• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

g80 A3?

S

SuperKeijo

Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
705
I just got my 8800 GTS 640MB back from rma and noticed that the core is now an A3 version. Previous card was an A2. What has changed from A2 to A3? This new card is one hell of an overclocker, I ran 3dmark06 at 648/1674/999 clocks and with a lowsy e4300 running at 3GHz this is what I got with 158.22 drivers:

g80.JPG


I did have to drop the shaders to 1620 to get atitool artifact free. Still over 11k though.
Is A3 a better overclocker?
 
geez, my gtx only just manages that. whats the rest of your system?
 
My system is:

e4300 @ 3024MHz (8 x 378)
Gigabyte DS3 mobo
2 x 1GB cheapo 667MHz memory at 5-5-5-15 timings and 756MHz
Inno3d 8800 GTS 640MB

I guess that was all the important stuff...
 
The 3DMark result window covered up the "Resolution" field (and others). These days, with widescreen monitors and other special screen resolutions, it is very difficult to tell how good (or bad) of performance this is. I suspect that you were running 1280x1024 (the 4:3 default) but I hesitate any comparisons without this data. What was your screen resolution, bit depth, filtering, etc that you were using?
 
Kango said:
The 3DMark result window covered up the "Resolution" field (and others). These days, with widescreen monitors and other special screen resolutions, it is very difficult to tell how good (or bad) of performance this is. I suspect that you were running 1280x1024 (the 4:3 default) but I hesitate any comparisons without this data. What was your screen resolution, bit depth, filtering, etc that you were using?
Click to expand...

Everything was default, didn't touch any settings..
 
sorry but i dont believe you could beat my sig system?
everything is faster in it...
 
Teknokid said:
sorry but i dont believe you could beat my sig system?
everything is faster in it...
Click to expand...

What windows are you running? what drivers? I'm running xp. Your gtx is almost at stock clocks? a GTS running at the clocks I benched it with doesn't fall behind a gtx more than a few percent in mem mandwidth and shader power atleast. With the previous gts card I had it only clocked to about 621/1512/866 and I managed 10400-10500 with it. I can do another bench where I have everything open..

besides for a system like yours, am I wrong in thinking it should manage more like 12000-12500?
 
well my ram is a lot faster i have raid HDD, faster CPU, i dont believe you can make up the difference between the 2 gfx cards with an overclock.
what res is your monitor?
 
Teknokid said:
well my ram is a lot faster i have raid HDD, faster CPU, i dont believe you can make up the difference between the 2 gfx cards with an overclock.
what res is your monitor?
Click to expand...

Monitor is 2560 x 1600. I'll do another bench for you and leave cpuz and all open so you can see I'm not lying. I'll be back in 10 minutes..

Ok, here goes. I even have the shaders at lower speeds (from 1674 to 1620). 3dmark reports cpu at 3,4ghz because I have lowered the multiplier from 9 to 8, and 3dmark still thinks its 9 x 378. Cpu-z tells the truth.

g802.JPG
 
Teknokid said:
well my ram is a lot faster i have raid HDD, faster CPU, i dont believe you can make up the difference between the 2 gfx cards with an overclock.
what res is your monitor?
Click to expand...

LOL..someone is getting a little squirmy...:p
 
how the hell does that work?
sorry for doubting you but i spent an extra 1/3 on my card, and yours has just owned it :(
 
Wow, An A3 core. I was wondering when these would start showing up. The A3 core is actually the revised A2 which is used on the Ultra cards. It overclocks very well because of this. The core is tweaked and yields have gotten better.
 
lol good for you. I remember having the fastest 6600GT ever and it beat some higher end cards too. No way it should have but it did. some people just get lucky. try other benchmarks though just to check.
 
oh and so now the GTS has gotten faster does that mean the GTX is faster now too? poor ATI lol.
 
Is there anything in the serial code that would tell you that the core is an AC3 revision? I'm going to buy one within the next three weeks and I have enough extra power to CPU bottleneck my games. :)
 
so, the gtx's should clock higher?
i might buy an evga gtx, swap the cooler with my palit gtx, rma it, so then i have 2 A3 cores?
reckon that would work?
cheers.
 
This A3 core is really amazing! I mean with the fan @ 100% I had no problems running 3dmark at 675/1674/1053 speeds. With cpu @ 3,33GHz check this out!

g803.JPG


No tweaks and just plain air cooling! I'm sure I could hit 12k with a little more effort.
 
im on the hunt for an A3 core based GTX as well but without pulling off the cooler there is no way to know. I assume you pulled off the cooler and verified the core is in fact an A3?
 
Rivatuner reads A3. I didn't pull of the cooler to verify, but I've tried a few (4) 8800 GTSs in the past and for all of them rivatuner said A2, even when flashed with the newest bios. And none of them were able to reach 675MHz on the core when fan was at 100%. So until someone proves me wrong I'll assume it is really an A3 :D.
 
thats wicked! im gna re-bench myn :)
hopefully my nxt will be A3, i presume all the ones in production are?
 
You know what? Mine's also an A3 core, maybe that's why I'm doing 700/1000 without any volt-mods and just air cooling .
 
what are the stocks? im not familiar with gts's. so what sort of improvements/best clock are you getting?
3d mark goingnow :)
 
Stock for gts is 513/1188/792 (core/shader/mem)

So 648/1620/999 is

-26,3% improvement on core
-36,4% improvement on shaders
-26,1% improvement on memory bandwidth.

These kind of numbers actually make a difference in gameplay. I tried out a few games and got ~25-30% improvements in fps at high resolutions. I'm glad my previous GTS broke down, LOL.
 
geez, i wna A3 core gtx. ill swap an evga cooler onto myn and see if i can rma? hehe
 
You might buy one off the egg. I remember when the C2Ds came out they were jsut about the only one who had the B2 stepping ones that overclocked even more well. If that holds true, they might have this latest revision as the normal cards. I guess I'll hold off buying until next week and let the older ones get bought up.
 
hmm... mine says A3 in rivatuner as well. got it from the buy.com $295 deal. looks like that deal just got even sweeter :p. mines running 621/1458/1008 @ stock fan speeds.
 
Teknokid said:
geez, my gtx only just manages that. whats the rest of your system?
Click to expand...

Teknokid, there must be something wrong with your setup. As superkeijo already posted, you should be getting 12,000~12,500 with that rig. 11k in 3DMk06 is not that unusual for an overclocked GTS + C2D, even with A2 revision cores. This performance is not reflected in games however.

I get 12,200 with my GTX @ 630/1000 and E6600 @ 3.2Ghz
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1704914
 
Ok Teknokid, lets start from the top and work our way down the standard checklist:

- Are you running 3DMark at default settings?
- What drivers are you using (version number)?
- What programs are you running in the background?
- What other hardware do you have attached to the PC? (PCI cards, webcams, mice, printers, etc)
- Is your card overheating and throttling?
- Is your video card overclock stable (check with ATiTool)?
- Is your CPU overclock stable? What about system RAM?
 
DerComissar said:
SuperKeijo:
Great score!
You just blew past my 3D06 score of 11,500.
Unfortunately, I have an A2 core, maybe I will try to bump it up when I get my Thermalright HR-03 Plus:cool:
Http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2029807
Click to expand...

You have core and memory running at or very close to what I am using. Yet your sm 2 and sm3 scores are somewhat lower. The key here is shaderclocking. Flash the bios with 1620 or 1674 shaders and up go the game scores :) I think you'll get past 12k with that cpu score!
 
Teknokid said:
sorry but i dont believe you could beat my sig system?
everything is faster in it...
Click to expand...

I have a Core 2 Duo E6300, 8800GTS 640mb, and 2GB of DDR2-800 RAM, and I beat his score by 700 points.

I have no idea what revision of the core I have, but my 8800 GTS is sitting at 684/1620/1044 right now. :)
 
ShiningHolden said:
I have a Core 2 Duo E6300, 8800GTS 640mb, and 2GB of DDR2-800 RAM, and I beat his score by 700 points.

I have no idea what revision of the core I have, but my 8800 GTS is sitting at 684/1620/1044 right now. :)
Click to expand...

How long can you run atitool artifact scanner with those clocks? :eek:
 
SuperKeijo said:
How long can you run atitool artifact scanner with those clocks? :eek:
Click to expand...

I think we had this conversation before.
hahaha.
It is 8 hours stable, but that is my old motherboard.

I just got a new motherboard today, P35-DQ6, so I will have to re-test it. But it is DEFINTLEY 3DMark06, web-browsing, and atleast 2 hours RTHDRIBL + Artifact scanning stable. :)
 
ShiningHolden said:
I think we had this conversation before.
hahaha.
It is 8 hours stable, but that is my old motherboard.

I just got a new motherboard today, P35-DQ6, so I will have to re-test it. But it is DEFINTLEY 3DMark06, web-browsing, and atleast 2 hours RTHDRIBL + Artifact scanning stable. :)
Click to expand...

Oh, ok. Very nice overclock indeed.
 
SuperKeijo said:
You have core and memory running at or very close to what I am using. Yet your sm 2 and sm3 scores are somewhat lower. The key here is shaderclocking. Flash the bios with 1620 or 1674 shaders and up go the game scores :) I think you'll get past 12k with that cpu score!
Click to expand...
Thanks for the advice:)
As soon as I get my HR-03 Plus from Xoxide (shipped, on it's way) installed on the card, I am going to do some more testing. Then it's time to fire up Nibitor and do some bios editing:D
 
How did you clock up the shaders? Or did they scale automatically as you moved the core up?

I never oc'd my GTX yet .. I figured stock speeds are already fast enough.

Although your score is very impressive, when I had a E6300 @ 3.06 GHz with 2GB RAM I only got a little over 10k in 3D06.
 
chanchan said:
How did you clock up the shaders? Or did they scale automatically as you moved the core up?

I never oc'd my GTX yet .. I figured stock speeds are already fast enough.

Although your score is very impressive, when I had a E6300 @ 3.06 GHz with 2GB RAM I only got a little over 10k in 3D06.
Click to expand...

Yes the core and shaders both move together. If you make a custom bios, you can get them to different values afaik. Eg 513 / 1188 (core/shader), but can flash it to something like 513 / 1200.

Thus if one is limited you can up the other and get a bit more performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top