Does the memory/core clock excessively impact the GPU's lifespan, or are temperature and overvoltage the main factors?
Does the memory/core clock excessively impact the GPU's lifespan, or are temperature and overvoltage the main factors?
The title clearly explains the situation and the user's concerns about memory overclocking.
JordanMihailov shared his thoughts on extending hardware performance. He mentioned that increasing voltage shortens its lifespan, but since he won’t be using it for more than five years, the issue is likely elsewhere. He clarified that he didn’t raise the voltage itself, only the clocks, and voltage stayed consistent. He intends to keep the card for at least two generations, possibly upgrading after Volta if it’s worth it. He plans to test by running a stress test without overclocking initially, then again after overclocking to check if voltage changes.
With the latest cards it hardly reduces their lifespan. Also, you're not overclocking the Memory, you're actually increasing the Memory CLOCK speeds. Plus, try to improve gradually when OC because each card behaves differently.
Reference GP104 such as founders edition includes high-quality power components (infineon caps, ferrite chokes, in-house MOSFET drivers). When operating, these capacitors can withstand temperatures up to 100°C. I believe thermal and electrical conductivity are not the main reasons for degradation, but rather chemical and physical properties. Likely causes involve substances such as sulfur, chlorine, lead, or any corrosive materials.
With newer cards it's hard to reduce their lifespan much. Also, you're not overclocking the Memory, you're actually increasing the Memory CLOCK speeds. Plus, consider progressing gradually because each card behaves differently. I understand now that the advice to go slowly comes from the need to preserve life span if pushed too far. On another point, if I were to push it to 10ghz—what they call the stock memory clock for the 1080—wouldn't that mean I'd be using gddr5x memory? From what I know, gddr5x is just a higher-speed version of the gddr5. I'm sure I'll never reach that level of overclocking, but I'm just curious.
JordanMihailov explains that increasing the voltage on hardware reduces its lifespan. He clarifies that he hasn't changed the voltage itself, only the clocks, and he intends to maintain this card for a minimum of two generations. He anticipates upgrading once it becomes suitable, possibly after Volta, but only if it meets his needs. He plans to keep it for at least four years, or longer if necessary.
So just to make sure, these two scenarios don’t really affect the GPU’s lifespan much.
1. The GPU runs at an excessively high speed and becomes very unstable, lasting only briefly.
2. Over time you notice the overclock isn’t stable, meaning a small but prolonged instability.
I’m trying to confirm if either case has a similar impact on longevity. Thanks.
I understand. I thought the advice to go up slowly came from the idea that going too far could shorten the lifespan of the device. Now I see it was about how each card behaves differently, making it harder to work from bottom to top instead of the other way around. On another point, if I were to push the overclock to 10ghz—what they call stock memory clock for the 1080—wouldn’t that mean I’d be using gddr5x memory? From what I learned, gddr5x is just a higher-speed version of the standard clock. I’m sure I’ll never reach that level of overclocking, but I’m just curious.
The slow increase in OC is meant to confirm the system functions properly at the higher speed. If we start at 1.0 and aim for 2.0, going straight to 2.0 would cause a crash, showing us the real limit. So we adjust gradually: 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8… until it stops working properly. Then we lower back to 1.7 and accept the result.