No more overclocking on Nvidia mobile GPUs

And after all this, there are still people thinking about giving those arsholes some money ? Seriously ?
I just sent back my 970m i ordered few days ago to get my money back.

I'll stick with amd no matter what now.

I think we have the right to be crabby.

 

My Best OC Nvidia 970m stock .993 volt
Max Fan: 200MHz core, 200MHz ram - Valley score: 1703
Auto Fan: 200MHz core, 190MHz ram - Valley score: 1660 Max temp - 66
The auto fan 200, 200 score was lower than 200 : 190 at auto fan, but both run stable. Max fan at 200:190 had a score of 1664, so stones throw negligible. And this is at stock voltage...

It can go higher than this without crashing the driver, but the scores go down.

 

Unfortunately, AMD is a downgrade from my 780Ms, both in heat and in power. So the only way to go us "up". AMD really needs to smack them back into gear.

 

I know it sounds like one of those crazy conspiracy theories but I believe Dell/AW are behind this. They are NV's biggest customer of 'm' chips. They release a pup that can barely perform at stock (and even then they had to rewrite the BIOS to use the battery as well as the PSU. Overclocking this thing can only lead to exposure or worse, real failures.

They strong-arm NV to stop supporting this. I believe we will get a solution from the community eventually and NV can just wash their hands of the whole affair. Unless some pro-bona lawyer is prepared to take on a class action for false advertising and maybe even anti-trust if Dell's involvement can be shown. They will refuse to comment. Where is a whistle blower when you need one!

 

I think you're right about this, that's what they're trying to do. I think though that if NVidia does continue to block overclocking on their new laptop GPUs then I think that desktop users will be less safeguarded from the same fate in the future; I still think that ultimately it's in the desktop's users best interests to have NVidia not lockdown the laptop GPUs and to have this lock down rot cut out right from the start.

 

I think when nvidia makes a new arcitecture on a graphics card it's made to be able to overclock a lot from the get go so they can simply overclock it and sell it again as a new card. And then simply overclock it again and call it a new card. Until it can't be overclocked anymore and then theymake a new arcitecture and do it all over again. If we are able to overclock the card then that throws a rench in there evil plan of rebrands. Why would we keep upgrading our cards on the same arcitecture when we can simply overclock it to match nvidias next rebrand. To solve this problem nvidia just stops overclocking so you have to buy the exact same card next year that just has an overclock from nvidia.
I'm sure the next card from nvidia after the 980m is just going to be an overclocked 980m. Her is our next card enjoy but you can't overclock it because we're saving the overclock for our next card. Ha ha he he.

 

The thing is, when I tested the P35X v3, which is 21 mm, I could oc the 980M no problem +135/+500. It tore through Shadow of Mordor 3K High with max temps 84.

So even one of the thinnest laptops out there can oc the Maxwell flagship without getting close to 90 degrees.
And now it's almost confirmed the clockblock only concerns Maxwell. This sounds more and more like a marketing/milking dick move. Question is how many is in on it.
Come to think of it, can Intel be involved? Every thread and test I've seen lately focuses on keeping the cpu at bay.

On another note, did we just get ddosed by Nvidia? Site was down.

 

If AMD is unable to be competitive in desktop GPUs, watch Nvidia backstab desktop users too.

 

Heads up, true false advertising cases can only be brought by competitors, not consumers. If you want any recourse for a wrong like this, contact the ftc. Not to say this is the only type of case that may be brought. an analysis of all applicable laws is needed before a delineated list of rights can be made. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE OF COUNSEL. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO KNOW YOUR RIGHTS RELATED TO ANY ISSUES PRESENTED IN THIS THREAD OR FORUM, PLEASE CONTACT AN ATTORNEY IN YOUR JURISDICTION.

 

I've shared the petition on my College's gaming club facebook page.. Hopefully we can get a few more signatures.. Many of them own Alienware, Clevo, MSI laptops so we should get some more signatures!

We need to step up the campaign and make sure NVIDIA can't just screw us over!

 

No one has answered my question, if we keep our old 344 drivers, will we still be able to OC?

 

Really, weird laws you Americans have. The consumer here has the right to sue for false advertising AND in this case misrepresentation. And before you say how? It has already been shown in precedent that if a practice is 'normal and accepted', then the seller cannot claim that removing that feature without prior notice is fine.

But whatever, they feel safe and we are screwed.

 

If we can't overclock our cards because nvidia says it's not safe for our laptop then what the hell were they doing with the 880m. All they did was take the 780m and overclock it and sell it as a 880m.
Nvidia is more guilty than anyone else when it comes to overclocking

 

Yes, any driver before 347.xx can still OC

 

We need more press in major news outlets to screw NVIDIA... If iaTa's partner can get an article in Huffington Post and we can get some coverage on some news network, it will definetly help.. BTW NVIDIA is having an event on March 3 for their new Shield tablet.. Has anyone got an invite for this event? Time to hijack it.. It will be perfect as lot's of tech websites etc will be there...

 

Especially since the modded nvflash is windows only.

Won't work. The modded nvflash is windows only. Nvflash can't normally touch Maxwell. Basically there is a much higher risk for those of us without Optimus because there is no way to flash back if you can't get into Windows. I suppose you could wrote out how to blind flash once in Windows but if the nVidia driver picks up the cards then you're screwed. And Clevo machines won't even POST with a bad flash.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

Hmmm...I'll be at GDC (where it takes place) on the day of that event...

Edit: Scratch that I'm there on the 6th not the 3rd

 

I agree with others thinking that possibly the OEM are behind this. Especially now that Dell/Alienware are using soldered GPUs. It is my understanding these new laptops from them are shipping with 180w PSU, and aren't going to be able to compete when overclocked against a Clevo/MSI laptop that still uses MXM and has a larger PSU. Alienwares prices cannot be justified when they're suppose to be some uber performance brand, and are being beat out in games and benchmarks by a cheaper brand.

In addition with the fact that the GPU is soldered, when it possibly goes defunct due to OC, the entire board has to be replaced. Not just the replacement of the MXM card. This would be extremely costly to laptop manufacturers.

My 2 Cent.

 

Yes, but that isn't an acceptable solution. The whole reason that new drivers are released is to optimise performance for new game releases, fix bugs and incompatibilities with existing games and add new features (e.g. MFAA, DSR, ShadowPlay etc.). We can't all stay on 344.75 forever if we want to play the new releases of 2015, 2016 and beyond - and benefit from any new features that NVIDIA may release.

 

Exactly. Sooner or later some game is gonna refuse to run unless you update your driver, or GFE/ShadowPlay will stop working, or you want DSR when it gets added to mobile. Sticking to an outdated driver is not a viable or acceptable solution, not even a band-aid one.

 

Screw them I say. Bunch of brain dead hypocrites who don't give a **** about anything as long as it doesn't affect them. I want nVidia to kill desktop overclocking just so I can see the look on their face and their RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE mode. (and how after a month or two, everything will be forgiven and they'll still be buying nVidia and singing praises)

I think what they're really trying to say is if you want to overclock your already overpriced GPU, you must go ahead and spend twice that amount on an custom liquid cooling loop or your computer will have a meltdown. At some point in the future they will block overclocking for anybody that doesn't have a watercooling setup.

 

Just been having a dicussion with @Ethrem about checking the differences in the drivers.. he's suggested using Linux and Meld tool to compare the drivers... It's a bit complicated for me to install Linux and dual boot due to the 970M BIOS nonsence in AW so if anyone has Linux and some time, why not give it a shot.. Just quoting Ethrem below..

"Linux has a tool called meld that is a graphical version of diff (compares two files) which can compare files between two different folders rather than one file at a time with diff. Then it shows you what was changed where and you sift through it looking for key changes. "

"Get a USB key with Linux mint and search for pen drive Linux and you don't have to worry about changing things on your system.

http://www.pendrivelinux.com/universal-usb-installer-easy-as-1-2-3/

http://www.linuxmint.com/edition.php?id=172

You want to add persistent storage so it saves the files you need.

Open the terminal and type "sudo apt-get install meld" (no quotes) and have your folders ready to go. It's not a hard tool to use. "

P.S: I don't have a big enough USB drive for this..

 

It seems there is an open source Windows version of this tool. Www.winmerge.org

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

Open the 344.75 or 346 in M$ Word, go to compare document, do a legal blackline under compare, choose the same driver file from 347, it will show what is unchanged and what is changed. If you use 346, you will not confuse the g-sync enabled changes. This is one way to do a compare between drivers.

 

So what driver version still enables overclocking? Or can you transplant the OC bug from the older driver to new ones (sorry, 27 page thread ._.).

 

There is no OC bug, that's an Nvidia lie. The lack of OC is the real bug. OC is possible on pre-347.xx drivers, that's what you need to use.

 

Anything before 347, apparently. But, as someone explained to me, this is only a temporary fix because eventually games will require the newer drivers and then it's buhbye OC and consequently, buhbye performance. When that happens, I will probably quit gaming until either Nvidia reverses their stance or AMD finally releases a competetive product. I am getting married and hopefully starting a family soon anyway, so if I have to abstain from gaming for a while it isn't something that is going to greatly impact my lifestyle.

I'm not supporting Nvidia with any more dollar votes while they take this stupid, greedy stance. I am sure NV knows damn well that people who buy 970 and 980 cards aren't normal users, ordinarly... they are people looking for top-notch performance and as such they are inclined to OC to get the most out of their expensive hardware. It should be one of those "user assumes all responsibility" type of things, where if you fry your GPU because of OC your warranty doesn't cover it.

To me, this appears to be a cash grab because it forces people to shell out money more often if they want to maintain the same standards of performance they are accustomed to.

 

KnightofDight, it's a viable solution for current-gen GPUs. You install older drivers, overclock and thoroughly test for stability, flash adjusted frequencies to BIOS, install new drivers and voila. Of course it will be much less fun for users who have vBIOS integrated into main BIOS, but still doable. The real problem will appear once new generation of Nvidia GPUs, unsupported by those older drivers, comes out - if Nvidia doesn't reconsider, that is.

 

Yeah you`re right. I just used Linus example and gave him an example of why he is thinking wrong if Aorus had bad cooling.
Maxwell is good man. Totally agree. Temps should be of no concern, and its amazing to see thin notebooks like the P35x you mentioned carry the 980M flagship
So why the hell does Nvidia disable OC on Maxwell? Greed must be the answer :/

The problem with that move although it sounds like an ok solution is
1) You void the warranty on the GPUs if anything goes wrong
2) You need to flash cards back and forth, and just using a third party app to overclock is so much easier and easy to revert. You can have different profiles for what you are doing with the notebook with Afterburner etc.

Yes but you lose new SLI profiles/game profiles that come with a new driver, game optimizations, new features etc. Thats the core of this dick move from Nvidia.
We should be able to have both OC and new drivers!

Would be funny to crash the show and display our displease with Nvidia in that event for sure.
Dress up like farmers and carry pitchforks and torches.
Or make a costume that resembles a Nvidia mobile card and act disabled while you shout at Mr Huang on stage

 

Out of curiosity, why would one need multiple overclocking profiles? I understand it may be usable in different seasons if one's having cooling problems, well he or she will likely choose one. It's not in any way critical and miles ahead of inability to overclock or adjusting BIOS frequencies without testing.

 

Games that run 60FPS on stock clocks and less demanding games for example.
I`d gladly use 3rd party app to get some breathing room in terms of fan speed and noise if that is possible

 

Okay, apparently I am a newb to this. Obviously, my weapon of choice is a GT72, but I am new to OCing as this is the first notebook I've owned that I wasn't scared would melt into a smouldering pile of goo if I attempted it. Are there any links to guides for doing this sort of thing? And do you know if the GT72 has vBIOS integrated into the main BIOS? Thanks for any information you can provide.

 

KnightofDight, first you download and clean-install older (344 or below) Nvidia drivers. Then you overclock and test it using MSI Afterburner, it's straightforward and there are many guides around. On the extracting, modifying and flashing 980M BIOS someone else should consult you.

 

Thanks

I have been running 344.75 since I first read on these forums about the problems of 347 (that was even before the clock-block), and since many people on this site recommended it for stability.

I will download Afterburner and ticker with it.

 

It's not an ideal solution though. Ideal solution is for NVidia to revert to allowing overclocking. Software overclocking is less risky, less complicated, less permanent, more tweakable on a daily basis to suit a particular need. Yes, it's a workaround, but we don't want to be resigned to that.

Time for the petition link again, been a while since it's been posted! (Hopefully there's some newbies to the forum reading this that would like to support the cause & sign it!):
https://www.change.org/p/nvidia-re-...geforce-equipped-notebooks?recruiter=20925400

 

I signed ^^

What they are doing is deplorable. Taking it at face value, if they are worried about people ruining their equipment then issue a disclaimer warning people that OCing is not manufacturer-intended, and the end-user assumes all risks and liabilities if damage occurs to their equipment because of it. No, they don't give a **** about people ruining their cards, what it is all about is reducing the lifecycles of GPUs so people have to buy upgrades sooner.

 

I think the official term is "planned obsolescence". Apple epitomizes that phrase, which is why I never have and never will buy any Apple product.

 

I believe Nvidia are absolutely in their right to limit undocumented features of their products however they want. The real issue here is lack of competition. If there were many brands offering similar in performance, quality and pricing products, we'd just say Screw you, Nvidia! and buy notebooks with different GPU vendors... Oh, wait, there's only AMD with their f***ed up drivers and more heat. XGI, Voodoo, Matrox, S3 and Trident... all dead and buried. At least the situation is still better than with mobile CPUs - Intel, being monopolists, can get away with whatever trick they pull.

 

The only Apple product I use is OS X Mavericks, on my Clevo. Heh, beating Apple at their own game is fun. I didn't upgrade to Yosemite because the UI looks terrible and it's extremely buggy.

 

Really hope that the next GPU from AMD will trounce Maxwell, or at least stay competitive. It looks unlikely though. The issue with AMD is that they are designing their GPUs top-down, desktop first. Great for desktop users, where they remain very competitive. However, very bad for us laptop users, where efficiency is everything - performance/watt is literally all that matters. NVIDIA have moved to a bottom-up strategy starting with Maxwell, focusing on efficiency, which is why they are so far ahead right now in the laptop market. Sadly, nothing we have heard in the rumours surrounding the R9 300 series has suggested that GCN 1.3 will be any different. Great for desktop users, lacklustre for laptop users.

I plan to buy a new laptop this year; I'm on a yearly upgrade cycle because games are evolving so fast, my desires for 1080p gaming are not being met by even the 980M. I keep trying to justify a desktop, but I just can't picture it working out; my current living situation would make having a completely stationary PC very inconvenient indeed.

I want to be able to give AMD my support this time around to punish NVIDIA for this dick move. But there's no guarantee that AMD will be able to compete until the 14nm process shrinks next year - and that scares me.

Sent from my Nexus 5

 

I am a sucker, I love my iPhone/iPad. But, I wouldn't ever buy a Macbook.

 

It's interesting that no one else has managed to break into the computational chip market - I suppose the barriers to entry (fabs, foundries, business connections with silicon mines, etc.) are too high.

What's the likelihood that Qualcomm/Samsung/Apple enters the x86 and desktop GPU market?

 

i think the only real competitor that could be a threat to nvidia in the laptop/desktop market is Imagination technologies. The GPU's they make are remarkable for mobile. Look at the ipad air 2's GPU, that thing smoked the tegra K1 and used much less power.

 

Even though I am a huge Nvidia fan (considering the amount of technology they brought to us and always pushing the envelope as much as possible), I am disappointed. I am not a defender of OC'ing on mobile platform either, if you want to OC, get a desktop has always been my mindset. BUT outright removing the OC support on mobile platform only is ridiculous (which kind of shows what awaits us in the future). Why not just state that OC will void warranty? (which is more than reasonable considering mobile chips already gets stressed in most laptops, apart from AW 18 kind of desktop replacement units) Bad decision by Nvidia.

 

One correction, AMD only had cpu at glofo which is 14nm. Gpu is with tsmc like nvidia which is 16nm, followed by 10nm. As I am unsure as to their set generation (1.2 or 2.0 gcn arch.) I cannot comment on the 1.3 thing. But I agree. Hopefully the report from extreme tech isn't true on them canceling 20nm gpus, but time will tell. I've only seen that statement at one site. .. but if new architecture and they pour almost all of the node shrink into heat dissipation, it may be more than competitive. I'm still wondering about the m295x at 4k performance. But time will tell

 

Take this piece with a grain of salt, but it appears AMD might be using GloFo's 28nm SHP which is supposed to have 25-35% more performance over TSMC's existing 28nm process.

 

I don't understand why my cards aren't performing at the clocks I set in evga precision x when doing fire strike benchmarks. Could the nvidia drivers cause the cards clocks to downgrade?

 

Well, it may transition it's mid and low level gpus to GloFo and have it's flagship on 20nm. That would alleviate demand for 20nm wafers during a shortage (I'm sure their contract would provide for contingencies to allow AMD not to perform if their was no way to fulfill orders during the time period for performance), and would allow for improvements in mid and lower end gpus due to GloFo's processes. Who knows?

I had the same issue running valley. Although stable with other checks, when I ran in valley, the driver would crash and reset to stock, or would throttle and not perform. I just found where the driver wouldn't crash, then tested by 10hz changes until I achieved the highest benchmark score, then ran it for an hour to verify heat at the same level and no lower framerate variance. But I was using Nvidia Inspector and prema vbios.

 

SRSR333, very high entry barriers indeed. The last ones who tried IIRC - and they tried to enter desktops only - were XGI, actually SiS division with Trident legacy. PowerVR once produced PC VGAs as well, before they quit to mobile.

 

OT, but look who picked up on the desktop 970 debacle. Quite refreshing to say the least.