GPU remains stable without gradual adjustments
GPU remains stable without gradual adjustments
I own two EVGA GTX 780 SC units equipped with ACX coolers. I'm using MSI afterburner for overclocking and tracking performance via GPU-Z. Without any overclock, my first GPU core clock reads 1071 MHz and the second is 1100 MHz. Applying an overclock of +12 MHz doesn't change anything; both cards maintain their original core clock values. When I push to +13MHz, the first card reaches 1084MHz while the second remains static. At +25MHz overclock, the first card climbs to 1084MHz and then further to 1123MHz when an OC of +14MHz is applied. The second card only increases after a +27MHz overclock, reaching 1136MHz. Since these cards are linked in MSI afterburner, this pattern suggests I'm hitting the limits of incremental overclocking. The challenge is finding those optimal settings without small steps. This issue also appears with EVGA precision units—am I experiencing something typical?
I own two EVGA GTX 780 SC units equipped with ACX coolers. I'm running MSI afterburner for overclocking and tracking performance via GPU-Z. Without any overclock, my first GPU core clock stands at 1071 MHz and the second at 1100 MHz. Applying an overclock of +12 MHz doesn't alter these values; both cards maintain their original core clock readings. When I push to +13MHz, the first card climbs to 1084MHz, while the second only rises to 1123MHz after a +14MHz overclock. Further increases require a +27MHz OC, which then brings the first card up to 1136MHz. It seems the cards remain linked in MSI afterburner, and these gradual changes suggest...
acsdog :
I have two EVGA GTX 780 SC with the ACX coolers. I am using MSI afterburner to overclock and am monitoring with GPU-Z. With no overclock, my first GPU core clock is 1071 MHz, and my second is at 1100 MHz. Now, when I apply an overclock under +12 MHz, nothing changes. Nothing. The core clock on both card remains the same. When I apply an overclock of +13MHz to +25MHz it goes up to 1084MHz on the first card. The second card behaves differently, not increasing until I apply an OC of +14MHz. It goes up to 1123MHZ at this point, and doesn't increase again until I increase the OC to +27MHz, at which point it goes up to 1136MHz. Keep in mind the cards are linked in MSI afterburner. These incremental increases continue to what I presume is as far as I can overclock. The problem with this is I can't overclock in increments like normal, I have to find these "sweet spots". The same problem arises with EVGA precision. Is this normal?
From my knowledge of how the overclock works, you still increase your GPU 1mhz at a time, but because of the fluctuations it reads what it previously has been until you find a frequency that is stable. (sweet spot) Your stress testing will show that your FPS does increase as you increase it by +1 or +2. I don't know if it is just a limit in the software to show the fluctuations in the frequency or what it is.
I own two EVGA GTX 780 SC units equipped with ACX coolers. I'm using MSI afterburner for overclocking and tracking performance via GPU-Z. Without overclocking, my first GPU core clock reads 1071 MHz and the second is 1100 MHz. When I try to apply an overclock of +12 MHz, nothing changes—both core clocks stay constant. Applying a +13MHz overclock causes the first card's clock to jump to 1084 MHz, while the second card doesn't increase until I reach an overclock of +14MHz, reaching 1123 MHz. After that, further increases require an OC of +27MHz, which then brings it up to 1136 MHz. Since the cards are linked in MSI afterburner, these gradual changes seem to be the maximum I can achieve. The challenge is finding these optimal settings; the same issue occurs with EVGA precision. Based on my understanding of how overclocking works, you typically increase GPU frequency by 1 MHz at a time, but due to instability it reads what it previously was until a stable frequency is found (the sweet spot). Stress testing should reveal that FPS improves incrementally with each +1 or +2 MHz increase. I’m not sure if this is just a software limitation to show fluctuations or something else entirely.