Official GTX 680 overclocking Thread!

[xGAM3Rxx]

you have an SC+, so you likely won't be able to apply the offsets ppl with vanillas are, however, you won't need to as your stock clocks already should be higher than vanillas.

Why wouldn't he be able to get higher offsets? I heard sc editions are better overclockers. "binned"

 

[Forceman]

Why wouldn't he be able to get higher offsets? I heard sc editions are better overclockers. "binned"

They aren't. The real high-end custom PCB cards might be, but the vanilla OC cards are nothing special.

 

[xGAM3Rxx]

So does the vanilla and the SC versions of the 680 have the same oc capability?

 

[Forceman]

So does the vanilla and the SC versions of the 680 have the same oc capability?

Yes, normally they do. It is not worth paying extra for a OC/SC card unless they also have a custom cooler or custom PCB.

 

[MissJ84]

So does the vanilla and the SC versions of the 680 have the same oc capability?

My SC+ (now sold) and Signature+ both do 1189 stock boost. In my case the SC+ topped out around 1260, while the Signature+ is stable at 1300. I've seen vanilla cards hit over 1300 and non vanilla cards not even be able to hit 1250, so it's all luck or as I like to call it, the way the cookie crumbles.

 

[xorbe]

My Signature does 1202/1215 stock boost, but it crashes at +38 with a hard system freeze. So the top speed is 1240 on this sample. Definitely luck of the draw.

 

[overlord20]

What is more important for general game performance and what is better for render performance, higher GPU offset or Higher mem offset?

 

[plagas]

What is more important for general game performance and what is better for render performance, higher GPU offset or Higher mem offset?

I would like to know this as well.

 

[xorbe]

What is more important for general game performance and what is better for render performance, higher GPU offset or Higher mem offset?

Discuss chart:

 

[night_2004]

Looks like the stock clocks for the core and memory are somewhat balanced judging from that chart, but it also looks like the memory bus is going to have to be a good OC'er to get the most out of core OC'ing.

 

[xorbe]

Looks like the stock clocks for the core and memory are somewhat balanced judging from that chart, but it also looks like the memory bus is going to have to be a good OC'er to get the most out of core OC'ing.

You sure about that? Because 992/3506 = 1117/2808. IOW, starting from 992/2808, it takes 1 bump of core, or 2 bumps of memory to reach 2030~2035. Looks like these things want more core throughput. The memory scaling for a stock GTX 670 isn't going to help a lot. Of course, this is just one lousy canned benchmark. Who knows!

 

[Forceman]

You sure about that? Because 992/3506 = 1117/2808. IOW, starting from 992/2808, it takes 1 bump of core, or 2 bumps of memory to reach 2030~2035. Looks like these things want more core throughput. The memory scaling for a stock GTX 670 isn't going to help a lot.

Once you get the core raised by one notch, though, it goes back to being one notch for either core or mem to get to the next level of performance. So core limited to start, then balanced?

 

[xorbe]

Once you get the core raised by one notch, though, it goes back to being one notch for either core or mem to get to the next level of performance. So core limited to start, then balanced?

Right, it wants more core MHz to increase in a balanced fashion. But then my card runs out of core MHz headroom before mem Mhz on that diagonal. Where are those 1400 MHz cards?

Hmm, 2560x1600 could totally change that chart ... that benchmarking stuff takes a lot of time.

 

[night_2004]

The resolution and the game could change that chart. That's how it's always going to be since each game is just different. At first glance it looks like you'd want to equally OC both if you can before pushing one higher.

My Signature does 1202/1215 stock boost, but it crashes at +38 with a hard system freeze. So the top speed is 1240 on this sample. Definitely luck of the draw.

Yup. I finally had some time tonight to OC my 680 a little bit. On my eVGA GTX 680 SC can get it as high as 1215MHz core and 3250MHz memory (+50/+150) before any glitches or crashes in Heaven. Add +25 to either, no go. Going to run through 3dMark and eVGA's OC Scanning tools later to confirm +50/+150 is stable. On single monitor I pretty much don't need the OC but maybe that'll change when I get my 3rd 24" monitor in tomorrow. Heat could be an issue for me though since I have a GTX 570 in the 2nd PCIe slot for other reasons -- once I remove that I expect my 680 to run a little cooler.

 

[xGAM3Rxx]

My SC+ (now sold) and Signature+ both do 1189 stock boost. In my case the SC+ topped out around 1260, while the Signature+ is stable at 1300. I've seen vanilla cards hit over 1300 and non vanilla cards not even be able to hit 1250, so it's all luck or as I like to call it, the way the cookie crumbles.

I would be happy with those numbers (1260mhz, you were including the boost right?) just ordered my SC+,I really hope I don't get a dud. idk if you can return if it has sucky overclocks. (evga.com)

 

[night_2004]

Returning a card because of sucky overclocks is like trying to return a lottery ticket after the numbers are pulled and you didn't win the jackpot. You gamble, you lose, you live with it.

 

[gotendbz1]

http://3dmark.com/3dm11/3406142

+225/500
card boost to 1325 , pretty sure i can get litlte higher too. temp stayed at 63 with fan at 75%.

 

[xGAM3Rxx]

Returning a card because of sucky overclocks is like trying to return a lottery ticket after the numbers are pulled and you didn't win the jackpot. You gamble, you lose, you live with it.

OR, sell it on ebay/craigslist

And I was checking out evga's return policy and this is what it says. "Opened items must be in "as-new" condition, in original packaging and with all warranty cards, manuals, and accessories. There may be a 15% restocking fee applied to all opened returns."

So you're wrong sir, i'll win. lol

 

[Forceman]

No one said you couldn't, just that it's a dick move to do so.

 

[MavericK]

I'm a little confused on overclocking mine. Either I'm doing it wrong or this is the (seemingly) shittiest card ever.

Settings: Power target 132%, Core +100, Memory +300

Never crashed before in a game, but I tried doing a Heaven benchmark (1080, 4x AA, 16x AF, max settings) and about halfway through the driver crashed.

Power usage never went above 110%, max core clock was 1197, and memory was something like 3302. Temps got up around 70C (I've seen them up at almost 80C before), fan speed is whatever the default automatic is.

Is that how you guys test for stability? Because if the card can't even do +100 that seems kind of lame.

Should I be doing a custom fan profile? I can't hear it as is and I like it that way, but the default one could be allowing the temps to get higher than it should.

Also, is it worth trying to replace the TIM?

 

[QuiteSufficient]

If that is stock voltage that might be correct. If you read [H]'s review, I believe they were limited to around +100 core as well.

 

[MavericK]

Hmm. It just made me wonder because people keep talking about 1250+ MHz on the core and I am wondering how they're getting that.

In the [H] review it seems they got better results by forcing the voltage up to the max? I haven't tried that yet but I asked the same question earlier and from what it sounded like, it didn't make any difference to do that versus just pushing Power Target to max. But like I said before, power usage never reaches over 110% or so anyway. Even at stock (which was stable but I was still getting 80C load temps) it only went up to about 100% or so.

 

[GoldenTiger]

OC's vary, as always... just got a relatively not-so-great sample it sounds like Maverick . 1200mhz isn't anything to scoff at though ! Most GTX 680's seem limited to around 1170-1220 as the general range with temps in check (once you hit 70c it starts dialing it back, more and more till you hit 80+).

 

[MavericK]

Well like I said, it doesn't even seem totally stable at +100, which is just below 1200.

The fan profile seems pretty lax, so I might make it more aggressive. I can only start hearing the fan at about 60%+ (and even then it's only air movement noise, not fan noise) but even at max load the fan only goes up to about 55%, if that, and 80C. Forcing 65% or so seems to keep it around mid 70s.

I'm just wondering because it will rarely, if ever hit full voltage. I'm wondering if forcing it to max out would make any difference or just waste power consumption.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong, I'm not super unhappy or anything. Just after reading this thread the results seemed...atypical. Then again, most of the people who post their results probably have the better clocking cards, lol.

EDIT2: That downclocking/downvolting at 70C is pretty lame, too. I wish there was a way to disable that because unless I get 70% on the fan it's not gonna stay under 70C at all times. I wonder if that's part of the problem...

 

[MavericK]

Also, will the EVGA high-flow bracket fit on any reference GTX 680? Thinking I might get one of those as well to help out.

 

[Forceman]

I'm just wondering because it will rarely, if ever hit full voltage. I'm wondering if forcing it to max out would make any difference or just waste power consumption.

Adjusting the voltage doesn't actually increase the voltage - it is limited to 1.175 no matter what. Changing that slider only (supposedly) changes the minimum downclocked voltage. Brent said it seemed to help with memory overclocking though.

Also, will the EVGA high-flow bracket fit on any reference GTX 680? Thinking I might get one of those as well to help out.

The high flow brackets should fit any card. It cuts temps about 3C on my 680. Then I butchered the old bracket to make it super-high flow, and that cut another 2C off.

 

[Rattle]

Hmm. It just made me wonder because people keep talking about 1250+ MHz on the core and I am wondering how they're getting that.

In the [H] review it seems they got better results by forcing the voltage up to the max? I haven't tried that yet but I asked the same question earlier and from what it sounded like, it didn't make any difference to do that versus just pushing Power Target to max. But like I said before, power usage never reaches over 110% or so anyway. Even at stock (which was stable but I was still getting 80C load temps) it only went up to about 100% or so.

My card will boost all the way to 1310 if I let it and will complete heaven and my rig abruptly shuts down before the score comes up lol. No arties temps about 65c I guess it's OVP kicking in.

I have played bf3 all night at 1292mhz, voltage does nothing it doesn't work, all I do is keep going up on gpu clock offset till I get that speed in game..my card never sees more than 65c either with fan at 75%

 

[BababooeyHTJ]

Hmm. It just made me wonder because people keep talking about 1250+ MHz on the core and I am wondering how they're getting that.

Luck of the draw. A lot of people don't stress test much either and then brag about their 3d mark 11 stable clocks. Then the people whos cards do clock well seem to brag on the forums more. You aren't going to see me bragging much about my 1215mhz max boost clock.

 

[Rattle]

I'm not bragging just giving info. I have had such shitty luck with my nvidia cards OCability and general issues It's about time i got a good one lol. No fucking coil whine ftw also on this card.

 

[BETA.]

In Alan Wake my 680's run extremely hot - 90 degrees, this is with max settings including AF and AA. Nothing else brings my cards to these temps.

I am starting to notice a trend, but it could just be me... people with high clocks tend to also have low temps which is obvious. What baffles me though is how my cards and some other people's can get so damn hot while the next guy's cards at load is 10 degrees above my idle, it's a huge difference if on stock cooling only 60 load vs 80 etc etc. Is this water cooling or air or what? I haven't read a post where someone has a hot card(s)(like 80+ degrees) with a good OC...

My vanilla 680 hates 1200 Mhz, BUT it only seems to cause driver crashes when it hits the 80's. I have it sitting at 1180... My SC can hit 1250, anything above that it'll crash.

 

[MavericK]

Good to know about the high-flow, I may get one (don't really want to butcher the one I have for warranty purposes). That few C difference could mean the difference between downclocking and not.

@BETA.: Yeah, I'm with you on the temps thing. Some people are saying like 1300 MHz at 65C load and that just seems weird to me. Makes me think they either have super good cooling, an aftermarket design card or something is wrong with the TIM on my card.

 

[SolidBladez]

The high flow brackets should fit any card. It cuts temps about 3C on my 680. Then I butchered the old bracket to make it super-high flow, and that cut another 2C off.

I had taken my I/O plate off completely and it dropped temps ~5°C. Didn't need it anyways since I was using a tech bench.

 

[tangsta]

I just got the gigabyte OC edition of the card and it's amazing. I wonder if I could OC it even further? Haven't felt the need to at all, though.

 

[Rattle]

Good to know about the high-flow, I may get one (don't really want to butcher the one I have for warranty purposes). That few C difference could mean the difference between downclocking and not.

@BETA.: Yeah, I'm with you on the temps thing. Some people are saying like 1300 MHz at 65C load and that just seems weird to me. Makes me think they either have super good cooling, an aftermarket design card or something is wrong with the TIM on my card.

LOL none of the above dude, reference design i just use the fan curve to keep it cool.
Lucky card is all, very lucky. Would like to see if the high flow bracket did me any good but not about to spend $10 on one + shipping. I may just remove the stock one completely when I decide to apply some mx2 on it.

 

[Hornet]

A good chip can certainly overclock to 1.3GHz. With the reference design, its all down to luck.

Anyway, just to share the overclocking result for a non-reference board, Asus DirectCU 2 TOP version in my case:

For some reason my card's max boost speed is about 24MHz above its rated boost speed, one of the lowest I've seen. So I had to crank the base clock speed up to 1207MHz just to achieve that max boost speed. So far so good. Been playing Battlefield 3 and Skyrim for the past few days without a single problem.

Note: The temperature in that screenshot is not relevant, maximum temp I've seen is 73c

 

[Lord_Exodia]

Strange, yesterday I could barely push my ram and today I can't seem to be able to put them high enough. I'm gonna be careful about the ECC aspect, What is the best program to check for stability on ram and gpu?

Seems different programs are recommended for each different type of oc

Currently I'm testing with EVGA OC tool or whatever it's called which basically runs a furmark benchmark or stress test

Once card is at an amazing 1332 on the core and the other is around 1232 only I'm still tweaking now though. These cards are reference cards with a custom fan curve at 132 Power. High flow brackets are on the way.

 

[Forceman]

I don't think that EVGA OC Tool does much. I was passing that all day long, but would get artifacting almost immediately in Heaven. I just started running Heaven to check for stability, and then follwed it up with BF3, which really taxed the card.

I don't know if the beta driver is better, but with 301.1 I found that after it crashed once (from too high an overclock) it would then crash again even with much lower clocks until you rebooted. So I'd reboot after every crash.

1332 is pretty amazing for a 680 - I'd say 1232 is about par for the course.

 

[Lord_Exodia]

I don't think that EVGA OC Tool does much. I was passing that all day long, but would get artifacting almost immediately in Heaven. I just started running Heaven to check for stability, and then follwed it up with BF3, which really taxed the card.

I don't know if the beta driver is better, but with 301.1 I found that after it crashed once (from too high an overclock) it would then crash again even with much lower clocks until you rebooted. So I'd reboot after every crash.

1332 is pretty amazing for a 680 - I'd say 1232 is about par for the course.

Thanks, I'll download heaven, Any recommended settings? Also I've heard heaven isn't that stressful on Vram. I have BF3 installed so I can test with that. Anything specifically recommended for vram stess testing?

 

[MavericK]

I tried using OC Scanner X (the EVGA tool you are referring to) and it (the program, not drivers) crashes immediately when I start the test up. Some sort of bug there or something, the card doesn't even get going.

 

[Forceman]

Thanks, I'll download heaven, Any recommended settings? Also I've heard heaven isn't that stressful on Vram. I have BF3 installed so I can test with that. Anything specifically recommended for vram stess testing?

Whatever your native resolution is, then max out the settings - 8x MSAA, Extreme Tesselation, highest aniso, etc. Should stress the card pretty good. Not sure about testing the VRAM - BF3 is good, but that takes time. Not sure if something like OCCT will test VRAM or not.