Video card overclocking

WA Jack Bauer · 8th July 2012, 8:42 PM

I'm overclocking my video card to get the best performance I can from it since I won't be upgrading for a while.

Does it at all make sense for the framerate to be worse when you overclock your memory? I was using Furmark 1.9.2 with no overclocking and the framerate was like 10 or something, then only overclocked the memory clock and the framerate was like 8.

Could this be a result of overclocking too much (seeing as my video card already is overclocked, Gigabyte super overclock GTX 580) or this perhaps a problem with Furmark?

Also, is it even worth overclocking memory? I read somewhere that it isn't.

Rory K · 8th July 2012, 8:57 PM

I'd say possibly a result of instability. I don't think memory OC will get you much anyway, you'll get the most improvement from core clock increases.

kazen · 9th July 2012, 12:44 AM

Coreclock is the important part. but furmark is a terrible measure of gaming performance. furmark is a heat generator, nothing more. 3dmark is a great test of stability, as is just gaming for a few hours.

WA Jack Bauer · 11th July 2012, 9:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rory K

I'd say possibly a result of instability. I don't think memory OC will get you much anyway, you'll get the most improvement from core clock increases.

It should still be worth it right? By default it's 2050, I can get it up to 2300 without artifacting. Maybe the lower framerate with higher memory clock was just a one off thing, will do more testing.

zero_velocity · 11th July 2012, 9:32 PM

I find furmark great for stress testing, but if I want to record some scores I would definitely trust 3dmark11 over that

kilebantick · 11th July 2012, 10:15 PM

Just had this issue with my girlfriends GTX580 10 minutes ago. Try this:
In Afterburner, force the Core-Clock to 700Mhz, then run Afterburner. I'm going to giggle if you get the 30FPS boost that my girlfriends card did.
Give it a shot _b

Frontl1ne · 11th July 2012, 10:36 PM

From what I remember, unstable memory OC has more chance of causing permanent damage than core.

C-BuZz · 11th July 2012, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frontl1ne

From what I remember, unstable memory OC has more chance of causing permanent damage than core.

Dunno about that man. Fairly equal IMO

WA Jack Bauer · 13th July 2012, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kilebantick

Just had this issue with my girlfriends GTX580 10 minutes ago. Try this:
In Afterburner, force the Core-Clock to 700Mhz, then run Afterburner. I'm going to giggle if you get the 30FPS boost that my girlfriends card did.
Give it a shot _b

I did it yesterday and I got a higher framerate when I reduced the core clock to 700MHz, I did it this morning and I got a worse framerate with 700MHz. My video card/computer is either constantly unstable, or Furmark is a really bad program to test framerates.

I have a 700 watt power supply, that should be enough for a GTX 580 no? It says on the back of the box that minimum requirements are 750 but I've been told by people that it's bs.

ShadowBurger · 13th July 2012, 3:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WA Jack Bauer

I did it yesterday and I got a higher framerate when I reduced the core clock to 700MHz, I did it this morning and I got a worse framerate with 700MHz. My video card/computer is either constantly unstable, or Furmark is a really bad program to test framerates.

I have a 700 watt power supply, that should be enough for a GTX 580 no? It says on the back of the box that minimum requirements are 750 but I've been told by people that it's bs.

It's really frustrating when people ask for help but don't listen. Furmark isn't for testing framerates its for maxxing out your card in order to generate the most heat possible to test the capacity of your cooler. I have found while using it the framerate varies for no apparent reason. Stop using it as a benchmark. Also drop the comic sans

Re-read:

Quote:

zero_velocity I find furmark great for stress testing, but if I want to record some scores I would definitely trust 3dmark11 over that

kazen Coreclock is the important part. but furmark is a terrible measure of gaming performance. furmark is a heat generator, nothing more. 3dmark is a great test of stability, as is just gaming for a few hours.

EDIT: A bad or inadequate PSU won't inhibit FPS unless the GPU realises and goes into limp mode, but then it would be reeeally low fps. So you're right there. But if it starts crashing at stock speeds try a new PSU first

power · 13th July 2012, 3:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frontl1ne

From what I remember, unstable memory OC has more chance of causing permanent damage than core.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WA Jack Bauer

I did it yesterday and I got a higher framerate when I reduced the core clock to 700MHz, I did it this morning and I got a worse framerate with 700MHz. My video card/computer is either constantly unstable, or Furmark is a really bad program to test framerates.

I have a 700 watt power supply, that should be enough for a GTX 580 no? It says on the back of the box that minimum requirements are 750 but I've been told by people that it's bs.

wtf is going on in this thread!!

D_W_Y · 13th July 2012, 3:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by power

wtf is going on in this thread!!

what do you mean?

C-BuZz · 13th July 2012, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by power

wtf is going on in this thread!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by D_W_Y

what do you mean?

__________________

Carcin0Genic · 13th July 2012, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C-BuZz

image

__________________

Where did you get that font? Its pure awesome.

C-BuZz · 13th July 2012, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carcin0Genic

Where did you get that font? Its pure awesome.

http://www.dafont.com/theme.php?cat=606

Just picked a random one

8th July 2012, 8:42 PM	#1
WA Jack Bauer Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Western Australia, Perth Posts: 13	Video card overclocking I'm overclocking my video card to get the best performance I can from it since I won't be upgrading for a while. Does it at all make sense for the framerate to be worse when you overclock your memory? I was using Furmark 1.9.2 with no overclocking and the framerate was like 10 or something, then only overclocked the memory clock and the framerate was like 8. Could this be a result of overclocking too much (seeing as my video card already is overclocked, Gigabyte super overclock GTX 580) or this perhaps a problem with Furmark? Also, is it even worth overclocking memory? I read somewhere that it isn't.

8th July 2012, 8:57 PM	#2
Rory K Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Melbourne, 3145 Posts: 2,039	I'd say possibly a result of instability. I don't think memory OC will get you much anyway, you'll get the most improvement from core clock increases. __________________ ~~Project: Eternity, modded and liquified TJ08-E~~ ON HOLD \| i5 3570K \| HD7850 \| 8GB 1600CL8 \| Z77 Extreme4-M \| TJ08-E \| 128GB Samsung 830 \| 240GB SanDisk Extreme \| 850W Strider Plus \| Xonar Essence STX \| U2711 \|

11th July 2012, 10:36 PM	#7
Frontl1ne Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Perth Posts: 3,478	From what I remember, unstable memory OC has more chance of causing permanent damage than core. __________________ Phenom II X6 1100T :: GA-790FXTA-UD5 :: G.Skill 8GB DDR3 NZXT Phantom 820 :: XFX HD7950 :: Crucial m4 128GB :: Corsair AX860i

9th July 2012, 12:44 AM	#3
kazen (Banned or Deleted) Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: 3147 Posts: 751	Coreclock is the important part. but furmark is a terrible measure of gaming performance. furmark is a heat generator, nothing more. 3dmark is a great test of stability, as is just gaming for a few hours.