Which do I use, 3dMark06, or '11?

Vantage 2011 - I bench and like 9fps and it looks like it's killing my G73SW.
3dMark 2006 - I get anywhere from 30-60 fps...but that feels like it's not truly testing my GPU.

I'm looking to do my first GPU Overclock. I have read very extensive threads on increments, when to stop, what not to do etc...

It's simpler than most people think actually.

Anyways, which is better.

*If it wasn't apparent up there, I am doing this on a :::

ASUS G73SW
GTX 460M
BIOS 2.10 (2010 I think - not sure of # like 205 etc..)
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit



Thanks guys!

Quick EDIT: My main point of asking this is actually to find something to check for artifacts etc to see if it's a stable clock. So if there's something easier than 3DMark feel free to let me know!

Thanks again!

 

Both & Neither.

Both, as I've found the individual graphics tests in 3DM06 seems to correlate to specific games. Say I see "X" score on Canyon Flight, I can estimate how well the laptop will run Oblivion. Of course they are all pretty much old games at this point and everything is going to run.

Neither, as all that really matters is games ...so bench games.

http://www.geeks3d.com/20090703/furmark-1-7-0-the-bad-boy-of-graphics-cards-utilities-is-back/

Personally, I've given up running max OCs for games even if that means leaving a little performance on the table. I can run my Mobility HD5870 at 800/1100, but just use 750/1100 and it all plays the same when the FPS counter is off. I can test fine on each clock, but in game some will crash at 800/1100 [...like Batman: AA or Orcs Must Die!, while Crysis and Metro are fine. It's odd that it's the easy stuff]. I think the OC on the memory is actually more important. I find that most of the sudden drops in FPS that hit gameplay are due to VRAM and bandwidth. I would look at finding an approximate max VRAM clock, which from ~4yrs experience doesn't have an issue between drivers ...I won't crash later because of the VRAM OC. Then OC the max GPU clock.

Stock: 700/1000, I set my OC presets at:

700/1100, 725/1100, 750/1100, 775/1100, 800/1100 and use just what I really need.


...but I wouldn't worry about the scores, the numbers laptops get aren't expected to come with bragging rights.

 

If you overclock, you'll have to test with the games you play. 3DMark or Furmark are good places to start testing, but ultimately, some games will accept higher overclocks than others. you could consider 3DMark as the first validation step, if it doesn't pass through 3DMark, forget about it, if it does test with the game.

 

Furmark test for 15 minutes at full burn in while watching your temps with HWINFO sensors.

If it goes anywhere near 90oC forget overclocking.

3Dmark is there to stress your card to its limits to reap a result worthy of what it can handle same goes for the CPU as both play a part in the final result. Mobile cards will never get amazing results in 3DMark11 at the moment unless they are top end or SLI it is suppose to be that way. At release 3DMark06 was a killer on cards back in 2007.

 

Thank you very much for the information guys. Just getting back from work I think I'll test the games then as the final decision.

What "scares" me is I can go all the way up to 875 core and my GPU runs at like 74C max....

It's like it's "too good to be true" kind of thing.

Thanks again for the advice everyone.

 

As long as your compound and cooling are good the core should not go anywhere near as high as the memory controllers. Although with a core that high you may notice instability after 30 minutes in game and the driver will stop responding this is a clear sign the core is too high.

The memory clocks normally effect the heat the most, on mine if I push it upto 1200mhz and albeit it reaps 150gb/s bandwidth I also gain a whopping 10oC which pushes me to 98oC.