool, Rivatuner RC16 both running in background logging temps.

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...4_14028_tn.png

Pretty happy that I managed to get the vid memory clock up from what seemed like a 814mhz wall in ATI Tool 0.25 beta 14 to the 864-868mhz speeds now on stock hsf air. GPU clocks do seem low at 720mhz but guess nothing that better cooling on GPU wouldn't help fix :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

mursaat, nice scores, you can find my mem timings in my compare url descriptions or clicking the images for larger screenie as i'm running uplock 233 divider :)

3dmark05 won't change much at around same clocks you have 5mhz more GPU core than me 725 vs 720 hence GT2 higher...

---

So that means with a X1900XTX at those clocks 3dk05 is also GPU bound. Which also could mean a A64 DC @ 3ghz is just the point where the GPU starts to lack CPU power, because I get higher scores @ 3000 than @ 2800 :D

yeah, ya need SLI or CF setup to really see that cpu @3400mhz move some nice figures in 3dmarks :)

What's interesting is it's at around 3ghz where 3dk05 starts to be GPU bound. I get ~700 more points at 3ghz than at 2.8, but you don't get real benefit from 3.3ghz.

Looks like the perfect combination, 165@3000 + X1900XTX air 725/850 :D

3dmark2003 = 22,583

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...4_22583_tn.png

3dmark06 = 7,025

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...64_7025_tn.jpg

3dmark2001 = 44,974

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...4_44974_tn.jpg

AM3 = 124,159

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...124159_tnn.png

Last benchie for tonight and still at 1.55v managed to pull off a perfect 3dmark06 run with Gecube X1900XTX stock hsf air @732/868 :)

3dmark06 = 7,170
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=356684

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...64_7170_tn.png

eva that 3dmark03 score is some strange to me, i get the same score with a single evga 7900gtx @stock and a fx62 stock.

how did you score that with ur x1900 oced an the fx60 oced

ATI single cards aren't that strong in 3dmark2003, Nvidia 7800/7900 series is stronger in 3dmark2003 :)

Also 3dmark2003 also gets a boost with FSB/HTT speed, but i'm at 16x213HTT due to cold bug heh

But i might go back to 3dmark2003 and redo the runs and see heh

Managed 738/868 for 3dmark05 and 3dmark2001 at 1.575v/2.195/2.023/1.564 but it froze in GT1 in 3dmark06, so 732/868 seems like the stable point on stock hsf so far.

3dmark05 = 14,264
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=2083234

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...8_14264_tn.png

3dmark2001 = 45,404
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=9000571

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...8_45404_tn.png

fantastic score eva :D how are you folks all keeping you vltage regulator so cool?
My x1900xt master is maze4 watercooled and temps never pass 40*c load...but my v.reg chips sit at 60*c idle and load at anywhere up to 80*c!!!!!

120x38mm fan over voltage regular chip :D

First FX-60 benchmark beyond my cpu's cold bug/low HTT bug. Work around using toast app to keep cpu loaded when idle.

FX-60 @15x229HTT with 233 upclock and 2x 512MB OCZ PC3200 Gold UTT BH-5 @264mhz 2-2-2-5 :)

3dmark2001 = 46,083 :cool:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=9000607

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...8_46083_tn.png


3dmark05 = 14,335
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=2083369

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...8_14335_tn.png

3dmark06 = 7,175
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=358008

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...68_7175_tn.png

Nice work, Eva2000.. under stock HSF.. Wow!!

Just looking the first result you have give for 3D05.. my CPU was clocked around the 3080 if i remember well.. looking your score i see my score was really CPU limited... you was having better score in the first part or i was at 793/900mhz.. (perhaps 799/900.. don't rememeber ..)
YOu will got easy the 15K..

Just for show you at what point the first bench is limited CPU...( in my case.. )
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/7...stitre23jh.jpg

I definetevely need better cooling (or change my CPU)...

thanks was that single core @3080mhz ? you would be cpu limited i'd say somewhat

Yes here my orb's: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=2045383


totally cpu limited in my score.. i can put any speed on core and memory.. the first bench never move higher /or lower.. .. i have suspect this before.. but this time i m fully sure...

I can't wait to see your GPU under water.. with your FX at this speed, you should increase quickly the score..

Nice job eva, your card isn't that bad.. only a bit worse than mine on the core and I'm on water, and much better on mem (I only get ~820)

Anyway can you try something?? See if you can reduce VDDQ to the minimum 1.785vand keep your clocks stable, I've always left mine there and there's no good effect to raising it, as far as ocing is concerned

edit: I also keep the VDDCI at 1.440v, oc'd to 702/792@ 1.4/2.001/1.785/1.440 (yes I'm a low voltage freak)

Yup slapped on Dangerden Acetal Maze4 Low Profile water block for water cooling to see how it goes.

H20 cooling results

With ~23C room ambient, X1900XTX on water cooling

@500/594 2D stock volts = GPU is 31C idle and 36C load
@650/774 3D 1.425v = GPU is 33C idle and 40C load

GPU/VDDC/VDDQ/VDDCI = GPU/Mem

Note: PASSED means ATI TOOL continued to run at that stated speed only.

GPU core clock tests with mem set to always 774mhz

1.425v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 732mhz on GPU core an improvement of 30mhz over stock hsf air

1.450v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 733mhz on GPU core with load temps of 40C. Sounds like similar issue with stock hsf air, GPU volts or temps aren't the problem but maybe VDDCI volts ? An improvement of 13mhz over stock hsf air.

1.500v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 759mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C. Now we're getting somewhere :D

1.525v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 766mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C.

1.550v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 769mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C.

1.575v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 769mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C.

1.500v/2.086/2.086/1.564v = 760mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C.

1.575v/2.195/2.023/1.564v = 769mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C. Have i hit a limit here ? On stock hsf air ATI Tool said my max was 720mhz on GPU but i could bench all the way to 732-738mhz on GPU.

Video memory clock tests with GPU set to always 732mhz

1.575v/2.195/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 886mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 882mhz.

1.575v/2.225/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 900mhz before ATI Tool locked up during artifact scanning. Load temp = 43C

1.575v/2.266/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 904mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz.

1.575v/2.296/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 895mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 891mhz.

1.575v/2.288/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 922mhz then locked up with slight artifacts.

1.575v/2.280/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 882mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 841mhz :confused:

1.575v/2.305/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - locked up at 871mhz

1.575v/2.288/1.985/1.564v = FAILED - upto 909mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz

1.575v/2.288/2.023/1.533v = FAILED - upto 873mhz then artifacts. Guess VDDCI voltage still is important for mem clocks on water cooling.

1.575v/2.288/2.023/1.575v = FAILED - upto 900mhz then locked up

1.575v/2.288/2.135/1.564v = FAILED - upto 909mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz then down to 891mhz

1.575v/2.288/1.935/1.564v = FAILED - upto 886mhz then artifacts

1.575v/2.288/2.047/1.564v = FAILED - upto 909mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz then down to 891mhz. Similar behaviour as when VDDQ was at 2.135v

1.575v/2.288/2.015/1.564v = FAILED - upto 913mhz before locking up

1.575v/2.288/2.012/1.564v = FAILED - upto 909mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz then locking up

H20 cooling results

Yup slapped on Dangerden Acetal Maze4 Low Profile water block for water cooling to see how it goes. With ~23C room ambient, X1900XTX on water cooling

@500/594 2D stock volts = GPU is 31C idle and 36C load
@650/774 3D 1.425v = GPU is 33C idle and 40C load

GPU/VDDC/VDDQ/VDDCI = GPU/Mem

Note: PASSED means ATI TOOL continued to run at that stated speed only.

GPU core clock tests with mem set to always 774mhz

1.425v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 732mhz on GPU core an improvement of 30mhz over stock hsf air

1.450v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 733mhz on GPU core with load temps of 40C. Sounds like similar issue with stock hsf air, GPU volts or temps aren't the problem but maybe VDDCI volts ? An improvement of 13mhz over stock hsf air.

1.500v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 759mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C. Now we're getting somewhere :D

1.525v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 766mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C.

1.550v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 769mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C.

1.575v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 769mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C.

1.500v/2.086/2.086/1.564v = 760mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C.

1.575v/2.195/2.023/1.564v = 769mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42.5C. Have i hit a limit here ? On stock hsf air ATI Tool said my max was 720mhz on GPU but i could bench all the way to 732-738mhz on GPU.

Video memory clock tests with GPU set to always 732mhz

1.575v/2.195/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 886mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 882mhz.

1.575v/2.225/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 900mhz before ATI Tool locked up during artifact scanning. Load temp = 43C

1.575v/2.266/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 904mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz.

1.575v/2.296/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 895mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 891mhz.

1.575v/2.288/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 922mhz then locked up with slight artifacts.

1.575v/2.280/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - upto 882mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 841mhz :confused:

1.575v/2.305/2.023/1.564v = FAILED - locked up at 871mhz

1.575v/2.288/1.985/1.564v = FAILED - upto 909mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz

1.575v/2.288/2.023/1.533v = FAILED - upto 873mhz then artifacts. Guess VDDCI voltage still is important for mem clocks on water cooling.

1.575v/2.288/2.023/1.575v = FAILED - upto 900mhz then locked up

1.575v/2.288/2.135/1.564v = FAILED - upto 909mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz then down to 891mhz

1.575v/2.288/1.935/1.564v = FAILED - upto 886mhz then artifacts

1.575v/2.288/2.047/1.564v = FAILED - upto 909mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz then down to 891mhz. Similar behaviour as when VDDQ was at 2.135v

1.575v/2.288/2.015/1.564v = FAILED - upto 913mhz before locking up

1.575v/2.288/2.012/1.564v = FAILED - upto 909mhz before artifact scanning dropped it to 900mhz then locking up

Hmmm not happy with GPU clocks, might need to do a remount of the Maze4 waterblock to see if i can improve it somewhat heh.

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...43Cload_tn.png

Kind of mediocre score huh ? From that i'd probably need 800Mhz on GPU to hit 15k in 3dmark05 LOL

3dmark06 looks better though = 7,338 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=358600

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...95_7338_tn.png

.. it's really nice... Eva 2000... this promise a lot..

for 799/900.. here the voltage i use with my HIS.. 1.575/2.25/2.25/1.503
( try up the MVDDC.. and lower the VDDCI)

nice work as usual eva

what cat's are you using? In the other thread the beta 6.6's supposedly boost 05, 06 around 400-500 points.

thanks guys

Lane will try your suggestions, but from what i've seen so far VDDCI needs to be high for stability for my card... but maybe by lowering VDDCI, i will be able to increase VDDC volts hmmm

I'm remounting the waterblock today to see if i can get better contact with GPU core heh

Praxis, i'm using official 6.5 ... will try 6.6 betas alot later.. need to be able to run my scores and compare with other 6.5 and below cats to see if i'm on track first heh

================================================== =
Update: remounted Maze4 LP GPU waterblock to see if i could get better contact and higher clocks. Seems to have helped so far.

GPU/VDDC/VDDQ/VDDCI = GPU/Mem

Note: PASSED means ATI TOOL continued to run at that stated speed only.

GPU core clock tests with mem set to always 774mhz

1.425v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 739mhz on GPU core an improvement of 37mhz over stock hsf air and 7mhz improvement over first GPU waterblock mount :cool:

1.500v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 759mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42C. Same max as first mount.

1.550v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = 769mhz on GPU core with load temps of 42C. Same max as first mount.

Got a bit tired of ATI Tool, so thought i'd do 3dmark05 continuous loop tests instead :)

1.575v/2.086/2.086/1.486v = PASSED at 772mhz looping 3dmark05 artifact free! Guess ATI Tool doesn't tell the whole picture :)

I am so impressed of your documentation of your tests! The listing of voltage--speed is like a dictionary. ;)

I have noticed the same thing, ATI Tool might report errors while other applications don't. Also, after a few days of -try-and-error I also remounted the Maze4, it was almost like a new card after that. So, that is a tip: If you cannot clock as high as you could earlier, remount the cooler.

well seems ended up around 765mhz gpu core is max when mem is >882mhz, can do 772mhz gpu core when mem is around 774mhz heh

I settled on 765/891 for now. Bit disappointed as i was hoping for at least 785-795mhz GPU on water.

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...1_14564_tn.png

Max load temp was 43.68C or there abouts, never hits 44C so far in 23-25C room ambients :)

Interesting finding, i changed to my other PCI-E power connector on my 1KW PCP&C SLI psu, and now at same 1.575v ATI Tool managed to get to 778mhz instead of 769mhz!

Oh and piccies

http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid...900XTX_001.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid...900XTX_014.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid...900XTX_015.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid...900XTX_017.jpg

http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid...900XTX_019.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid...900XTX_022.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid...900XTX_023.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid...900XTX_024.jpg


http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_003.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_005.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_010.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_012.jpg

http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_014.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_022.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_023.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_024.jpg http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/vid..._Maze4_025.jpg

edit: darn 778mhz gpu clock was a once off fluke it seems, still 765-769mhz is max sigh

Well decided to try 6.6 beta and gained 8.67% in SM2.0 and 3.99% in SM3.0/HDR and overall gained around 5% in 3dmark06

Jump from 760/895 = 7,338 to 765/895 = 7,717

3dmark06 = 7,717
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=359755

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...95_7717_tn.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rob[GL]

I'm surprised that an XTX clocks so poorly... I have an X1900CF (625/725) same as XT... I am overclocked 729/828 with stock cooler and stock volts...

I thought XTX was supposed to be far better than XT?

Wish I had an FX processor...

Keep up the good work!

---

I have the X1900 Master card too, but why it's not well for oc? :confused:

I have ASUS EAX1900 CrossFire Edition with the water cooling system. My GPU/mem is about 700/780 on default voltage, then I try to rising the voltage by ATITool it's not any help for oc. :(

Please tell me that how the X1900 CF Edition oc as good as XT/XTX. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deschutes

I have the X1900 Master card too, but why it's not well for oc? :confused:

I have ASUS EAX1900 CrossFire Edition with the water cooling system. My GPU/mem is about 700/780 on default voltage, then I try to rising the voltage by ATITool it's not any help for oc. :(

Please tell me that how the X1900 CF Edition oc as good as XT/XTX. :confused:

---

Sawasdee-khrap !! The XTCF have 1.2ns mem, and the XTX mostly have 1.1ns and generaly OC better than XT/CF cards:)

for the voltage. Did you remeber to disable the services ati smart and hotkey poller??? ati does not always do it itself:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SIOUX

Sawasdee-khrap !! The XTCF have 1.2ns mem, and the XTX mostly have 1.1ns and generaly OC better than XT/CF cards:)

for the voltage. Did you remeber to disable the services ati smart and hotkey poller??? ati does not always do it itself:)

---

Even if the XT has 1.1ns rams the XTX will still OC better than the XT ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by farksy

Even if the XT has 1.1ns rams the XTX will still OC better than the XT ?

---

depends on each card it seems - but on average XTX will clock better than XT... take 10x XTX cards and 10x XT cards and the average clocks and see heh

the memory on my XT overclocks well but the gpu sucks (i've a VF-900 on it but still :/ )

edit: 1.1ns rams

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SIOUX

Sawasdee-khrap !! The XTCF have 1.2ns mem, and the XTX mostly have 1.1ns and generaly OC better than XT/CF cards:)

for the voltage. Did you remeber to disable the services ati smart and hotkey poller??? ati does not always do it itself:)

---

Sawasdee krap .... :clap:

Thanks for your recommendation, I'll try it again. :D

Now that's what i'm talking about!

3dmark06 = 7,762
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=359864

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...04_7762_tn.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deschutes

Sawasdee krap .... :clap:

Thanks for your recommendation, I'll try it again. :D

---

Mai pen rai khrap :D pen reang lek noi :)

I haven't pulled my stock heatsink off to check what kind of ram is on my card... But I think that 729/828 on stock heatsink, with stock volts, is great overclock for X1900CF 512MB...

I tried overvolting the core and memory, but I did not gain anything great, only few MHz... So I will leave stock voltage for now... :)

FEAR v1.05 Director's Edition hehe

FX-60 @16x213HTT = 3408Mhz
DFI NF4 UT SLI-DR R.AB0 406BTA
2x512MB OCZ PC3200 Gold UTT BH-5 @243Mhz 2-2-2-5
4x 80GB Hitachi 7K80 SATAII NCQ Raid 0
WinXP Pro SP2
6.6 Beta Catalysts

512MB Gecube X1900XTX on Maze4 Low Profile 1/2"ID H20

@766/904
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...164_410_tn.jpg

@766/895
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...71_157_389.jpg

@760/895
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...69_158_391.jpg

@738/868
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...67_155_386.jpg

@650/774 stock
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...67_147_345.jpg



Silly me just realised i had set it to HIGH and not MAXIMUM quality

here's at MAXIMUM @766/904
http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...62_126-305.jpg

Lastest

3dmark06 = 7,790
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=360955

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...04_7790_tn.png

3dmark2001 = 46,981
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=9001908

http://www.fileshosts.com/DFI/NF4_SL...4_46981_tn.png

Wow you sure take your time to help others. Thanks, sincerely :clap: :clap: I was seriously thinking about getting some WC, but seeing there's no benefit in many of the cases with my 165@2800, I will wait for R600/Conroe instead. All thanks to you :fact:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lane-k

Yes here my orb's: http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=2045383


totally cpu limited in my score.. i can put any speed on core and memory.. the first bench never move higher /or lower.. .. i have suspect this before.. but this time i m fully sure...

I can't wait to see your GPU under water.. with your FX at this speed, you should increase quickly the score..

---

Yes you're CPU limited, here's my score with a 165 at 2970, 705/855, 13616 points:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=268158

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SIOUX

Did you remeber to disable the services ati smart and hotkey poller??? ati does not always do it itself:)

---

what does disabling those do? iv been having endless problems with my Connect3d x1900xt xfire mastercard :(

What resolution and AA/AF settings were you at for the FEAR benchmarks Eva?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elfear

What resolution and AA/AF settings were you at for the FEAR benchmarks Eva?

---

MAXIMUM settings default to 1024x768 i think LOL.. if i set resolution to anything else it shows up as CUSTOM not MAXIMUM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

MAXIMUM settings default to 1024x768 i think LOL.. if i set resolution to anything else it shows up as CUSTOM not MAXIMUM

---

If you wouldn't mind setting the resolution to the max your monitor will support and rerunning the benchmark, it would be greatly appreciated. I'll post up my scores at 1920x1200 (or lower if needs be). I'm curious to see how much difference the cpu makes as mine peaks at 3.05GHz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elfear

If you wouldn't mind setting the resolution to the max your monitor will support and rerunning the benchmark, it would be greatly appreciated. I'll post up my scores at 1920x1200 (or lower if needs be). I'm curious to see how much difference the cpu makes as mine peaks at 3.05GHz.

---

Well at that resolution, and with single card, in FEAR, I would go and do a wild guess by saying you're GPU limited :p:

Sorry for the sarcasm, today I'm having a hard day :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elfear

If you wouldn't mind setting the resolution to the max your monitor will support and rerunning the benchmark, it would be greatly appreciated. I'll post up my scores at 1920x1200 (or lower if needs be). I'm curious to see how much difference the cpu makes as mine peaks at 3.05GHz.

---

well bit preoccupied now with http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=105003 and my 2nd hand HIS X1900XT Crossfire mastercard arrived today :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mursaat

Well at that resolution, and with single card, in FEAR, I would go and do a wild guess by saying you're GPU limited :p:

Sorry for the sarcasm, today I'm having a hard day :D

---

Lol. Sarcasm duly noted. Normally I'd agree with you but I've been seeing some benchmarks lately that show a faster processor (namely Conroe) giving some nice gains even at 1600x1200 4AA/16AF. Kind of surprising to me so I'm just curious whether gains can found with a faster AMD dual core as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

well bit preoccupied now with http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=105003 and my 2nd hand HIS X1900XT Crossfire mastercard arrived today :D

---

No worries Eva. Thanks for all your hard work.

Wow 127FPS average in FEAR is insane indeed.

Thanks for posting up all the benchies - a lot of good work on the numbers.

Drop it into your new Conroe setup. Go on! You know you want to :)

i will just finding my way around conroe and DDR2 first.. it's a new learning curve for me .. nearly there :D

I wonder if all this was done with just ramsinks on the ram?