x1900xt overclocking questions

M

Majestic12

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
95
Hi there, I recently got a new MSI x1900 XT graphics card. I run with 1 GB of ram, and an Athlon 64 3000+ at 2538 mhz with the stock cooler.

I have 2 80 mm case fans in the back, along with one on the side of my case.

I first ran up the card and some atitool 3dcube and found that my temperatures were quite high up to or over 84 C. I couldn't really overclock the card at all. Replaced the stock thermal junk with some AS5, and now my temps cap out at 78 C or so looping rthdribl. I was able to overclock to 658/769 currently.

I max the fan at 80% because its too loud otherwise.

I have 1.1 ns ram on my XT but I am getting poor memory speeds. One thing I found was that with a 500 mhz core, I was able to overclock the memory to 801 mhz at temps of 69 C. However, as I approached 650 core, the temps would go up and I'd get checkerboarding unless I lowered memory clocks. My guess is this is heat related? And why does this 900 mhz rated ram do so poorly when my old 6800 GT ram could do well over the rated spec?

I've also tried playing around with the voltages. Currently I use 1.425 Vcore which I have read is the highest I should go on the stock cooler. I find that bumping core up to 661 causes it to stall; should I increase the Vcore to 1.45 and try again or leave it as is?

Also with the memory: I increased the VDCCI to the max 1.58 V, and this really helped and allowed me to clock up to 801 mhz. But I found that changing the memory voltage didn't help at all and infact I could lower it and still be stable.

What should be the next step I should do? I'm trying to get the most out of the card and hopefully reach something closer to the 675/800 most others seem to be getting.

I am getting 10600 3dmark05 at the moment.
 
XTs are Xts for a reason bro. they don't oc well. you will find it plenty beefy at stock. for better cooling and maybe more headroom with the OC you MUST get an aftermarket cooler.
 
I think these are limited by the memory controller rather than the ram itself (since it is rated higher than you can hit) I think the vddci actually affects your mem controller voltage. My x1900 behaves similarly.
 
You're likely well aware, but you shouldn't ever go into a purchase with expectations of overclocks. There will be instances where you can clock faster than anyone has ever before, and there will be instances where there is absolutely no headroom beyond the stock settings.

I think kermist is half-right. I believe the limiting factor of memory overclocks on the X1900s are 1) voltage and 2) heat. The X1900 recieves power via a sort of pool, and it must distribute power adequately among all components within specification. Increasing the core clock will result in the possibility of less stable power for VRAM and other components, which will lead to stability issues.
 
phide said:
You're likely well aware, but you shouldn't ever go into a purchase with expectations of overclocks. There will be instances where you can clock faster than anyone has ever before, and there will be instances where there is absolutely no headroom beyond the stock settings.

I think kermist is half-right. I believe the limiting factor of memory overclocks on the X1900s are 1) voltage and 2) heat. The X1900 recieves power via a sort of pool, and it must distribute power adequately among all components within specification. Increasing the core clock will result in the possibility of less stable power for VRAM and other components, which will lead to stability issues.
Click to expand...
Hmm, I've been playing around with it.

The core wouldn't budge to 661 no matter what I did. But I was able to cut the core voltage to 1.35 and remain stable.

I kept undervolting the memory further, and it worked fine up to 1.95 V, a rather large drop from 2.08 V. Set VDCCI at 1.55 and I was able to clock the memory up to 797.

And on top of all this I cut the max fan speed. So maybe you are right.
 
My X1800XT wouldnt overclock much at all until I blew cold air onto the Voltage Regulator heatsink, it was getting really hot!
I put an 80mm fan inside the case blowing onto the end of the card.
Now it clocks to 700 core with 70% fan and the memory is cooler too (gets to 800MHz) :)
 
You need better cooling.
Or you could try putting your entire computer in vegetable oil.
 
rofl

Rather than submerging the whole PC in oil, squirt oil at high speed onto things that need cooling with an oil bath at the bottom to drip into.
It could look way impressive :D
 
Is there a way to find out if you have 1.1 ns memory without removing the cooler ? I have an Asus EAX1900 Crossfire and I would like to know if I can push the memory a little higher. I wouldn't touch the core as it already is too hot for my liking anyway.
 
Chernobyl1 said:
My X1800XT wouldnt overclock much at all until I blew cold air onto the Voltage Regulator heatsink, it was getting really hot!
I put an 80mm fan inside the case blowing onto the end of the card.
Now it clocks to 700 core with 70% fan and the memory is cooler too (gets to 800MHz) :)
Click to expand...
Hmm, interesting. For me the voltage regulators get hotter than the gpu itself, I'll try to sandwich a fan between my 2 hard drives.
 
uniwarp said:
Is there a way to find out if you have 1.1 ns memory without removing the cooler ? I have an Asus EAX1900 Crossfire and I would like to know if I can push the memory a little higher. I wouldn't touch the core as it already is too hot for my liking anyway.
Click to expand...
You should remove it and put some AS5 on it anyway. That thermal paste is junk.
 
agreed.
I got a few degrees C drop in core temp by using Arctic Ceramique on the core.
I couldnt do the same for the memory or the Voltage regs as they are using pads to bridge the air gaps.
 
My XT core would not budge above 660 without 1.495 volts, which I did not like doing even though cooling in my case seems like it can handle it. But my Ram can do about 820 with a 650 core. Heat really isn't a problem with the HIS cooler.

I have stayed at 650/801 because that is what most of my bench marking and stablility testing was at. My vcore volts are at 1.425 because that is what the guide I used said was stock 3D volts, I never tested going lower.
 
Majestic12 said:
You should remove it and put some AS5 on it anyway. That thermal paste is junk.
Click to expand...

Am I better off using an aftermarket cooler ? I am asking because a friend of mine who has bought vf900 wasn't overly impressed with the performance of the cooler and I can'T think of anything else that will perform better and justify using aftermarket cooling. I mean, I can buy a cooler thats no problem but I just don't want to buy something that won't make any significant improvement in cooling. It might be a waste of my time, money and effort. thx for the tips.
 
I have read that your case airflow needs to be really good for the vf900 to be really effective, otherwise some have reported no better temps than stock. The Accelero X2 seems more popular for X1900 cards..
 
uniwarp said:
Am I better off using an aftermarket cooler ? I am asking because a friend of mine who has bought vf900 wasn't overly impressed with the performance of the cooler and I can'T think of anything else that will perform better and justify using aftermarket cooling. I mean, I can buy a cooler thats no problem but I just don't want to buy something that won't make any significant improvement in cooling. It might be a waste of my time, money and effort. thx for the tips.
Click to expand...
You'll certainly be better off, the question is to whether it's worth it. The primary benefit of aftermarket cooling on this card seems to be noise moreso than temps.

I see no reason not to push that core to at least 650; XTX cards manage to do that with the same cooler, and if my dud core can reach that, I bet most can.

I paid $280 for the card; personally, I don't see a reason to dump $40 on a cooler. Check
this
 
simply wow !!! I couldn't have imagined with such a huge design, the stock cooler would trail as such...
 
Chernobyl1 said:
I couldnt do the same for the memory or the Voltage regs as they are using pads to bridge the air gaps.
Click to expand...
Excessively thick, useless looking pads. In my opinion, ATi did a horrendous job on designing the X1800/X1900 cooler.
 
phide said:
Excessively thick, useless looking pads. In my opinion, ATi did a horrendous job on designing the X1800/X1900 cooler.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why they didn't release something like the x1950 cooler to begin with...the stock cooling is adequate but not at the level of the competitive 7900gtx cooler...

Then again, ever since the 9700 pro they were rather flimsy with the cooling...If only they retained the 9700 ideal of not releasing a dozen skus per card.
 
Majestic12 said:
You should remove it and put some AS5 on it anyway. That thermal paste is junk.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I might want to do that. Right now my gpu peaks at 83-84C when scanning for artifacts, and run 81-82 when playing Oblivion or Call of Duty 2 (the most torturous of my dx9 games). I can OC to XTX speeds with no issues really, it doesn't even get hotter. But if I could cut 3-5c off just by applying better thermal paste, I might do that.

I think I got a fresh tube of AS5 in the fridge, it might still be good even if its 6 months old. Tell me, how complicated is it to remove the stock cooler from the X1900XT, and more importantly, how difficult is it to settle it back again?

I'd rather not try 3rd party cooling. So far Ive only heard about the Accelero X2 that blows all air onto the mobo, which is a bad bad solution. Then there is the zalman, but it doesn't cool the ram? No good either.

I don't understand why they didn't release something like the x1950 cooler to begin with...the stock cooling is adequate but not at the level of the competitive 7900gtx cooler...

Then again, ever since the 9700 pro they were rather flimsy with the cooling...If only they retained the 9700 ideal of not releasing a dozen skus per card.
Click to expand...

Or rather, why did Arctic cooling come up with that retarded Accelero X2 design, and not make something like for the HIS? It makes no sense. Swiss fools.
 
Immacolata said:
Hmm, I might want to do that. Right now my gpu peaks at 83-84C when scanning for artifacts, and run 81-82 when playing Oblivion or Call of Duty 2 (the most torturous of my dx9 games). I can OC to XTX speeds with no issues really, it doesn't even get hotter. But if I could cut 3-5c off just by applying better thermal paste, I might do that.

I think I got a fresh tube of AS5 in the fridge, it might still be good even if its 6 months old. Tell me, how complicated is it to remove the stock cooler from the X1900XT, and more importantly, how difficult is it to settle it back again?

I'd rather not try 3rd party cooling. So far Ive only heard about the Accelero X2 that blows all air onto the mobo, which is a bad bad solution. Then there is the zalman, but it doesn't cool the ram? No good either.

Or rather, why did Arctic cooling come up with that retarded Accelero X2 design, and not make something like for the HIS? It makes no sense. Swiss fools.
Click to expand...

Very easy to apply the AS5. Just need a small philips screwdriver; unscrew the heatsink, wipe it down with alcohol cleanly, then apply right on the center. When screwing it back on I believe you should put the 4 middle screws in first to secure the retention bracket, then the outside ones. It does take some time to cure though, after which you get nice temps.

HIS is a nice cooler, but they charge too large a price premium. 650 core gives solid performance anyway.
 
Majestic12 said:
Very easy to apply the AS5. Just need a small philips screwdriver; unscrew the heatsink, wipe it down with alcohol cleanly, then apply right on the center. When screwing it back on I believe you should put the 4 middle screws in first to secure the retention bracket, then the outside ones. It does take some time to cure though, after which you get nice temps.

HIS is a nice cooler, but they charge too large a price premium. 650 core gives solid performance anyway.
Click to expand...

Do I need to apply HS5 on the GPU only, or should I put some on the RAM chips as well? I haven't removed the heatsink yet, I need to buy a new bottle of cleaning alcohol at the drug store. But as I understand from review of the Zalman, there are RAM chips too surrounding the GPU. I assume they have some sort of contact with the heatsink as well?

Yeah, the HIS is too expensive. I wonder if their heatsink is designed by Arctic Cooling, and why the hell AC decided to go with the crappy Accelero design for the XT1xxx family of cards.

At 650 core 750 mem I can play Oblivion at 1024x768 with HDR + 4AA / 4HQAF and get framerates above 30 most of the time, if not in the 40s. So I am satisfied with that overclock.
 
phide said:
You're likely well aware, but you shouldn't ever go into a purchase with expectations of overclocks. There will be instances where you can clock faster than anyone has ever before, and there will be instances where there is absolutely no headroom beyond the stock settings.
Click to expand...

Has to do with wafer yields. The cream of the crop is the middle chips. Those have least errors and the largest tolerances. The further out to the circumference, the more errors or less tolerance the chips have. Sometimes when they grade chips, when yields are mature and good, some of the outer chips are binned at a lower speed than they can handle. This is done because even if they could get half a wafers worth of XTX chips, they couldn't sell that many. So they flog some of them off as "lesser versions". If you went and bought a XT card today that was made with chips from the same wafer as an X1950XTX, you could probably get away with overclocking it a lot more than the first wave of X1900XTs
 
Immacolata said:
Do I need to apply HS5 on the GPU only, or should I put some on the RAM chips as well? I haven't removed the heatsink yet, I need to buy a new bottle of cleaning alcohol at the drug store. But as I understand from review of the Zalman, there are RAM chips too surrounding the GPU. I assume they have some sort of contact with the heatsink as well?

Yeah, the HIS is too expensive. I wonder if their heatsink is designed by Arctic Cooling, and why the hell AC decided to go with the crappy Accelero design for the XT1xxx family of cards.

At 650 core 750 mem I can play Oblivion at 1024x768 with HDR + 4AA / 4HQAF and get framerates above 30 most of the time, if not in the 40s. So I am satisfied with that overclock.
Click to expand...
Just on the cpu core, the Ram chips are cooled by these little sticky pads that help contact with the heatsink.
 
Immacolata said:
Has to do with wafer yields....
Click to expand...
You're abso-right, but I'd like to think that things tend to be more complex. When overclocking, you're not just tinkering with GPU clock speeds. The GPU "stands" on a complex subsystem of various components, and these all have their potential limitations. In an ideal world, all components attached to the PCB are cherry-picked components. In the real world, however, this obviously isn't the case, and most components aren't subjected to any sort of stringent testing gamut. It would be Real Neat if ATi and nVidia cooked up some special "ultra-bin" cards, with everything on the card being the cream of the crop, but I doubt there's much of a market there.

For the most part, the GPU itself is the most crucial portion of the maximum overclock, but the best binned chip can still be limited by other poor quality components. I suppose there's always a chance of entire wafers being barely usable. TSMC (or whoever the fab is) may bin it at XT-facto, but it might not end up budging a mere 1% over spec. Now there's a question - who's actually doing the binning? The fab or ATi?

In my fairly uneducated opinion, I think the X1900 VREGs may be the major inhibitor in general overclocking potential. Keep them in the ideal temperature range, and they'll reward the GPU and memory with clean, stable power, and that's really all GPUs care about in the end.
 
Majestic12 said:
Just on the cpu core, the Ram chips are cooled by these little sticky pads that help contact with the heatsink.
Click to expand...

Thermalpads aye, they are supposedly shite as well. But do they need replacing after you do the thermal pasting on the core? I am considering doing a lapjob on the copper heatsink to get that core cooled proper. I just worry that the thermalpads are useless once they have been removed.
 
Majestic12 said:
You'll certainly be better off, the question is to whether it's worth it. The primary benefit of aftermarket cooling on this card seems to be noise moreso than temps.

I see no reason not to push that core to at least 650; XTX cards manage to do that with the same cooler, and if my dud core can reach that, I bet most can.

I paid $280 for the card; personally, I don't see a reason to dump $40 on a cooler. Check
this
Click to expand...

Are you fisting me?
On my X800XT it hit way over 70 degrees on load. After I incorrectly applied too much AS5, the card STILL wouldn't go beyond 58 degrees load after I put on a (now obsolete) Zalman 700. I couldn't imagine what a properly installed, lapped Zalman 700 would do for me.
 
Immacolata said:
Thermalpads aye, they are supposedly shite as well. But do they need replacing after you do the thermal pasting on the core? I am considering doing a lapjob on the copper heatsink to get that core cooled proper. I just worry that the thermalpads are useless once they have been removed.
Click to expand...
I don't think so; at least I just left them there.

I don't think theyre useful at all though...memory should have its own heatsink, or the way I see it you're just redistributing GPU heat over to the memory.
 
That is definitely not the case. The pads might not be as efficient as dedicated metal heatsinks, but they do help dissipate more heat than just air. and there isn't room for sinks beneath the cooler anyway. I also doubt that the heat from the gpu transfers via the copper sink to the aluminump late and then into the pads.
 
Thermal pads are pretty awful anyway, and the ones ATi uses on the stock cooler are incredibly thick due to the gap between the chips and the underside of the heatsink. The thermal conductivity is going to be pretty low. Without a side fan, warm air also gets trapped in this gap which equates to higher temps overall. Heat from the GPU is transferred to the PCB, which means the hotter your core runs the warmer the vreg's and memory chips will be. With the stock cooling solution, my XT was a raging heatspot in the case - sure, it managed to run stock speeds without creating too much racket, but overclocking was very limited.
The ICEQ3 cooler is far superior, but I'm glad I run a watercooled rig and had a Maze4 lying around! Sapphire had the right idea with their Toxic model, but ultimately it's a long way off the performance of 'proper' watercooling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top