Overclocking: Does OCing memory or Core cause more Instability?

Ive been playing around with clock speeds on my 8600m gt for a while now and lately ive been stuck at 640/900. Ive seen plp taking their card up to 700/950 and from hearing all these reviews and what nots on how great of an OC card the 8600 gt is Ive been itching to try to push mine a little further.

So in regards to playing the lastest games on the highest settings, does OCing Core or Memory clock make a bigger difference.
And which Ocing which clock is more taxing to the GPU? Ive noticed that the game crashes when I take both up simultaneously but maybe taking one higher and the other lower wont result in a crash?

Anyone with experience with these sort of tweaks? Also, my 3dmark scores are incredibly variable, 5300~5700 on the same clock. What the hell?!

 

i would say core would make a bigger difference in game..

memory causes stability issues more often than the core from my experienc (i can max out my 8600m's core at 715, but anything more than 915 for memory is instant BSOD/restart

 

OCing your core will make the biggest difference ingame. But you need the memory to back it up. But if you OVER OC your core, usually you just get alot of artifacts and tearing and other garbage. HOWEVER, if you OVER OC your memory, thats wen ive gotten my whole screen to like, turn into a solid screen of static and other things where i had to do a hard reboot to even get it to work again.... memory is volatile in myy experience.

 

Nice thread! Just the questions I wanted to ask as well .
I just have one more though, which increases temperature more - memory or core?

 

im gonna go with core... but its more or less equal i believe cuz wen you overclock your SUPPOSED to be doing both in small relative increments anyway! so you rele wouldnt know which has more of a temp effect.

 

I am so envious of all of you lol. Max I have found a stable OC on my M1530 is 550/800. If I try 650 on the core I get a instant restart when I load up TF2. But I can 3dmark like that.

 

yea... a hundred points over on many cards isnt stable for core at ALL... i know mine wouldnt let me do that..., not even cuz of heat issues... general rule for me is like, 50 over the core and clock is most i wanna do for stability.

 

driver issue what drivers are you running? give 174.74 a run and see how you like it

 

core for sure the temps aren't all that different though but theres a greater effect when overclocking core as compared to memory

 

yeh thats a good rule to keep for gpu maintenance, with the way Im ocing this baby i dont expect to keep my laptop for more than 4 years. But by that time I'll be making a switch anyways.

I had that issue when i first started Ocing. I was on 169.09 foreware i believe and I could never OC past 550 core. I thought that was pretty wierd and so I started trying different foreware versions, and after a few trails 175.70 let me Oc up to 600 with good stability. It wasnt until I found 174.74 that I took the card all the way up. So try your luck man, different game run optimally with different drivers also.

 

Man I have tried almost every single driver. 174.74, 169.09, 175.70, 175.80, 174.93 you name it I have tried it. I guess I will try 174.74 again.

 

One last question from me......does the memory clock have anything to do with the core clock (and vise-versa) in terms of stability issues e.g. will decreasing my memory allow me to increase my core etc?
Just wondering since I've OC'd my memory from 700 to 850 so far (I have yet to get artifacts etc on 3dmark) and thought that this success may reduce potential for core.