7970m...how high can it overclock?

pretty much. I have the first 7970m so they had some design issues from what i heard so maybe the new ones are better.

 

pretty much, every card is unique in its oc ability. i was just talking about the absolute max. that one could expect. the highest core clock ive seen was around 1060 (ov to 1.1v), highest mem around 1580-1600.
if u have a machine with switchable graphics, ull have to stick to msi afterburner to overclock. in all other cases u can also use amd overdrive, details for that are given in my 7970m thread in my sig (see OP updates)

cheers

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

Thanks man, will definitely check it.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

Jay is there stuff i could add to the OP to save people time? doesn't svl7 or geocake have one too for alienware owners?

 

u mean an overclocking thread/guide for 7970M owners? would be a bit difficult to generalize it, since its slightly different for EM and HM machines...

and what kinda stuff did u have in mind? like min. and max. OC clocks one could expect with and without overvolt? please clarify

 

i was refferring to links to other threads so if people find this page they can see links for various threads like svl geo and you

 

Ya great idea... This is a loooong thread.

Thanks in advance, Jaybee

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

Just a heads up, I hit 1075/1575 with my old NP9150. Stock voltage obviously. Any higher and I would BSOD though lol.

 

So what was your highest that was actually gaming stable?

 

those are insane clocks, especially on stock voltage! how did u check the stability? one 3dmark run doesnt count, btw

lemme see what i can do concerning 7970M threads, ill come back to you guys

 

alrighty, here are the threads ive come up with in my subscription folder that are somehow concerned with overclocking the 7970M in various machines, sorted by the date of the last post:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/sag...0m-680m-ordered-installed-oced-lets-have.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/ali...-mobility-7970-m17x-r3-illustrated-guide.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sager-clevo/712265-overocking-7970m.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sag...-7970m-modded-vbios-clevo-p1xxhm-laptops.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sag...7970m-13-1-whql-afterburner-2-3-0-p150em.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sag...ers-7970m-how-high-your-stable-overclock.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sager-clevo/686606-cant-seem-change-voltage-7970m-gpu-p150hm.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sager-clevo/695122-dell-7970m-sager-p150hm.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sager-clevo/693560-gaming-stable-oc.html
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sager-clevo/688963-afterburner-2-2-3-ocing-7970m.html

hope those sources help

cheers

 

I would game at 1000/1500, 1050/1550 was stable for gaming but I'd hit 90C after a while so I didn't run those clocks very often. 1075/1575 would BSOD after 10 or 15 minutes. It was pretty much only good for 3dmark lol.

Lol yeah, it wasn't gaming stable at all. I didn't even share my benchmarks at those clocks since it wasn't technically accurate lol. My highest "legit" score was 7900 graphics in 3dmark 11. Would have been better with higher voltage though.

 

wow! You hit the jackpot on the silicon lottery with that core. Most 7970m's I've seen couldn't do more than 960-970 on stock voltage.

I wish I'd get a core from the center of the wafer for the 8970m I'm gonna buy.

 

Definitely helpful! Thanks man.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

Yeah, it was a pretty good overclocker. It was held back by stock voltage and my crappy 3630qm though. Drivers were garbage too lol. Of course right when I was selling it, 13.1 came out and fixed pretty much every issue I had with it

 

yea i can clock super high but playing a game is another question ^^

get a laptop cooler to force air into intake and up to 1.075v and have fun ^^

also added jay stuff to OP

 

Don't regreat it too much! You have a far more reliable rig now. At least drivers wise.

 

I got to 1050 on core on my old 7970m. no picture sorry to say, cant find it ):
But the card died a week or two later. so overclocking isn't wise on clevos, temps can get up there...

 

yeah well, i only apply the OC clocks for benches tbh when i do normal gaming i keep everything at stock,havent had a situation where i needed the extra powah yet

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

anyone able to oc to 1100?

 

yeah, i think there was one guy who made that happen at an overvolt of 1.1v (stock is 1.05v). but that wasnt stable iirc. he got to 1090 stable though. concerning the overvolting, 1.075v is generally regarded as stable and safe, whereas 1.1v gives mixed results depending on the user (in some cases lower bench scores, other times instabilities).

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

In my current rig, stock voltage is 0.975v and anything over that gives lower benchmark results. I can OC via CCC to max 990/1400 and everything is ultra stable with a max of 6.6k 3dm11 but the moment I try to OV the benchmark results plummet to around 6k, even though the machine is rock stable.

Can't really explain the behavior but I'm happy that it's stable as it is.

 

@all , @1.075V for benchmark 1075MHz

24/7 @1GHz+

 

What are the frames increase on average pushing this card that far? Is it worth the extra heat/noise? I am still choosing between the 680m or 7970m...

 

the 7970m scales pretty well actually my 26.6% oc results in about 20% higher framerates/benchscores.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

why did you cut out the bios and release date??? Also if you increase that memory you will see a huge boost. Games like PS2 see no boost in core but a ton in memory. I see virtually no boost in PS2 from the 50mhz core but when i go to 1400 memory i see a huge jump. This card does seem memory is a bottle neck...try your memory at 1400 or 1500 and see how you score again

 

here is mine 13.3 beta drivers.voltage is 1.050 and overclock 1050 core,1560 memory!!

 

Lucky boy! Are those clocks stable at max settings in Crysis 3?

 

its totally stable!!!max temps after one hour 74-75 celsious!!

 

I am downright jealous lol. I cannot get much above 950/1450. Perhaps I can push the memory to 1500mhz or so but the core is practically maxed at 1.05V. Unless I can hit 1000mhz on core no point in raising memory frequency I guess.

Enjoy your great 7970M. For me I need to wait for 8970M lol

ps: compared with stock clocks how much % wise is the card faster? 20% or more?

 

oh thx m8!!! as i see it depends from game to game.is some games i can see a raise of 15 fps.in crysis 3 the raise is about 10 fps maybe 13.

 

When will the 8970M be released? The 7970M has been around for about a year already.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

 

Not long now I don't think. There is a thread dedicated to 8970 and from what I been reading, 8970 is only 7.5% faster than 7970 ...

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Well, the claim from AMD is the the new 8970m is only 7.5% faster than the 680m from Nvidia, but that is nothing for AMD to boast and brag about, because that is extremely embarrassing for AMD to state, due to the new release from Nvidia- the 780m, is about 20% faster than it's predecessor, the 680m.
Since the 680m is about 15% faster than the 7970m, then the 780 is about 35% faster than the 7970m, and about 28% faster than the new 8970m.
It's AMD's way to keep up with what happened LAST YEAR with it's competitor.
As I see it, AMD is so far behind Nvidia, that their best mobile GPU is now on par with the now 3rd best mobile Nvidia GPU FROM LAST YEAR.

THIS the best that AMD can do with their newest flagship model?

Very embarrassing for AMD.
A definite major fail.

 

not sure where you get your numbers but the 7970m is the same if not faster than the 680m...it all has to do with which game and which drivers. At stock 7970m is faster in almost everything...minus those few games that are nvidia exclusive.


brian and whoever else did this review shows that AMD card is great except drivers are still shaky...and xfire is a no go for now...again drivers.
AMD 7970M Xfire vs. NVIDIA GTX 680M SLI Review - Tech|Inferno


updated one and you can see that both cards are nearly the same except that the games that nvidia wins are the ones that are nvidia exclusives, which really comes down to drivers.
Review Update: Radeon HD 7970M vs. GeForce GTX 680M - NotebookCheck.net Reviews


this is the old one with the batched drivers....in CAD AMD destroys Nvidia like it is cool
Review GeForce GTX 680M vs. Radeon HD 7970M - NotebookCheck.net Reviews

now if you want to get into overclocking than yes Nvidia wins with single card only...duel card they are ~ the same. Also only way Nvidia wins single card is because of that msi hack or whatever...ask brian about it i don't know what it is. He was just talking about it in the chat a long time ago.

EDIT: read over your post again and you are spewing hot air out of every orifice....8970m is 7.5% faster than the 680m and 780m is 20% faster than 680m. But somehow the 780m is 25% faster than 8970m....what????

 

any test with lastest driver?

 

[OT]

soo, based on current info:

780M vs. 680M = 120%

8970M vs. 680M = 107.5%

780M vs. 8970M = 120% / 107.5% = 111.6%

11.6% faster, thats not too big of a difference

[/OT]

 

if that is even true....i remember people claiming nvidia was all sorts faster than AMD even though they were ~equal

 

well of course, at this point in time all figures and data are to be taken with a whole bag of salt i was just straightening out the calculations based on current rumors

 

i would be surprised the 8970 is only 7.5% faster than the 7970m

 

Why everybody is like the 780m is like better??
I think AMD will kick Nvidia with there price again and I think last year was in favor of AMD with the Mobile GPU's (see price performance nvidia get's raped haha).
Last year it was AMD, now it's nvidia a little more, so what haha

 

i agree as long as your not dual GPU AMD is a clear winner. I would only consider Nvidia in a dual GPU set up and at that time i would just go with last gen on the cheap. 680s are awesome cards and i would totally buy them after 780s come out.

 

Sources claim 780m is 20% faster than 680m.
Sources claim 8970m is 30% faster than 7970m.
Currently 7970m stock is pretty much on par with 680m stock (+/- here and there).
Conclusion?

Wait and see... and get ready 4 sum hardcore OC.

 

people keep saying these sources by the way with different numbers...i have yet to see any links...maybe i have been in the wrong threads and sites but have yet to see any of these peopl ahve talked about

 

As are both likely just re-badges I have to question how much headroom is actually going to be left for OCing with such high percent increases.

 

very good question but normally don't they change the cores a little to give them some more oomph even on a rebrand/rebadge....which one is it?

 

Rebrand/rebadge... in this particular case it has the same meaning.
As for changing the cores to give them more 'oomph'.
I doubt it.
Mostly, they could 'rename' them in the video BIOS (and on newer manufactured chips) and overclock them, and quite possibly reduce the voltage.

Theoretically, Nvidia and AMD could fiddle with the BIOS for example to find stable lower voltages and higher overclocks.
I wouldn't be surprised if either company is putting in intentional restrictions on voltages and clocks (such as locking the settings or programming them to fail at specific numbers) to prevent people from modifying their cards on their own or achieving too good results... and who knows what other things.
We are dealing with companies that mainly operate on principles of profits and planned-obsolescence is intentionally implemented to ensure further profits (its how businesses operate).

If a GPU is to be re-named then at least they could undervolt and overclock the card at the same time - giving it more performance and lower power draw.
It might be possible that Nvidia/AMD could find creative ways of providing 20% to 30% overclock on a lower voltage through video BIOS itself without changing the corers in any way.
At any rate its very possible they can achieve this in a much more reliable way than people can do at home with simple undervolt/overclock methods which are not necessarily as precise (and are based on trial and error approach - whereas companies that produced this hardware knows what it can and cannot do).

 

Hopefully that's what theyll do, and we can flash our 7970m's to the new bios, so in name, we'll all have 8970m's,

Just like people were doing with the 580m to the 675m when it was released.

 

Depends on what system you bought it. I think for overall cost/performance and support, Nvidia won it hands down, no competition from AMD. AMD totally slacked and continue to do so. I have little doubt for rest of the world who doesn't use an Alienware that doesn't even use the latest PowerXpress 5.0 on their 7970M, it's PowerXpress 4.0 it seems brute forced, 780M will be no contest again. AMD is really struggling.

Even if you did have Alienware, sorry to tell you, but 680M users have better gaming experience than what's possible on the 7970M. They have smoother framerate, lower frame latency across the bar, on all games, including AMD title games. Their shadowing and ambient occlusion rendering and performance is also better. The number of artifacts on 7970M or AMD in general in games far exceed that on Nvidia, including AMD titles.

Nvidia also provides support for overclocking and performance. Nvidia works with developers of software like EVGA and MSI Afterburner. The few support you have for AMD on Afterburner and RadeonPro, were all done without the help of AMD. Those are unofficial workarounds.

So I don't know how you measure it, but it seems to me, for the rest of the world, Nvidia won easily, no contest from AMD last year. The only thing AMD had is a few high benchmarks on a superoverclocked 7970 desktops, but the still had micro-stuttering, latency issues, so who cares. It was found a Nvidia 660Ti, just do to smoother framerate and latency, the visual experience exceeded that of the best AMD systems had to offer.

AMD also openly admits their drivers for GCN suck. They can't fix the micro-stuttering issue on CFX systems, at least not until July for some reason. The memory controller is still not optimized properly for GCN. They openly admit they didn't QC and test for frame latency like Nvidia has bee doing for the past 3 years. I don't see how AMD is better in value than Nvidia.

Oh and Nvidia drivers with Intel drivers since 2932 don't crash your system like AMD does. AMD can't even get drivers to work right with Intel drivers that have been released since 2932. For reference, Intel is up to 3071 now. And Intel has had more WHQL releases than AMD has, so has Nvidia. Nvidia has more beta, and more WHQL than AMD.

To me, dollar for dollar, you're getting a whole lot more from Nvidia right now. ESPECIALLY on the mobile front.

 

Seems like you had a wonderful experience with AMD