Just got my 880M twins!

Oh okay. We just gotta wait

 

Log does me absolutely no good when you continue to overclock despite my telling you not to .

 

Sorry my bad, uploading one tomorrow. Cheers

 

Witcher 3 - whole great escape quest on two 880M + i7-2920XM

Base clock: 824 MHz, overclock to 954 MHz.

Attaching log

 

I see a ton of throttling going on.

First off, you have started by dropping your base clock from 953 to 824. That's automatically a disqualification for a "stock" vbios run. Secondly, a vbios that doesn't throttle runs its boost clocks 24/7. Yours are still not doing that despite your underclocking efforts.

The vbios mod disables boost entirely which forces the cards to 993MHz or whatever value you set in your favorite overclocking program. What you have done is shown that your cards not only power limit throttle, they power limit throttle when they aren't even running their stock clocks.

 

@Ethrem do you think it's because @GodlikeRU has the 880ms in an older generation Alienware which causes them to throttle way more. I will attach a witcher 3 and 3dmark 11 GPU-Z log later today so we can compare.

 

No I think its because they are 880Ms and as Mr. Fox, Papusan, myself and svl7 and Johnksss and countless others have said, are broken pieces of garbage that even clocked the same don't bench the same as the 780M

 

Okay I will still provide the GPU-z log of the witcher 3 and 3dmark 11 if you still want to take a look.

 

Facepalm. Did you read that it's overclocked? When GPU is not used then GPU clock is 824 because it is BASE CLOCK. while using it 99% it's 954 MHz. Where did you saw 400 MHz throttling like in other 880Ms?

 

When I looked at your GPUz log it throttled to about 870Mhz at times when at ~100% GPU load, so it's not holding the 954Mhz consistently that you were aiming for.

 

When you changed the base clock, you changed the power values on the card. Dropping 131MHz off the core doesn't show that you don't power limit throttle on STOCK CLOCKS! If you have to downclock your cards, then they are not functioning as they were intended to. They were intended to have a 954MHz base clock with a 993MHz boost clock and in order to be considered as a non-throttling card, it needs to demonstrate that it can run its BOOST clocks in gaming scenarios. Your cards still power limit throttle themselves to the stock clock you set which is almost 14% under what nvidia advertised the cards to run at minimum.

Why do I respond to these threads? Because I owned these garbage cards from May of 2014 until I got Sager to replace them with 980Ms in December. Guess what? My 980Ms have never throttled below their 1038MHz base clock even in benchmarks and in games, they not only run at their rated 1126MHz boost clock most of the time but on stock voltage, my cards can actually do 1226MHz boost in most situations. My cards function as intended, without any special vbios or tricks.

If you look early in this thread, I am one of the largest contributors in it with graphs and all kinds of different voltage and clock scenarios in games and benchmarks with two different pairs of 880Ms (which both pairs failed which is why I fought to get 980Ms when I sent it back to Sager for the second time) which more than gives me the right to post in this thread, regardless of the fact that anyone on this forum may post anywhere that they wish to post.

I'm coming in to get proof that this vbios does not throttle so that I can pass it on to other people but showing me results that are not obtained at stock does me absolutely no good.

One last thing, my stock 880Ms very very very rarely throttled under 880MHz. They *never* throttled to 400MHz unless it was a thermal throttle for hitting 95C.

 

First pair of cards. This was in the thread where Pidge from Nvidia was saying he wanted to help us.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...80m-list-them-here.757508/page-2#post-9723428

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...80m-list-them-here.757508/page-2#post-9723499

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...80m-list-them-here.757508/page-2#post-9723550

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...80m-list-them-here.757508/page-3#post-9723610

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...80m-list-them-here.757508/page-4#post-9723633

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...80m-list-them-here.757508/page-4#post-9726959

Here are the links to my graphs I made after getting my second pair of cards in August.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...0m-list-them-here.757508/page-29#post-9748730

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...0m-list-them-here.757508/page-33#post-9754331

That was before that pair started to fail

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...0m-list-them-here.757508/page-56#post-9775832

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...0m-list-them-here.757508/page-56#post-9775860

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...0m-list-them-here.757508/page-56#post-9775907

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...0m-list-them-here.757508/page-57#post-9775947

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...0m-list-them-here.757508/page-58#post-9776074

As you can clearly see, I have spent hours upon hours working with those cards... Those are just posts with graphs!

 

To add to what Ethrem said, I'm going to go further. You are new here. Not to this forum, but to this thread and to 880Ms troubleshooting. I never had 880Ms, but I've asked and had people test every single thing I could think of. We've done more testing and checking and extra testing and further testing than you would begin to think about doing. When we say "your information is not valid" or "your information is not complete", we mean that we can't use it because it is not done in an apples-to-apples method.

It's why my original reply when you posted a benchmark and you told me your cards' vbios was modified with a lower base clock was "can you use the unmodified stock vBIOS for your cards and run the tests again?". I don't have 880Ms and I'm *NEVER* going to own 880Ms I can assure you of that, but their overheating, throttling and various other issues are legendary among anybody who knows anything about laptop GPUs, and unfortunately quite a few users are stuck with them. While svl7's vBIOS did indeed work in killing throttle for the most part, the cards overheated like crazy in almost every scenario, and sometimes caused issues when attempting to use the cards on battery, so many users don't use them unlike the 780Ms which have 0 reason to not use the modified vBIOS at all.

So we're not attacking you. We're simply being EXTREMELY thorough.

 

Exactly.

 

Okay guys. I don't give a crap about 880M owners. Deal with your heavy throttling without me and my vBIOS. Removing it.

 

Typical response of someone who has been busted giving false information. Good luck with getting someone to mod that vbios for you without those of us with experience validating that it actually functions better than the garbage we all used.

 

Yeah keep telling yourself that

And 870 MHz is due to my cpu can't keep up the game.

 

So, you're being childish now...

Well, it stands to reason. No single user who has ever come into this thread with a "working" 880M vBIOS has ever been able to successfully complete a couple benchmarks at stock and give us clockspeed logfiles.
Buuuut most everyone with a throttling vBIOS has provided more than enough information. Enjoy being a statistic =D

 

@GodlikeRU I can get a copy of 80.04.F5.00.07 if I really want it, your taking it down doesn't stop that. I asked you to run tests at stock so that results can be compared with the work that myself and others have done to see if there is a true improvement. It is not possible to see that when you are running different clocks. Also, totally inappropriate message edit. I am not attacking you, as you claim.

 

Gtx880m that run 400mhz or Max 954mhz is crippled cards. They should run 993 boost clock all time anyway. Gtx780m can easily run gtx880m boost clock and +++ all time but not the famous crippled card...

 

See the funny thing is he has them, but is telling us "good luck" with them, when his own doesn't even sit at stock 780M clocks with his vBIOS.

I don't understand people. I really do not.

 

Guys, I agree with each and every single one of your responses. I am by no means saying that my 880ms are "Golden", that would be the biggest joke in the history of jokes. But I just want to say that my 880ms can hold the boost clock speed of 993MHz 24/7 even when playing the witcher 3 or any other demanding games. So in this regard I can say that my 880ms will serve me for 1.5 years to 2 years of ultra settings gaming. When the time comes, can you guys pinpoint me to a fresh new pair of 980ms (or the 1000 series if it's out) and a guide as well on how to change cards and cpu too. For newbie please

 

I'll just enjoy my "good luck" with this:

Spoiler: TW3 Ultra + Hairworks stock vbios

I thought you said that they do throttle? GPU-Z log please?

 

I'm starting to think PC GAMER is in fact two people with two separate notebooks and one has no problems and can't run benchmarks to save his life and the other has problems and wants help fixing them.

 

HEHEHEHEHE @D2 Ultima @Ethrem it's coming

There you go @Ethrem my results. Tell me what you think Also, have you experienced weird bugs with the game like stuttering and random crashes to the desktop, it's like it minimizes itself and brings me back to the desktop. I just updated the witcher 3 also.

 

Can you upload the actual text file for your GPU-Z log please? I'd like to parse it with my log viewer to get specifics.

I only experienced one crash and no more after that. Make sure it doesn't have you in borderless window mode, the game doesn't default to full screen and borderless window will cause a slow down.

 

@Ethrem it says the file is too large for me to upload?

 

@Ethrem and @D2 Ultima - I looked at the GPU-Z log posted by @GodlikeRU and while I do see undesirable fluctuations in clock speeds, it seems like for the most part his clocks are stable enough for gaming. He set 780M clock speeds to reduce heat, hoping to extend the life of his GPUs and make them more consistent. That actually may be working pretty well for gaming, even though it is not intended based on 880M specifications.

I can see both sides of the discussion here. I agree with both of you. The GTX 880M does not work correctly for anyone. It is erratic, to say the least. However, if @GodlikeRU is getting results that are consistent enough so as not to harm his overall experience, that's actually a good thing and something many 880M users cannot claim. The fluctuations seem to be less than what many others have experienced. That might not produce the good benchmark scores many of us like to see, but he seems very content with his gaming results and I find it difficult to fault him being satisfied with his own results. I think it is good that he wants to offer assistance to gamers looking to have a decent gaming experience.

 

Might break out the 880m's for some benches just to see if the new drivers improved.

 

As you can see from my GPU-Z @Mr. Fox , my 880ms work at 993MHz 24/7. Will upload a new one for @Ethrem as the one I recorded was too large (10mb) couldn't stop playing the witcher 3. I get on average 50fps now for benchmarking, the highest 3dmark fire strike score I got was 12500 and they weren't even working at their designed 993MHz boost speed. @GodlikeRU maybe you should revert back to the stock VBIOS and check your scores again as I can consistent 993MHz in games. I get the same scores as a 980 actually sometimes more. Now the 980m SLI is 28% faster than a 980 and consequently 28% faster than an 880m SLI in general.

 

I don't disagree with any of this... in fact my original response when I asked him to try with the fully stock vBIOS (instead of his downclocked modification) I said I completely understand if he did not want to do so. The problem however is that when he tried putting forth extra benchmarks/tests and we said we couldn't use the results (as Ethrem already modified his vBIOS on 880Ms to keep a lower clock at one point for heat... I'm definitely certain I remember that) he got pissy with us. That's the only issue here, really.

It's commendable that he's willing to help, but if he can't help he can't, and if he's unwilling to mess with his vBIOS that's fine too. But tests with a modified vBIOS as ethrem pointed out messes with the way the card operates, so he can't help with his current setup. If he doesn't wanna change, then that's all well and good too. But getting snippy at us when we say that his modification means we can't use his results is not only not warranted, but not our faults.

 

Put it on Google Drive or another free upload service

Did we not have a big debate when I did the same thing? His cards are not acting any differently than my own cards did when I underclocked them. The only way to see if the vbios is actually functioning correctly is to compare stock clocks. I don't know where people got the garbage that the 880M throttled to 400MHz from. The lowest my cards would throttle due to power limit was 888MHz (I went through all my posts on the subject today to refresh my memory) and my overall clock average in gaming was, in fact, always between 940 and 960MHz with a 95+% GPU load. But as you said when I decided to run my cards at 849MHz @0.875v - under clocking the cards doesn't change the fact they are broken. If people want to claim the issue is fixed and encourage people to flash their vbios, they need to back it up with stock numbers that prove it. Any other measure is invalid.

 

Max boost clock at 954mhz with gtx880m; This is like under clock gtx780m to have boost clock at 771mhz. LoL

 

Oh, yes... we sure did. And, I don't disagree with you. The discussion we had way back when is still valid. The GTX 880M GPU is broken and it appears it cannot and will not ever be fixed.

All I was getting at is he is getting along with his OK and has squeezed some lemonade from the lemons NVIDIA delivered by running them differently than what NVIDIA intended. If it can be improved and do an acceptable job at playing games by downclocking everything without actually being fixed that is certainly better than leaving it more messed up. I say more power to him for that, and kudos for offering to help others make their peace with the fouled up cards they were dealt. If he is happy with the results I can see where it might be deemed as being "fixed" for the purposes he is using it for. That's was the only point of my comment.

We both know that the 880M will never be suitable for good overclocked benching... it's just too messed up to be pushed harder and not act up. With the screwed up drivers NVIDIA is cranking out, I'm getting a gut full of hellish 880M-like behavior from my 780M SLI... but, at least it is still working flawlessly with 345.20 and older drivers.

BTW... With a 353.12 hotfix desktop driver mod using GTX 690 strings I was able to get my 780M SLI to not throttle at stock clocks. It still throttles when overclocked, but doesn't immediately drop to 405/400 like it does with all drivers after 345.20. It seems NVIDIA tweaked something with the power table somehow. I modded it for 880M also. If anyone wants to see if it helps their 880M setup, you can download it from my Google Drive. Let me know if it helps, hurts or makes no difference. I wish I knew what they were doing in their drivers so maybe I could undo or remove it.

[ Download: Mr. Fox's 353.12 Desktop Driver Mod for 880M-780M.7z]

At stock clocks this gave me about 10 FPS more in 3DMark 11 test #1 compared to other drivers in the 350 series because there was no clock fluctuation at all. The improvement was consistent over 5 runs of test #1. Overclocked, the results were horrible, as expected, due to throttling. NOTE: Windows 8.X.X users remember to disable driver signature enforcement before attempting to install. It is 100% guaranteed to fail the installation routine if you do not disable it first. Might not hurt to run DDU in Safe Mode first also.

 

Thanks a lot @Mr. Fox . @Ethrem I completely forgot about this I'll upload it maybe tomorrow afternoon(busy with uni )

 

My whole reasoning for demanding stock clocks was because the vbios he posted was said to be "stock," so I figured that he made his own mod of the stock one he posted. Nowhere in his posts did he say the one he was encouraging everyone to try because it was fixed was the modification he made. The whole reason for me to try to get stock results was specifically so that I could compare with my old results so that people didn't have to take a risk flashing needlessly if it didn't actually fix it. You know how many times I soft bricked my P377SM-A testing vbioses, I was just trying to be helpful. Maybe my skepticism was a bit high but I couldn't leave it alone for someone to flash their cards and take a risk without verifying the results.

I need to try your desktop mods one of these days. I never have issues with the stock drivers so I've never tried a mod.

@PC GAMER Sounds good. I just want to pull the parameters of your cards and see how they stack up with the old cards I and others had

 

Always good to check bios files being handed out in my opinion too, not many people have an easy recovery option.

 

Do not worry @Ethrem, your intentions are more than justifiable. Making sure a VBIOS is safe and working as intended should be a top priority and I am glad there are people like you who take their time to verify these sort of files and risking their computers for us, the newbies. Not to say that @GodlikeRU's VBIOS isn't working, I am pretty sure it does but an 880m working at below the base clock speed is a big no in my opinion as the performance decrease that shall arise from this will not be worth the risk. My 880ms as shown in the graph (and the GPU-Z log file I'll upload tomorrow) shows that it is infact working at the designed boost clock speed flawlessly. The same cannot be said when running a benchmark as my 880m just gives me a big slap to the face and won't even run at a constant 954MHz. I did manage to pull up amazing scores despite this. @Ethrem @Mr. Fox @D2 Ultima, your contributions to this forum is greatly appreciated and you guys should never doubt that. I am sure that @GodlikeRU is fine now BTW @GodlikeRU, maybe you could flash the stock VBIOS strictly to compare it with your custom VBIOS Maybe your 880ms are downclocking themselves because of high temps. My 880ms generally run at around 79 degrees during long hours of heavy gaming. They generally run at around 70 degrees during benchmarking which is pretty weird.

 

@Mr. Fox, I know I can overclock my 880ms to +135MHz as per the stock VBIOS but can I overclock both of them id I only have 1 330W PSU( might follow your dual PSU modification later on) What program should I use to overclock my 880ms and what driver would you deemed best for it? I get terrible throttling issue with every driver I tried so far cause my 880ms would throttle like crazy but can keep their clock speed flawlessly in games.

 

At least with 780m SLI, a +135 overclock was easily doable. From memory it's around +180/200 I had to start sacrificing cpu overclock for gpu overclock.

@Mr. Fox that hotfix driver plays nicely with my desktop so far.. Early days yet.

 

The power limit is set too low on stock vbios to enable you to actually overclock the core like that. Those cards are running near the limit of what the stock voltage can provide on the core and raising the voltage makes you hit the target even faster.

A 330W brick is more than adequate for overclocking. I only managed to overload mine when benching at 1.2v which is an incredibly high overclock.

 

Yes, I think I'll have to flash a new VBIOS if I want to properly overclock my 880ms. For the time being, I am good as they do run at boost clock speed 24/7 in games and I would imagine sustain a small overclock as well( think so as I never used it before especially with stock thermal paste). Hey has anyone of you guys seen the requirements of batman arkham knight. To play it on ultra, you'll need a 980. The gaming industry is moving at a faster rate considering the recommended is a gtx 760. That jump is huge for normal gamers. Fortunately, my 880ms are the equivalent of a 980 sometimes more with the 980ms being 20% faster. I do feel bad for single GPU users, they won't be able to run it at ultra, even less with gameworks on. @Ethrem, I'll upload my GPU-Z log file via Dropbox most probably but will let you know anyways

 

Hey guys. I was just wondering, what kind of framerates should I expect from batman arkham knight at ultra settings along with nvidia gameworks on. I know for a fact it will handle ultra but I don't know what the performance would be with gameworks on?

 

Is the game even out yet? My guess is you'll probably able to run it mostly all ultra 1080p.. Maybe no AA and shodows high to get close to 60fps.. Pure speculation.

 

Thanks @TBoneSan, well the game isn't out yet but given that it requires a gtx 980 for ultra settings that got me thinking. Maybe if I disable some nvidia gameworks, I'll probably stay at a constant 60fps@ultra( with AA on)or 45-50fps on average with everything maxed(including AA)out considering this is what I get in the witcher 3 @ max settings. I am so thrilled for batman arkham knight though, wow. I am pretty sure you all are so

 

Killing Floor 2 is sucking down any spare time I get lol. It's too easy to just jump on for a few games.. No story line to follow or forget if I leave it alone for a while.. Just blowing apart beasts

 

Hey @TBoneSan, I really want to get killing floor 2 but I just don't know if the amount of people playing it is enough especially if you compare it to planet side 2 or BF4. I want extremely fast and populated servers given it costs 29 bucks. What are your views on the game ? Are the graphics stunning like BF4 or meh? Also are there a lot of servers?Hey @Ethrem, can you tell me what fps you generally get in the witcher 3. I've seen a lot of videos where the 980m sli gets 65-70fps on average with hairworks disabled. I personally get 45-50fps on average with hairworks disabled. I have to say that the 353.06 driver gave me an increase of about 20% in performance. I got quite a nice boost in far cry 4 as well. I get on average 60-70fps on ultra TXAA4x and nvidia gameworks on though soft shadows is turned off as I think ,update 1.10 which is the latest version, broke it.

 

It's a totally different game to PS2 and BF4. It's a coop game. As far as servers go - there are always people playing. If you liked L4D you'd probably like it. Graphics wise it's fine - nothing that's going to knock you off your seat though.

 

Yea I totally wish I had more free time to play games, I get in maybe an hour a day.

 

Thanks @TBoneSan, I think I'll wait for a steam sale or whenever there is a price drop. It actually uses the unreal engine 3 same as batman arkham knight but the two look totally different in graphics albeit being made from the same aforementioned engine. @Splintah, I am really busy with uni too especially that it's exam period right now