860m is a Beast

At this time I cant share the vbios, I was requested not to. But it should be available to the public in the near future

 

I really doubt you get 1700. Overclocking potential is not linear voltage/clocks. At some clocks it will just stop overclocking as you used to and you will have to overvolt more and more while get less and less.

BTW it is not just a temperature is a limited factor. It is mobo itself. If you damage GPU then you damage whole laptop because GPU is soldered. Because of too high voltage and too high clocks roads on board may start failing even if it takes year or two. I would separate the benchmark clocks from very hungry games and from everyday clocks. Just in case.

Congrats with results though.

 

Yeah I was just thinking this too.. too much voltage to the GPU will fry the motherboard. Thats why I undervolt and then see how high I can get my clocks and memory speed.

Currently @ 1306 / 5500ghz / 900mv @ 56C VS 540 /5000ghz / 1.2 V @ 70C

 

so far with +325/+700 i have been titanfall and crysis 3 stable for a couple hours. Saw a nice boost in performance in crysis 3. Have not seen temps break 75C. Really impressed by this chip. Ill def be looking to get a maxwell based 980m or 880MX laptop in 2015

 

I'm able to get +280 / +430 with my Clevo W230SS with the same vBIOS as HaloGod2012. For some reason this vBIOS lets me clock the vRAM higher. With stock vBIOS I could only run +180MHz.

Either HaloGod2012 got lucky with his 860m silicon or I got unlucky because of his +350 core vs my +280. In either case a +20% boost for free is welcome. If this translates to about +20% FPS I'll be happy, especially if it boosts the lower end FPS at 1080p. 30FPS will now be 36FPS, etc. But I don't suspect I'll really need the OC any time soon. However, will give a more detailed analysis of the performance with this vBIOS comparing a handful of games for FPS over time, temps, power draw, etc.

In any case this results in:

Core @ 1387MHz @ 1.1870V
vRAM @ 2955MHz / 5910MHz effective
Peak GPU Temp: 66C

For comparison Stock is:
Core @ 1097 @ 1.1500V
vRAM @ 2500MHz / 5000MHz effective

Scores show percent improvement over stock 860m in parenthesis (+XX%)

3DMark11 P: Generic VGA video card benchmark result - Unknown,
Score: P6321
Graphics 6026 (+20%)

3DMark11 X: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7 4900MQ,Notebook W230SS
Score: X2055
Graphics: 1846 (+22%)

3DMark FireStrike: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7 4900MQ,Notebook W230SS
Score: 4639
Graphics: 5006 (+23%)

3DMark Firestrike Extreme: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7 4900MQ,Notebook W230SS
Score: 2275
Graphics: 2287

This puts it about on par with a stock 870m. I can run at 250MHz at stock voltage, so should be able to run comfortably at 1350MHz Core / 5800MHz vRAM

 

actually that puts it ahead of a stock 870m, stock 870m only scores about 4500-4600 on the graphics, so we have a nice leap on the 870m Actually we are pretty close to a stock 780m

 

I would compare FireStrike and 3DMark11 X thought 3DMark 11 P is only for 720p performance. If you compare FireStrike and 3DMark11 X with 780m the 780m at stock beats it by a bit.

FireStrike:
780m Graphics: 2450
860m OC Graphics: 2287

3DMark11 X
780m Graphics: 5265
860m OC Graphics: 5006

I'll run the same benchmarks I did on the 780m here: http://forum.notebookreview.com/sag...ager-np8250-clevo-p157sm-review.html#gpubench and compare.

 

Those are some good scores, So I guess this Prema Mod guy isnt letting just anyone test the 860 bios. Ehh even if I donated which I did I still got no reply. I have been waiting all day to hear back from em. Guess I will look elsewhere. thx

 

LOL, patience DUDE...I am in Asia atm, just woke up...

 

Lets appreciate he does these vbios mods for us to begin with. He will be essential to us when the 970/980m's come out and we want to OC them like hell

 

These are some good running cards.

Sent with love from my Galaxy S4

 

Sorry man.. I feel like a jackass now.. lol I felt like a redheaded step child for a min.

 

What is the power consumption of the 860m? When oced


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

I agree, he will be the one to come when those cards are out. Heard nothing but good things in the forums about his work. Early on I noticed this new Maxwell card can go way beyond stock and is able to hold its own. GO team 860M!!!

 

That will be svl7's job! Usually I concentrate on the sBIOS front. I am contemplating of upgrading my mobo from W230ST (765M) to W230SS (860M) and just interested of what can be done with this chip before I pull the plug...

Clevo's vRAM timings are mostly tighter...

 

Take your time buddy. We really value your part in this community.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

I will be picking up a w230ss shortly, and your work really makes it even better. Thank you.

 

He's more than helpful *and* has a day job too (I think, still ). And donating doesn't guarantee beta access, you do it to get a stable working vBIOS and sBIOS mod. If you DO get the beta, please share your detailed results at least with him, but with us as well. So we can make it work as best as possible.

Good morning.

 

For the third time what do peeps reckon the tdp is for 860m when heavily oced? If it sucks more power than the 870m then maybe not so good in the long term!!

Hopefully Iam not alone in wanting to know the performance/ watt ratio.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

870m is a 100W TDP card. 860m is on the order of 45W TDP, and Voltage bump as noted was 0.037V only... so what do you think?

Just as a matter of comparison I ran a couple tests real quick at stock and loaded (score / peak power draw):

3DMark Firestrike:
Stock: 4639 / 104W
OC: 5006 / 108W

Tomb Raider:
Stock: 51.7 FPS / 100W
OC: 57.2 / 117W

Bioshock Infinite:
Stock: 49.3 FPS / 101W
OC: 53.8 FPS / 109W

 

Informative numbers, Is possible reducing the power consumption just under to 60W with disabling two CPU cores and reducing clock speeds? If so, what would be the 3DMark 11 performance number?

 

Interesting indeed! Thank you!


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

You won't reduce it 50W by disabling two cores. Maybe 5-10W at best. I did a review of the i7-4800MQ with 4 cores vs 2 cores vs i5-4200m and power consumption difference running 2 cores was only about 5-10W. Here's link: http://forum.notebookreview.com/sag...sing-sager-np7330-clevo-w230st.html#heatpower

(I just realized I didn't post power consumption numbers, will add those).

I'm sure if I drop clock speed to 2GHz, GPU to 800MHz, and limit FPS to 30 might be able to run at 60W.

 

Thanks, I'm going to review it .

 

So with OC we are maybe looking at around 50W? Not too bad getting 680M performance and yet consume only 50% of it

As always, good to have someone like you who post data to back things up

 

Thanks for all the info guys. I ordered the w230ss and can't wait to use the 860m

 

Can't break past 5100 graphics 3dmark11P score with a 850m until I can get a custom vBios (but I dont think the 850m in the Asus N550JK is dumpable so this may never happen).

Ran Firestrike with slightly overclocked 850m.. Only 3674 graphics score :/ I thought I was at stock 860m levels.. That GDDR5 ram must really make a huge difference in heavy graphics.

Edit: My stock 780M machine pulls a 5056 graphics score in standard Firestrike and a 6374 overclocked score just something for you guys to compare to. It's pretty awesome that you guys are on the brink of being a 780m.. but I think at Extreme levels is where the 780m will shine compared to the 860m.. So basically, don't play games higher than 1080p on the 860m and you'll be golden.

 

Thanks diversion, that does help! Yes gddr5 makes a huge difference. Also if the 850m doesn't allow you to extract the vbios through gpuz, try doing it through the nvflash command. Thats what i had to do on my g750 for the 860m. I just hit a firestrike graphics score of 5085 today and still climbing, so its cool to see i matched a 780m

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/2994950

 

Tried latest version of nvflash and it says no Nvidia display adapters found :/ and newest CPU-Z says bios dumping not supported.. so unless you're using a very specific or beta version of nvflash, I dont think it's possible (yet)!

 

I've decided to swing by Best Buy tomorrow and grab a G750 to compare to my N550JK.. I know i'm going to hate it's size and TN panel but I think I want the stronger GPU at this point since I do plan on leaving it primarily hooked up to my 70" tv to game on and use as a HTPC it won't matter much..

 

What about your P170EM?

 

Signature is old, need to update.. I sold it a few months back.. Thinking I should have kept it for my HTPC/gaming role but right now my current line up is a 780m powered '13 iMac, '13 MacBook Air, and this new N550JK with 850m. May just spend the extra $200 to get the 860m.. Not sure if $200 is worth a 20%-30% FPS increase or if I should just lower graphics settings to make up the difference. I paid 1049 for this N550JK on Amazon.. And the 860m laptops are essentially same cost as Best Buy's G750.

I'm thinking most people would say no to $200 more cost for a little better gaming perf..

 

To fix the nvflash bios dump run gpuz and start the little pcie benchmark it has to get the gpu running, then stop it and very quickly run the bios dump command , the gpu is not detected till it kicks in for some reason

I also used this version of nvwinflash

http://www.guru3d.com/files_get/nvflash_download,2.html


And lastly, go for the 860m even for 200 more , g750 has the best cooling and you saw what this chip can do

 

Wish I could say it worked but your trick made it at least detect the card but then it bombs out with this:

Edit: I also booted into a DOS environment and used the DOS version and got the same exact error...

 

wow some crazy score with 860m you got there
i wonder if the 4gb kepler version of gtx 860m can pull off such high score too ..

p.s : btw i was searching for firestrike gtx 780m oc score and found this meaker's 8071GPU in Firestrike

 

You need the right nvflash version, and run it from a DOS bootable USB flash drive: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/173386/NVFLASH.exe

 

You can try as long as you want with nvflash, the vbios is not in a separate eeprom, it's part of the bios. Nvflash won't do anything.

 

The N550JK? I thought he was referring to the G750

 

Yes, N550JK. I was under the impression that's what he was talking about.

 

You're right. My ADD wasn't following the conversation properly.

 

Am i the only one, who isn't quite impressed about real gaming performance gain?

I don't know what your overclocks were on these tests, HT, but i am quite diassapointed of the results, as there are only 10% gains in Tomb Raider and Bioshock while benchmarks indicated boosts of 20% and more...?
No offence, HTwingnut and thanks for testing, but like i said, i am not very impressed by the real world gains.
I mean, 52 vs 57 in TR and 49 to 54 in Bioshock. Wohoo!!? That's almost... erm... nothing...?
Was that with the basic overclock (+135) or with flashed vBIOS? It it was the latter, then the basic OC would result in absolutely nothing??

Just saying, because when i overclock my AMD 6750M (Macbook Early 2011) with +150 MHz Core and +150 MHz Memory i get +20%.
So i thought the basic oc with the allowed and similar to my values +135 would get quite similar results.

As looking at HT's results and my personal thoughts, i am quite doubtful a 860m overclocked can match a 780m in real gaming, can it?
Even if it can get similar points in benchmarks, clocks aren't everything on a gpu. There are several things that are responsible for performance.
You surely can get more juice out of a card through oc'ing, but 780m has a memory bus as double as the 860m (256 vs 128) and far more shaders. I doubt this can't be compensated only through higher and higher clocks, i assume...?

Don't get me wrong guys. Don't wanna talk bad about this topic. Just my two cents about it.

 

Yea benching and real world performance are two very different things

 

So are you guys saying it's not dumpable at all? Or requires a full custom BIOS?

 

The Maxwell 860M should be able to handle FXAA much better than the Kelpler 860M due to the much MUCH larger L2 cache that Maxwell employs. It lets the card utilize less memory bandwidth but output similar performance to cards with greater memory bandwidth. =D So I'm told at least...

Still wanna get the 7358...

 

You mean MSAA not FXAA. FXAA is a cheap shader technique, MSAA consumes a lot of VRAM and bandwidth especially if game uses deferred rendering.

 

Just grabbed a Asus G750JM with 860m GDDR5.. Will be posting my thoughts on performance between 850m and 860m before and after overclocks.

 

Look a few posts prior to that where I gave the OC's: http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/751352-860m-beast-6.html#post9642294

860m is great value for the performance it offers. 10-12% FPS improvement for a 25% OC isn't the best improvement, but it's free and it's something tangible. Temperatures also barely even budged by doing this too.

It also varies game by game. I'm sure games that you played on your 6750m were more sensitive to clock speed because the GPU was already lower end and every little improvement helped more. I'm sure after a little more OC you'd get diminishing returns on your OC. Not to mention your games were probably playing at 720p? If I run at 720p I'm sure my performance will go up 20% as well. It's just the whole bandwidth concern at 1080p.

EDIT: Here we go:

Tomb Raider 720p: Stock: 80.7 / OC: 98.1 ~ 22%
Bioshock Infinite 720p: Stock: 81.1 / OC: 95.5 ~ 18%

Not to mention if I drop detail levels a bit, likely will get more FPS differential too.

 

Poor 860M feel mocked when you run it on 720p

15-20% FPS increase in game is pretty close to what you should expect to get out of a GPU when you overclock. But like HT shows/explains, it varies from scenario to scenario. Not to mention GPU A can get better results than GPU B due to different potentials. One can be a high clocked chip while the other can be a fresh new architecture that is low clocked on purpose from the factory. GPU B can be bandwidth starved which have its performance unlocked by just doing some memory overclock. etc etc

 

Ok, thanks for clearing things up.
First of all, i'm not so experienced in these things. So my knowledge is fairly basic

I cannot say, if my games were more sensitive to clock speed. I just tried with Crysis 2 and Fable 3, where i got in 99 % of all cases quite exactly +20%.
Strange to say in very very rare situations i however got not even one single fps more with the overclock than with stock clocks.
I think these must be situations, where maybe other things (shader count, bandwidth...) of my gpu must have become a bottleneck? What do you think?

Yes, because of the 1440x900 Display of my Macbook i played those games in this resolution. I didn't consider that a OC and the percentage performance gain would be dependent of the resolution.
You mean, because of higher (bandwidth) requirements of 1080p vs 900p this would bottleneck the performance gain through an OC on Full HD? Thought the bigger L2 Cache would solve this problem quite a bit...?

According to your post, your OC was +280 / +430? What would a basic OC with +135 / +180 (without the need of a modded vbios) would bring?

 

you should be aware that your Asus model does not have the same cooling architecture as the G750 so it might not handle extreme overclocking the same way a G750 does even for the same GPU.