OCCT 3.1.0 shows HD4870/4890 design flaw - they can't handle the new GPU test !

[SamHughe]

Was that referring to me . I wasn't being hostile, just stating my results. Afterall, the OP wanted for thoughts, and wanted him to dig more!

It wasn't about you. Just my opinion about the general attitude. Nothing personal.

[Blazing fire]

Oh ok! Actually, I totally agree with you.

[Joki]

Hey all.

I just tried this with my XFX HD4870 XXX.
At stock freq i get 75A on the VRM. When overclocked to 850 i get the VRM to 81A and the screen goes black but comes back online after a few sec.

[Cyber-Mav]

I'm working on making the GPU test more optimized for Nvidia cards at the moment, and i do think that'll have to do with a new algorithm, a new test. That's going to take some time though, and when i say some time, that mean months, at least. Weeks at best, but i doubt it.

hey Tetedeiench any luck on getting a version of occt made that will bust my gtx260?

[David-Duc]

I have the same problem with my HD4870 but with FurMark, after 2 mins of running FurMark, VDDC last reported 83.5 Amps, the screen goes black and the D601 red LED lit - critical Core power fault => so I'm pretty sure this is ATi/AMD's defect, not Tetedeinch's fault.

/If someone say "This test is unnecessarily stress my vid since my games play fine", I think they just can't bear having a defective card. Imagine in the very near future, when some developer write a game or a GPGPU app that can pust your GPU to its limit and you won't able to run them because of ATi's fault, what do you think :P

[W1zzard]

Imagine in the very near future, when some developer write a game or a GPGPU app that can pust your GPU to its limit and you won't able to run them because of ATi's fault, what do you think :P

won't happen. ati devrel will show them a better way to do whatever they are doing

[Death^Dread]

Nice test. I bailed about 25 seconds in when my 4830 hit 82C... it loads about 60 in heavy gaming.

[jobol]

won't happen. ati devrel will show them a better way to do whatever they are doing

Please define "better" in this context


Also on a seperate note, how do you guys explain that the same cards that crash at 82A on setting 3, do not crash at 83A on setting 0?




.

[The Water Dog]

Maybe im stupid here now, but is 4890 still a good buy?
My Toxic 4890 turned black right after the test start and im waiting for my second card now.
But this is making me a little nervous about going that way, or shouldnt i be nervous?

When i taked the test but without fullscreen i got 93.66A, the phase-temp was on 135:P, and the cooler on Toxic is pretty good and i have never seen 75 on the core before now:P with the fan on 100%.

[W1zzard]

Maybe im stupid here now, but is 4890 still a good buy?
My Toxic 4890 turned black right after the test start and im waiting for my second card now.
But this is making me a little nervous about going that way, or shouldnt i be nervous?

some of those cards are unusable to play occt. so if you play occt often you may want to get another card, it will handle all other games just fine

[The Water Dog]

hehe, i dont often play occt:P
But i think is weird that on fullscreen it goes black and without the fullscreen it is okey, it was on 93A in the test too and nothing wrong there.
What so special about fullscreen and not? stupid question, but just so i know.

Did some testing becouse Toxic is 960\1050 from the box, if i sett it down to "stock" 4890 then everything is okey. on 920\1000 it starts but after 30 sec. it goes black.

[W1zzard]

fullscreen is more demanding than windowed

[The Water Dog]

thats why i said maybe im stupid now, sometimes i take things a bit too seriously

But the 82amp. barrier is not the issue here.

[knopflerbruce]

Failed on me^^ 4870 CF. But tbh, this test = CARE. If it doesn't show this error in ANY other ("non-synthetic", if that's a word) applications it works 100%.

[The Water Dog]

For info to OP i got Sapphire 4890 Toxic, on 960\1050 it goes black straigt away, setting down to "stock" 4890 is was fine and all up to 900\1000. From 920\1000 it goes black and have to reboot the computer.
All this with 1,4v( stock on Toxic) and where over 93a.

[halo112358]

Its funny reading people here are worried about buying a 4890 now because of this stupid little test. Listen this test is not a video game. I have yet to hear a 4890 fails playing video games, i could careless if mine failed that test. So you people who are reconsidering buying a 4890 because of this thread i say just buy it. Seriously, think about stupid this is. I dont think my 4890 has ap roblem tho iv run this occt test for like an hour just once and it never got above the normal temps i get in gaming and i didnt crash either.

The most iv seen this card use was like 54A and that was after playing crysis for like 3 hours straight.

Would you mind stopping the threadcrapping? I think we've discussed the "I don't care" vs "I do care" position enough already, stirring the same pot again doesn't get us anywhere new.

[zanzabar]

my HIS 4890 reference with stock 850mhz dosnt crash

[cx-ray]

I wasn't trying to prove a point, I was simply answering a question.
I can see where he might have been headed by asking that question though.

4890 is what ~10-15% behind a GTX285 with both at stock on average in "normal" games and apps?
Yet with OCCT, the 4890 is ~56% faster, using the 83FPS vs 53FPS.
However this app is programmed it stresses every part of the chip to the max, or at least quite a bit more than other "normal" apps/games.

Also none of the numbers, i.e. FPP, seem to add up.
4890@850mhz= 1.36Tflops
GTX285@1476mhz= 1.06Tflops(MADD+MUL), .708Tflops(MADD)

1.36/1.06= 1.28x greater (1/2 the FPS difference)
1.36/.708= 1.92x greater (amusing since it doesn't mean anything but = largons power draw increase)

Simply using max theorectical FPP is not an accurate way to estimate performance but in this case it seems to be related. Since this app has been said to use simple shaders to completely load the ALUs, you could come to the conclusion that the MUL is only being used ~45% of the time.

Basically, the way this app is programmed it is able to use the 4890's architecture to the max and seems to not fully load Nvidia cards, persay.

Edit- Anyone know what the stock volts for a GTX280 is under load? 1.3-1.4v?

I just ran the GPU test on a pair of GTX 280s SLI for about 10 mins (clocks 712/1512/1242 - voltage 1.185). Full screen 1920x1200 settings. Max current draw was just below 30A on both cards. Max frames per second 144. Both cards are water cooled. Temps of GPU0 max 56C and GPU1 53C. Ambient temp was ~23.8C. During gaming temps usually top out at 15C above ambient.

[zalbard]

I just ran the GPU test on a pair of GTX 280s SLI for about 10 mins (clocks 712/1512/1242 - voltage 1.185). Full screen 1920x1200 settings. Max current draw was just below 30A on both cards. Max frames per second 144. Both cards are water cooled. Temps of GPU0 max 56C and GPU1 53C. Ambient temp was ~23.8C. During gaming temps usually top out at 15C above ambient.

Keep in mind different settings should be used in order to fully load Nvidia chips with this test. They were posted earlier in this thread. Also was VSync off?

[HiJon89]

Its funny reading people here are worried about buying a 4890 now because of this stupid little test. Listen this test is not a video game. I have yet to hear a 4890 fails playing video games, i could careless if mine failed that test. So you people who are reconsidering buying a 4890 because of this thread i say just buy it. Seriously, think about stupid this is. I dont think my 4890 has ap roblem tho iv run this occt test for like an hour just once and it never got above the normal temps i get in gaming and i didnt crash either.

The most iv seen this card use was like 54A and that was after playing crysis for like 3 hours straight.

People are always looking for CPU's with the lowest VID, or trying to find a D0 i7 CPU rather than C0. Are these people stupid too? Sure a C0 stepping with a high VID will work fine and never fail in a video game, but people from XS demand more from their hardware.

[cx-ray]

Keep in mind different settings should be used in order to fully load Nvidia chips with this test. They were posted earlier in this thread. Also was VSync off?

Not sure where to find the VSync off or even if it matters as the fps is already higher than the standard 60hz of an LCD. So, it doesn't look like it's sync locked.

New settings I just tried VSync forced of in the Global Settings tab of my driver (didn't see a difference).

13:27 min. with Shader Complexity settings 3, FPS ~83, GPU temps 56C and 53C, current draw still about 30A. Ambient temp ~23.4C.

I tried to search for other settings in this thread. The above was the closest I could find for Nvidia cards. If you know something better let me know and I'll test again.

[skugpezz]

as long as this doesn't happen in games

[XS_Rich]

as long as this doesn't happen in games

Does for me

DoW II - max settings on boss battles = crash

[The Water Dog]

dosent think that have nothing to do with this, that can have many other caouses.

[FlawleZ]

Does for me

DoW II - max settings on boss battles = crash

And what is your proof it has anything to do with too much current draw through the VRMs?