1060 core clock remains unchanged during overclocking attempts.
1060 core clock remains unchanged during overclocking attempts.
Hello, I wasn't sure where else to look for this issue, so I reached out to the experienced members on this forum. Spending hours searching online didn't help. I own an MSI GTX 1060 with 6GB RAM that's factory overclocked, apparently. At normal speeds it runs at 1569MHz and increases to 1873MHz under load. I've tried MSI Afterburner and EVGA Precision XO, but any core offset doesn't affect the base clock. When checking with GPU-Z, the core is listed as overclocked, yet neither overclocking platform shows it. At first I thought this was just a strange bug, but after doing some benchmarks—regardless of how much I adjust the offset—the results stayed the same as stock speed. I'm using Heaven and Cinebench for my testing.
Warhawk327 shared the latest stock frequency data from MSI and evga, along with oc frequencies from heaven and gpu-z. Performance didn’t change regardless of overclock settings, suggesting the reported frequencies are accurate. There’s uncertainty about whether enough overclocking was done to notice a performance boost. He recommends testing with the free 3DMark Fire Strike benchmark, running it without any overclock, recording results, then applying the OC and comparing. He believes the benchmark will clearly indicate if the changes were made.
Hello, I wasn't sure where else to look for this. After spending many hours searching online, I turned to the experienced members of this forum. My attempts with a MSI GTX 1060 6GB that came pre-overclocked didn’t help much. At normal speeds it runs at 1569mhz and jumps to 1873mhz when under load. I tried MSI Afterburner and EVGA Precision XO, but any core offset didn’t affect the base clock. When checking GPU-Z, the core is listed as overclocked, yet neither overclocking platform shows that change. At first I thought it was just a strange issue, but all my bench tests—no matter how much I adjusted the offset—gave the same results as the stock speed. I’m using Heaven and Cinebench for these measurements.
GPU-Z should display the real GPU and memory frequencies. I use OC Guru II; I’m not very familiar with what MSI and EVGA actually show on their displays, but do they just reflect offsets or present actual values? Sometimes Heaven gives incorrect readings, but what does it actually report for GPU/Memory speeds?
Warhawk327 :
I’m looking for advice on this issue and reached out to the forum’s experts. My search on Google didn’t help much. I own an MSI GTX 1060 with 6GB RAM, which is factory overclocked, I think. At normal speeds it runs at 1569MHz, but under load it jumps to 1873MHz. I’ve tried MSI Afterburner and EVGA Precision XO, but any core offset doesn’t affect the base clock. When checking GPU-Z, the core is listed as overclocked, yet neither overclocking platform reflects that change. At first I thought this was just a strange bug, but after doing some benchmarks—using Heaven and Cinebench—I found no difference from stock speed, regardless of offset settings. I’m curious how both tools display actual GPU and memory frequencies. Do they show real values or just offsets? Sometimes HEAVEN gives inaccurate readings, but what’s the truth for these stats?
They both display actual frequency readings on the screen. Heaven will indicate the frequency at the claimed overclock, but the outcomes remain consistent with standard speed, which afterburner and precision confirm is correct. MSI, EVGA, and Heaven display stock frequencies, while GPU-Z shows overclocked values. I’m checking if this matches what you’re seeing. Based on GPU-Z, it seems you are indeed overclocking. I run 3DMark, which gives CPU, Physics, and Combined scores—helping me verify if there’s a real performance improvement. Have you checked if your FPS increased in Heaven during benchmark tests?
burnhamjs :
Warhawk327 :
They both display actual frequency readings on the screen. Heaven claims to show the frequency during overclocking, but the outcomes match the standard speed—what afterburner and precision indicate is the same as before. So MSI, EVGA, and Heaven list stock frequencies, while GPU-Z shows overclocked values? Just confirming my understanding.
I’m guessing from GPU-Z that you’re indeed overclocked. Personally, I run 3DMark which gives CPU, Physics, and Combined scores—helping me verify if there’s a real performance boost. Have you checked if your FPS in Heaven increases during benchmarking?
MSI, EVGA, and Heaven list stock frequencies, but GPU-Z reports overclocked ones. There’s no difference in performance in Heaven or Cinebench regardless of the overclocks set, so it seems MSI and EVGA are accurate about stock speeds since results stay consistent.
Warhawk327 shared the latest stock frequency data from MSI and evga, along with oc frequencies from heaven and gpu-z. Performance didn’t change regardless of overclock settings, suggesting the reported frequencies are accurate. There’s uncertainty about whether enough overclocking was done to notice a performance boost. He recommends testing with the free 3DMark Fire Strike benchmark, running it without any overclock, recording results, then applying the OC and comparing. He believes the benchmark will clearly indicate if the changes were made.
burnhamjs :
Warhawk327 shared that MSI and evga provided stock frequency data, while heaven and gpu-z indicated oc frequencies. Performance didn’t change regardless of overclock settings, suggesting the reports are accurate. I’m uncertain if sufficient overclock was applied to notice a real FPS improvement. Trying to run 3DMark without any overclock and recording results first could help compare. After applying the OC, re-running the benchmark should clarify whether the performance difference exists. It seems the OC is likely active based on GPU-Z showing it. I also noticed 3dmark now displays the overclock boost after the initial idle reading.