Can I overclock nvidia gt 330m? Pros/Cons?

I have the new Sony F series. Great machine, love it. Plays almost all my games at FHD with tweaked settings at around 60fps+. However, Call of Duty: World at War is in the 40ish range (mostly). Native resolution, no graphics settings on and textures at low/normal.

I've never done any overclocking. Can this gpu be overclocked? Which software would be the best (Nvidia tools?)? And is the risk/reward worth it? I would love to hear your experiences. Thanks.

 

My lappy's 9800M GS 512 MB had a hard time getting a steady 60 FPS with CoD4 (World at War uses it's engine) at higher resolutions. Maybe it was a CPU issue as well, not too sure. But I must note that the 9800M GS has another 16 Shaders for a total of 64 as opposed to the GT 330M which has 48. Also the GT 330M is 128 bit interface, so it's a bit bottlenecked by that. Try 1280 x 720 with max settings, no AA. As for being OC'ed, the reference clocks are 575 core/1205 shaders/800 mem. I'd expect 650/1350/900 to be achievable since it's a 40 nm chip. With voltage modding thrown into the mix, I can see up to 700/1400 for the GPU, maybe 750/1500.

 

Thanks for that info. I'll give CoD another run and see if I can live with the 40ish fps. It's definitely playable but would love another 5-10.

 

If I were to d/l the nvidia tools and crank up the gpu (never done, is it that simple?). How risky would this be? And do you think I could gain another 5 or so in fps by doing so?

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=5749575#post5749575 I think this will help you.

 

Thanks for the link.

The OP doesn't make me feel comfortable about cranking up those settings though. Maybe it's not worth the risk involved? I don't want to melt my hardware.

 

seeing the clocks , i would recommend a max OC of 10% on the core , 25% on shader and 10% on memory... no more...

 

Good advice. I would second that.

I just do 10% on the three, with a bios OC, and rarely a 10% FSB boost.

It has that threshold np without risking a much shorter life or imminent death.

Also my Clevo has great cooling and I have a Zalman stand. Maybe your Sony is decent at controlling temps.

 

You're saying you get 60fps at 1920x1080 with a GT 330M? This seems is impossible, unless everything is set to low. But if you're playing games with all graphics setting at the minimum, you'd be better off lowering the res and pumping the graphics settings. Even if the IQ is somewhat lower, due to the non-native resolution, you still get a decent looking game as a result of the graphical enhancements.

Also, when overclocking Nvidia cards, keep the core to shader ratio at 1:1.5, or you may get some stability issues. There is nothing to fear in overclocking.

 

With Call of Duty: World at War I get 40-60 (varies on map). Some maps are great and are very fluid but others are lagging and a good 5ps or so boost would smooth out my problems.

This is native resolution with low settings (textures at normal).

 

Here's stock:
575/790/1265

I OC'd to:
675/900/1430

I've been playing for about 90 minutes and the high temp is 68 degrees. How is that?

 

That seems like a pretty reasonable temperature in my opinion. As long as there aren't in lockups related to the OC I'd say you're fine! What kind of increase in frames is that getting you?

 

I would say on average 5-10.

 

Try raising the shaders to 1550.

 

I'm really happy with the results so far:

675/900/1500

I don't think I'll push my luck any further

 

i would recommedn to keep core and shader in ratio of 1 : 2.5

So it would be something like 650/ 1550... but don't OC memroy... its the one most likely to die. Anyways , those are nice temps

 

Thanks, I've gone ahead and done that.

 

Hey JimDuggan (great name btw!)

What are the other specs of your machine? I ask because I just ordered a Vaio Icy White and I'm hoping I'll be able to game on it as well. Reading your results in this thread make me optimistic to say the least. Now I am just hoping my specs are equal to or better than the machine you are playing on.

Can we compare specs? Mine is an i5 520M (2.93GHZ), 4 GIG DDR3, Nvidia GT 330m (obviously), 500GIG HD

 

Not to spread more confusion, but when overclocking, keep your ratio locked. Or break out the calculator... Did the work for you, your ratio is 1:2.2.

675 core stable? Then 1485 for shader

Don't be afraid to OC memory. Try 925, 950 before you settle on 900. Just to make sure 900 isn't at the threshold. Your temps are a-ok.

 

^anothergeek is correct.

 

only when I'm under the influence

thank yeh

330M is a spiffy chip, and somehow Sony fit it in the loaded 13" Z. Those are lux...

 

Hey guys, yeah I'm a little confused now because of conflicting suggestions. Here's what I have right now:

original/new
575/650 gpu clock
790/800 memory
1265/1550 shader

My max temp has been 70. I'm happy with the results. Any reason to change these around?

 

I have an i7 (the low end) and 6 gig of ram, playing at FHD resolution.

 

clocks are allright... jsut change shader one to 1625MHz or lower Core to 625MHz and leave the shader alone.

 

But according to notebookcheck, the mem is clocked to 1066.
Why is it clocked so low in the vaio and why can't it be clockedup to 1066 here?

 

I'm thinking about getting the Vaio F. How is the 330 compared to a Macbook Pro's 9600 that I will be moving away from?

 

It will be an improvement but not as great one as this if u wait... There is a great laptop comming this month... ASUS G73... comes with core i7 quad core , ATI 5870 , which is fastest mobile GPU, 8GB RAM , full HD 17 inch screen and Blue ray for $1600 USD... .... if ur willing to wait , u'll get the bargain of the century... u could max out all games... GT330M is good but not as good... but if u really want the sony , well it shouldm play games on full HD res but might have problems with more demanding games like crysis or GTA... should have no problems at all with 5870 which should allow u to play any game at max settings... somemore G73 has Directx11 while the GT330M is of old directx10.1... ur choice really...

 

Yeah, I know about the G73, and it is a great deal for what you get. It just isn't very portable. I don't play games very often, but when I do, I don't want it to be worse than the 9600 I had been using.

 

well then there the ASUS N61 , 71 and 81 series with core i7 quad and ATI 5730 which is actually better than GT330M....

 

got it to 775/948/1705. The computer started glitching and aero turned off then I tried 800/948/1760.

 

Those are beyond insane clocks man. Gotta be careful. You probably cut your GPU life in half because of that haha.

 

Haha yeah, it's not playable in any game. ME2 bugs out like crazy and Crysis just dies. I'm probably rolling back to 650/800/1430

Furmark ran with it though

 

If possible, please post 3DMark06 scores with your current OC results.

 

So I have the F11 series and I overclocked my GT 330m...

Factory is: 575/790/1265

I OC'd to: 675/900/1485

I've seen some pretty stable temperatures...I don't believe it hit 70...playing FEAR 2 max settings @ 1680x1050.

Could I overclock this a bit more? If so, what should these numbers be?

Thanks!

 

I would leave it as is.

 

Would it be dangerous to make it an even 700/900/1500?

 

If the tests run unstable, then yes it would be dangerous.

 

Nothing was unstable with the settings I posted before.

 

What score did u get in 3DMark06 with those clocks?

 

I didn't test it out, lol.

 

Can you?, please

 

As a fellow Vaio F w/GT330M owner I would be interested to see some before and/or after 3dMark06 results as well =)

 

Alright, so I found some new stable clocks and the temperature only goes a bit above 60. It's perfectly fine, no artifacting or anything.

730/915/1515

I was barely able to play Just Cause 2 at 1280x800. Now it plays at 30 FPS.

 

Why not just lower resolution to 1280 or 1366 or something like that?

That's still 720 HD right? Less strain on the hardware, as the pixel density is not that strong.. on a 16'' display, in 50+ FPS its also very limited in what you can see on the screen. I understand if it was a 24'' screen but... laptop?


I would lower the rez, and get other settings up, and hit 40-50 FPS.

 

I did say it was at 1280x800, lol. And it runs at ~30 FPS. It's playable but still a bit sluggish.

 

And the 3DMark06 scores? Please

 

i am an owner of sony vaio cw 26fg , w / 330m @ 512 mb .... i got my beast which was rather cold at the time of purchase coz clocks were underclocked at

475 , 680 , 1045 - 3d mark 05 - 11,292
fps details :
cod 5 - usually : 40 fps @ 1280 x 800 , 2 aa , high settings
nfs shift - usually 30 fps @ 1366 x 768 , 2 aa

.....
then i raised the figures maintaining all the ratios
600 , 816 , 1320 - 3d mark 05 - 13,929 ....
fps details :
cod 5 - 50 fps @ 1366 x 768 , 2aa , high
nfs shift - usually 38 fps @ 1366 x 768 , 2aa

 

yea n continuing on m previous post
m original temps were : max to 55 c

now they reach to 74 c ... !!! .. well stills its fine .. !!!

 

Not many 250m owners around so can I join in?



Crysis:

DX10:
1080p VeryHigh = 10.12
1080p Medium = 15.92
1280x720 Medium = 42.59
DX9:
1280x720 Medium = 45.94

 

Hi, what score do you get in 3DMark06? 05 is little bit outdated tbh