Clevo GTX680M 4GB overclocking result on P170HM

P170HM has been successfully installed Clevo GTX680M 4GB

Clevo GTX680M 4GB overclocking result on P170HM:

1.default test
3DMark11 : P5971

2.software overclocking w/o any hardware mod (854/1150)
3DMark11 : P7017


Source :
P170HM has been successfully installed Clevo GTX680M 4GB!

74'C low temperature for Furmark burning at default clock

85'C for 854/1150 overclocking

3DMark11 benched result:

7970M @ 850/1200 = P5860
7970M @ 1000/1500 = P6600 (tess on)

Desktop HD 7870 @ 950/1350 = P6600


Mobile GTX680M @0.835v 720/900 = P5960
Mobile GTX680M @0.835v 854/1150 = P7000

Desktop GTX670 @ 900/1500 = P8400
Desktop GTX670 @ 1116/1775 = P10295

Mobile GTX680M @0.85v 1000/1500 = P8200 ?

680M Battlefiled3 full load temperature :70
7970M Battlefiled3 full load temperature :83
(notebookcheck)

single 7970M @ 1000/1500 = P6600
dual 7970M Crossfire @ 1000/1500 = P11500

single Desktop GTX670 = P8455
dual Desktop GTX670 SLI = P13590

680M SLI = ?

I'm pretty sure that the GTX680M in SLI has higher efficiency than the 7970M in Crossfire

Spoiler

 

Wow!

This is quite a dramatic result.

I've never done it, no idea how to, and wasn't planning on overclocking my preordered 680M, but I better learn, and quick.

Any help with tips on where best to start? Thanks!

 

He's also using a 2920XM, no doubt OC'd. Probably factors in a lot in the scores.

But yes, at least 680M users now know the 680M can be overclocked. Now for people to see what the scores are with the 3610M as there is no need for a XM CPU for gaming for vast majority.

 

Wait, how do you increase the voltage to 0.85v?

 

Whoa thats insane!
Now are we clear that all the reviews up so far are totally BS? Because a card that reaches those scores can't be possibly get those FPS readings.
And I know this becaue my 7970m at stock gets much higher frame rates than the ones in NBC review.
This could be the added $300 reason alot of people were waiting, I hope to receive a sample as well to test it.

 

u are aware that NBC used the 12.4 drivers right? i doubt u were using those as well, or did u? theyre known to bring worse bench/gaming results than the 12.5 modded ones.

besides, the 7970M has also already been shown to break 7k in 3dmark11 soooo...whats the revolution here? ^^ both cards seem to be on par in every aspect, OC capability as well as it seems

 

Im just happy to know that its performing as it should
And youre right mate, im using 12.7 leaked right now, and the boost in games is big enough to show some faith in amd.

 

these results are still well below the OC capability of 7970m, seriously I am not impressed with 680m as of now and I think it will perform slightly below 7970m, however I think I am getting one (crazy?)

we have p7.6k (GeoCakes, tess off, though I am sure they also turned off tess to get to 7k with 680m)

 

This user should do gaming benches as well, if he is using the 12.7 leaked drivers for amd, they lower 3d 11 mark scores but increase gaming ones.

I have seen 7970m clocked at 1000/1500 reach 6900+ on 3d11.

 

the exact same thing @ http://forum.notebookreview.com/sag...-installed-clevo-gtx680m-4gb.html#post8651282 but w/e... 680M looking good

 

It's nice to see the 680m showing some OC headroom. But I still have yet to see any numbers that have made me say," oh, wow, that's worth $250, give or take, more then the 7970m. I don't think at this point I will ever be angered over my decision to get the 7970m.

 

...nor ever will any of you even if the 680M would be serving breakfasts in bed and massage the player's feet during every gaming session

 

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a red/green fan boy. Im a price to performance fan boy and it just doesn't seem NVIDIA wins this one. I do think they have the desktop win in that fight. They just r asking way to much for such a small advantage if any in the mobile department.

I know they have some things Like 3d vision and cuda, buy $250 more for that and maybe 1 fps. Just personally, emphasis on personally, don't see NVIDIA ontop on this instance. and if your going to factor in stuff like 3d and cuda don't forget amd eyefinity.

 

Without vbios mod this overclock is already the max possible... just saying. Kepler kills the fun with OCing.

 

yup...this is the max OC possible as there will be no overvolting on this card via software

That reviewer with 680m @ 854mhz scored 6835 GPU score in 3dmark11, so this isn't anything revolutionary compared to an overclocked 7970m (even i can get that on my meager system)

But still, it is nice to see that the card can get up to 854mhz. That is about an 18.5% OC on the core which is better than i had expected

 

Holy crap, thats some insane overclocking.
Not only does 680M run VERY cool and use way less power than GTX 580M (which it crush) but it also overclock like a beast. Awesome

+rep

Yes pretty much. I knew from the minute I saw it that the 680M review from Notebookcheck was complete BS

 

I don't get it. The desktop GTX670 has a 6 GHz clock. So why does OP have clocks under 2Ghz?

 

680M
900MHz x 4 = 3600MHz
OC:
1150MHz x 4 = 4500MHz

670:
1500MHz x 4 = 6000MHz

 

Does this have to do with "effective" clocks? Why the 4?

EDIT: Nevermind I found it. It is basically because you can transmit 4 bits per clock cycle per bit line. Basically the times 4 is meaningless. Your physical clock is only running at the specified value.

 

what cpu they use reaching 6900+?
AMD Radeon HD 7970M video card benchmark result - Intel Core i7-3610QM Processor,CLEVO P170EM score: P6764 3DMarks

 

^ It really all depends on the GPU. At least yours reaches 1045 core. Mine does not do 1Ghz core on 3dMark11. It crashes. However, I plotted the scores for every 20 Mhz increase from 850 to 980 (that was the max it would go stable) and if I extrapolate, at 1045 (your clocks) I would reach over 7000. Unfortunately, my card isn't stable above that so there is no way to know for sure. But it all really depends.

 

seems to be on par with 7970m but SLI 680M is going to completely annihilate CF 7970m

 

yup id guess so too due to the poor scaling of CF compared to SLI

Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk 2

 

and the broken drivers

 

This thread is going to end up like those others soon if we keep speculating.

 

Add it to the other half dozen floating around already. Hey guys, look, a dead horse!

 

As an owner of SLI and xfire in my desktops all my life, I can say that SLI is easier...meaning it is much more user friendly. It has its issues too, as you are dependant on drivers for 2 card support in games. In general, dual GPU's is not for the faint of heart lol

Speedy, SLI 680m will also completely annihilate your wallet...

 

Just as "meaningless" as saying "GTX 670 has a 6GHz clock".

Question:
Have anyone managed to get the 7970M over 6835 in GPU score in 3DMark 11 or is the 680M a better overclocker?

 

You really need to learn some humility. I am pretty confident of my language and I did not notice ANYTHING there that seems to suggest that any of that was directed towards you. You, instead, because of your huge paranoia that people are out to get you (and they probably are because, like the other guy said in that other thread, you are completely WRONG about the 680ms performance) decided it was aimed at you. Go be a fanboy somewhere else.

I mean look at how desperate you are. Just because one unknown dude with a ton of chinese chars on the screen came up with numbers close to what you hoped for, you decided to listen to that instead of a pretty famous website? LOL. The 680m is NOT a better overclocker because it hasn't been released. Until it has and has been OFFICIALLY benchmarked, do others a favor and keep your speculation out of this forum so that people reading it to get information about the card are not fooled.

 

And here we are again, another AMD owner that rage just because I commented that the 6GHz was the same as multiplying by 4.

Its not a better overclocker since it haven`t been released...OK great logic right there.

 

Guys, what is wrong with you all?
Now we're arguing on what overclocks better? For what, tell me, 400pts in 3dmark11, which could be dependable on drivers and other factors?
I love this place, some of you knows how much because i always try to help others out with guides and stuff, but SOMETIMES it looks like a kindergarten full of small kids that brags about this being better than that.

Look lets get things straight:

both cards OC well, perform extremely well, and are on par with some desktop cards. Does it really matter if 3dmark11 scores under OC are higher than 500pts?
Sometimes i ask myself whats wrong with you guys, jesus arguing and flaming each other over 400pts difference IN A BENCHMARK.
Or even more silly, arguing over how much it overclocks compared to this and that.

Sorry for the rant and for the rude words, i dont care if mods will take actions, but guys seriously get yourself together and try to act like grown up guys.

 

Calling you paranoid is not a personal attack. It is no attack. What would a person who reads this forum and has little knowledge of the subject believe? That the 680m is awesome and worth the $300, which, from current information, you cannot say.

you have nothing to apologize for. You are probably correct. All I am tryign to do is not have readers believe one thing or another until there is credible proof. If they are going to listen to this guy and ban people over that, so be it. I do not want some guy reading this and going oooo definitely worth the 300 and purchasing it. For many, laptops are once in a several years purchase and they deserve to spend their money based on FACTS and not speculation, especially if they trust this forum and come here to get an opinion.

 

Actually, you called him paranoid and a fanboy.

How old are you people? Name calling is for the immature. I don't think I've seen Cloud ever post personally attacks, yet every time I look at one of these threads, there is at least one personal attack directed at him.

 

You guys sure love trashing perfectly good threads.