[GeForce Forums] Nvidia has officially blocked 900M overclocking

[Erenhardt]

UH no all GPUs can be OCed. Also the 660ti was a fail card with cripple memory bus.

I was foreseeing the future gpus, not telling how it currently is.

 

[PC Master Race]

I was foreseeing the future gpus, not telling how it currently is.

Ya locked down and proprietary software does not seem good to me.

 

[ShintaiDK]

IMO though OEMs asked Nvidia for this is what I think.

Yep. But I think its a lost message in the rage.

 

[HurleyBird]

While locking down overclocking is something that should be frowned upon regardless, I can understand why Nvidia is doing it for notebooks. Probably not the best timing doing this so soon after 4GB-gate though.

 

[3DVagabond]

IMO though OEMs asked Nvidia for this is what I think.

Even if OEMs receive .001% more returns it's still more returns due to OCing or more time wasted on customer service. It was probably just a measure OEMs wanted to save costs because the market of people that it hurts is so extremely tiny (Market of GTX 980M owners/ Now Include ones who OC/ Now include ones who care that it's not allowed to be done anymore = 5 people who care who are affected).

The only people who are going to post online saying they care are caring from an "ideological" perspective. None were actual potential customers of this product. (In this thread anyway).

Yep. But I think its a lost message in the rage.

What is the source for you guys believing this? Especially considering with Kepler we had MSI and EVGA trying to get around nVidia's moratorium on voltage control.

It seems pretty likely, considering nVidia's past attempts, this is nVidia's doing not the AIB's.

So please, any kind of source for your conclusions.

 

[RussianSensation]

I really didn't realize people bothered to OC a notebook GPU - for the same reason nvidia just killed it: limited heat dissipation abilities...

Not surprising and I personally don't blame them. Mobile GPU's are already hitting their temp threshold as it is and in many laptops will throttle after extended gaming even at default clocks.

You must be thinking thin and light form factor laptops, not high-end enthusiast laptops that have heatpipes and fans that have allowed huge overclocks on Fermi, Kepler and now Maxwell GPUs. In fact, those heatsink and cooling capabilities for desktop replacement gaming laptops have only improved and yet Maxwell 970M/980M have gotten even more efficient.

The end result is even better overclocking headroom at low temperatures than ever!

High-end enthusiast 970M/980M laptops can handle 40-50% overclocks with temperatures way below 80C.

The vendor should be doing the OC, NOT the user. Because if someone burns out their chip, odds are they're going to RMA it for repair, and the vendor will be paying for the user's poor decisions. Don't you think this move by NV might be to benefit the OEMs?

Who made this rule?

1. The chips don't overvolt but overclock on stock voltage. Why would they burn out when modern CPUs/GPUs have the ability to throttle clocks at specific thermal points?

2. If you look at NV's desktop GPUs, even going back to GTX280 days, their maximum operating temperatures are 93-105C. 970M/980M OC run well below those levels and usually mobile dGPUs can handle higher loads than 90C.

3. The vendor could offer a disclaimer that overclocking voids warranty or charge $100-200 extra for "overclocking laptop models" that allow the user to overclock if they are so worried about returns.

Unless you want a 3 year old gpu, Nvidia is the only option in the high end laptop category.

Do you believe that: (a) AMD will never replace HD7970M in laptops? (b) AMD will never have a good dGPU mobile chip in laptops worth buying? (c) Do you think the only gaming laptops worth buying are those with the fastest single mobile dGPU, nothing 2nd or 3rd or 4th tier?

IMO though OEMs asked Nvidia for this is what I think.

Sound theory at first until you realize that Asus ROG and MSI specifically advertised overclocking on their laptops.

MSI even had specific mentions of overclocking on their GTX980M SLI laptop on their website but the reference is gone now:
http://us.msi.com/product/nb/GT80-Titan-SLI-GTX-980M-SLI.html#hero-overview

Remember voltage locking on the EVGA Classified 680? It wasn't EVGA who asked NV to remove voltage control. That completely went against EVGA's hardcore overclocking SKU marketing.

The only people who are going to post online saying they care are caring from an "ideological" perspective. None were actual potential customers of this product. (In this thread anyway).

Nvidia and Notebookcheck forums are filled with actual users who overclocked 970M/980M products for extra performance. We even have posters here who are upset and they own NV mobile GPUs. Now that NV removed that functionality in perfectly capable, cool and quiet laptops who could have handled that overclocking easily, NV is forcing you to upgrade to a faster product a lot sooner because you can no longer overclock 970M to match 980M or 965M to match 970M, etc.

The more sound explanation is NV did this for $ reasons, not because OEMs asked for it. In fact, OEMs would want overclocking to be as one of the differentiating factors for their high-end enthusiasts laptops.

Yep. But I think its a lost message in the rage.

Proposing the theory that OEMs specifically asked for it when some OEMs advertised overclocking as selling features for their high-end mobile GPU laptops doesn't support your theory. The 2nd reason is that unlike desktop Kepler cards that got neutered in GPU voltage control, Maxwell mobile dGPU parts didn't even have voltage control.

Explain now how OEMs/AIBs are pushing overclocking on GTX960/970/980 and release factory pre-overclocked cards, but suddenly overclocking mobile 900M parts will result in huge number of RMAs? 970M can hit 1.5Ghz on a well ventilated laptop and stays cool and quiet. Considering many GTX970/980 users on our forum have overclocked their cards to 1.4-1.55Ghz, why would a GM204 mobile chip fail prematurely running 1.3-1.5Ghz if the temps are fine and no overvoltage has been applied? Considering NV specifically went out of their way to advertize GTX960's 1.5Ghz overclocking as a selling point, I am supposed to believe now that 900M overclocking is bad for the brand name?

NV can't yet neuter overclocking on GTX900 desktop parts because there is too much competition with AMD for now. You can bet if competition gets to the same level as it is in mobiile right now, NV will neuter overclocking on the desktop too to support market segmentation and higher ASPs due to people stepping up to higher-end SKUs. That is their cunning plan all along.

Right now NV advertizes overclocking on the desktop because cards like 960 are total under-performers compared to competition without it.

"Nvidia announce Geforce GTX 960 cards; boasts 1.5 GHz overclocking potential" :sneaky:

http://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia-announce-geforce-gtx-960-cards-boasts-15-ghz-overclocking-potential

I can understand why Nvidia is doing it for notebooks.

$$$, product segmentation, enticing the consumer to pay extra for upgrading from 965M to 970M to 980M to 970M SLI.

What is the source for you guys believing this? Especially considering with Kepler we had MSI and EVGA trying to get around nVidia's moratorium on voltage control.

There is no source; it's just conjecture.

The arguments that NV limited this due to overheating are completely unsubstantiated.

"- the X7 - at the turn of the year and proclaimed it to be "the world's thinnest SLI gaming laptop."The sub-23mm chassis caught the eye of gamers craving something a little more current-gen in terms of styling, and knowing that it's on to a good thing, Aorus has seen fit to repurpose the chassis with subsequent revamps."

This thin laptop is cooling 2x 970Ms (!) or 150W graphics power usage alone! It gets better as the CPU is a a quad-core Intel Core i7-4870HQ capable of hitting speeds of up to 3.7GHz

For anyone keeping track, that's 219W of gaming at load, cooled by 2 fans and heat pipes, 100% warrantied for 2 years, while running both GPUs at full speed at 87C.
http://www.aorus.com/x7pro.aspx

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/laptop/76145-aorus-x7-pro/?page=9

If this sub-23mm laptop with dual GTX970Ms and a 47W i7 works perfectly fine, what are the chances that a modern high quality high-end gaming laptop with a single 965M, 970M or a 980M will overheat? Really now? :hmm:

The comments on NV-favoured forums like TPU are your typical defense of NV and actually some members attack laptop gamers and anyone who is even decided to buy a gaming laptop or overclock their laptop's GPU, as if enthusiast laptop gamers don't even count despite mobile dGPU gaming being > 50% of the entire GPU market! Amazing.

http://www.techpowerup.com/209820/n...bile-gpu-overclocking-with-driver-update.html

 

[octiceps]

Hi RussianSensation,

Thank you for making this thread. Every last bit counts as we raise awareness of this issue across the Internet and make our voices heard.

In your original post, can you please ask concerned users to sign this petition and to tweet the following messages:

#WTFnvidia Why have you disabled mobile overclocking? You're restricting performance & alienating users http://chn.ge/1F34mfS @nvidia

#WTFnvidia Why have you disabled mobile overclocking? You're restricting performance&alienating users http://chn.ge/1F34mfS @NVIDIAGeForce

We've already started a Twitter campaign using #WTFnvidia, so please include that hashtag whenever you're tweeting about this issue.

It would be even better if AnandTech is able to obtain and publish further info from Nvidia on this matter.

 

[Enigmoid]

This really sucks.

I run my 660m at 1085/2500 (+135 mhz on core) and get a nice 10% gain in fps. Laptop has no trouble cooling because there is no voltage increase. This is especially crappy for maxwell because Maxwell overclocks like a champ with no voltage increases and the power gain from overclocking is minimal compared to the performance gain.

Its really looking like I'm going to stay away from Nvidia for the foreseeable future.

 

[Cloudfire777]

People who think you can kill a mobile GPU by overclocking it have zero understanding on how notebooks work.
First of all, you have a +135MHz limit on the core clock for mobile GPUs. You`re not killing a GPU by doing +135MHz. To go beyond this limit you will need to reflash it with a modded vbios, and there goes your claim for warranty coverage anyway....

Second, even if you had the option to go beyond that limit, there are temperature limits on the GPU that force shut the whole computer if the thermal sensors read too hot temps.

Third, the only data you can change with a overclocking tool that can kill a mobile GPU is voltage. Which isnt available to change with mobile GPUs. Voltage have been disabled for a long time. To change it, you again need to use a modified vbios. Yes, warranty goes away here too if you go that route.

Forth, there are MANY gamer notebooks that can easily do overclocking and cool off a mobile GPU. Asus G751, MSI GT72, MSI GT80, Alienware 18, Alienware 17, many Clevo notebooks etc etc.
Just because some OEMs are appealing to the Hipster Joe and make their notebooks thin, they can`t drag down the rest of the OEMs and models that can do overclocking easily. Nvidia have no right to disable overclocking broadly across all mobile GPUs because there may exist some thin models that would catch on fire due to bad design.

No. Nvidia are obligated to have overclocking enabled on all drivers, be it mobile or desktop, and let OEMs decide if their models can`t handle overclocking and take precautions like implementing BIOS block from overclocking the GPUs.

This is Nvidia being greedy and we just caught them with their stinky fingers inside the cookie jar. Without overclocking for mobile, they can sell GT 940M to GT 840M (examples) owners. The two GPUs are identical, but the GT 940M run +100MHz higher hence it could persuade some fool to buy a new notebook with GT 940M just to have the "newest" since overclocking is disabled.

This was a stupid move from Nvidia, and I expected more after the GTX 970 accident where they had to come clean about the real ROP specs for the GTX 970 other than what was being advertised in marketing channels and from reviewers.

Shame on you Nvidia

 

[Aikouka]

If this sub-23mm laptop with dual GTX970Ms and a 47W i7 works perfectly fine, what are the chances that a modern high quality high-end gaming laptop with a single 965M, 970M or a 980M will overheat? Really now? :hmm:

Are you sure that laptop works "perfectly fine"? Here's an excerpt:

That's a little bit strange. CPU temperature is well within the limits and it's the actually the GPUs that are running warm under load. Surprising, then, that the CPU is throttling and the GPUs aren't. Aorus seems more concerned with CPU heat as our logs reveal that the speed of the Intel processor is dialled down as soon as it approaches 70ºC.

It's always a shame to see throttling on a performance-orientated machine, but with the X7 Pro it's a double-whammy as noise levels are also a concern. Load up the cores and the fans do get frustratingly loud.

Now, I know what you're going to say. "Well, it's being throttled unnecessarily! It says so right there!" Unfortunately, the image that you posted of the innards make it pretty obvious as to why it's throttling the CPU. There are three chips being cooled by two fans. The left and right chips are the GPUs, which makes the central one the CPU. Now, if you take a look at the heat pipes, you'll notice one thing pretty quickly... the CPU's heat pipes travel directly over the GPUs. In other words, they share cooling capability, which means the CPU's heat will directly affect the GPU.

Although, I originally went to the article, because I suspected that this paragon of processing prowess that you presented was actually a banshee in disguise. Unfortunately, based upon their description of the noise, it looks like I'm correct. Thin laptops almost always have poor cooling and tend to be loud. That's why I didn't go with the MSI Ghost series laptop, but instead went with the thicker Dominator. Sure, it's not nearly as portable (albeit, no 17" laptop is really that portable), but at least it's far more quiet.

 

[n0x1ous]

This is really asinine from Nvidia. Maxwell should be the best case ever for notebook overclocking since it does so well without voltage. I've always had a soft spot for Nvidia even though I buy from both vendors regularly. They are really starting to piss me off.......

 

[2is]

People who think you can kill a mobile GPU by overclocking it have zero understanding on how notebooks work.
First of all, you have a +135MHz limit on the core clock for mobile GPUs. You`re not killing a GPU by doing +135MHz. To go beyond this limit you will need to reflash it with a modded vbios, and there goes your claim for warranty coverage anyway....

Second, even if you had the option to go beyond that limit, there are temperature limits on the GPU that force shut the whole computer if the thermal sensors read too hot temps.

Third, the only data you can change with a overclocking tool that can kill a mobile GPU is voltage. Which isnt available to change with mobile GPUs. Voltage have been disabled for a long time. To change it, you again need to use a modified vbios. Yes, warranty goes away here too if you go that route.

Forth, there are MANY gamer notebooks that can easily do overclocking and cool off a mobile GPU. Asus G751, MSI GT72, MSI GT80, Alienware 18, Alienware 17, many Clevo notebooks etc etc.
Just because some OEMs are appealing to the Hipster Joe and make their notebooks thin, they can`t drag down the rest of the OEMs and models that can do overclocking easily. Nvidia have no right to disable overclocking broadly across all mobile GPUs because there may exist some thin models that would catch on fire due to bad design.

No. Nvidia are obligated to have overclocking enabled on all drivers, be it mobile or desktop, and let OEMs decide if their models can`t handle overclocking and take precautions like implementing BIOS block from overclocking the GPUs.

This is Nvidia being greedy and we just caught them with their stinky fingers inside the cookie jar. Without overclocking for mobile, they can sell GT 940M to GT 840M (examples) owners. The two GPUs are identical, but the GT 940M run +100MHz higher hence it could persuade some fool to buy a new notebook with GT 940M just to have the "newest" since overclocking is disabled.

This was a stupid move from Nvidia, and I expected more after the GTX 970 accident where they had to come clean about the real ROP specs for the GTX 970 other than what was being advertised in marketing channels and from reviewers.

Shame on you Nvidia

You're actually wrong... Increased temps will reduce the life of the components, not just the GPU but other components as well. Maybe not the first or send or even 10th time. But those extra few C for that little while longer adds up over time. Not to mention the circuitry responsible for providing the power, those get hot too. You seem to be under the impression that the GPU is the only thing affected, it isn't. There's supporting hardware that also take the abuse. Next time you accuse people of having zero understanding, make sure you actually know what you're talking about instead of merely thinking you know what you're talking about.

Another thing you're wrong about... nVIdia having no right to disable overclocking. It's their GPU, designed to work at a certain frequency. They have every right to disable it.

 

[2is]

You must be thinking thin and light form factor laptops, not high-end enthusiast laptops that have heatpipes and fans that have allowed huge overclocks on Fermi, Kepler and now Maxwell GPUs. In fact, those heatsink and cooling capabilities for desktop replacement gaming laptops have only improved and yet Maxwell 970M/980M have gotten even more efficient.

The end result is even better overclocking headroom at low temperatures than ever!

High-end enthusiast 970M/980M laptops can handle 40-50% overclocks with temperatures way below 80C.

Who made this rule?

1. The chips don't overvolt but overclock on stock voltage. Why would they burn out when modern CPUs/GPUs have the ability to throttle clocks at specific thermal points?

2. If you look at NV's desktop GPUs, even going back to GTX280 days, their maximum operating temperatures are 93-105C. 970M/980M OC run well below those levels and usually mobile dGPUs can handle higher loads than 90C.

3. The vendor could offer a disclaimer that overclocking voids warranty or charge $100-200 extra for "overclocking laptop models" that allow the user to overclock if they are so worried about returns.



Do you believe that: (a) AMD will never replace HD7970M in laptops? (b) AMD will never have a good dGPU mobile chip in laptops worth buying? (c) Do you think the only gaming laptops worth buying are those with the fastest single mobile dGPU, nothing 2nd or 3rd or 4th tier?



Sound theory at first until you realize that Asus ROG and MSI specifically advertised overclocking on their laptops.

MSI even had specific mentions of overclocking on their GTX980M SLI laptop on their website but the reference is gone now:
http://us.msi.com/product/nb/GT80-Titan-SLI-GTX-980M-SLI.html#hero-overview

Remember voltage locking on the EVGA Classified 680? It wasn't EVGA who asked NV to remove voltage control. That completely went against EVGA's hardcore overclocking SKU marketing.



Nvidia and Notebookcheck forums are filled with actual users who overclocked 970M/980M products for extra performance. We even have posters here who are upset and they own NV mobile GPUs. Now that NV removed that functionality in perfectly capable, cool and quiet laptops who could have handled that overclocking easily, NV is forcing you to upgrade to a faster product a lot sooner because you can no longer overclock 970M to match 980M or 965M to match 970M, etc.

The more sound explanation is NV did this for $ reasons, not because OEMs asked for it. In fact, OEMs would want overclocking to be as one of the differentiating factors for their high-end enthusiasts laptops.



Proposing the theory that OEMs specifically asked for it when some OEMs advertised overclocking as selling features for their high-end mobile GPU laptops doesn't support your theory. The 2nd reason is that unlike desktop Kepler cards that got neutered in GPU voltage control, Maxwell mobile dGPU parts didn't even have voltage control.

Explain now how OEMs/AIBs are pushing overclocking on GTX960/970/980 and release factory pre-overclocked cards, but suddenly overclocking mobile 900M parts will result in huge number of RMAs? 970M can hit 1.5Ghz on a well ventilated laptop and stays cool and quiet. Considering many GTX970/980 users on our forum have overclocked their cards to 1.4-1.55Ghz, why would a GM204 mobile chip fail prematurely running 1.3-1.5Ghz if the temps are fine and no overvoltage has been applied? Considering NV specifically went out of their way to advertize GTX960's 1.5Ghz overclocking as a selling point, I am supposed to believe now that 900M overclocking is bad for the brand name?

NV can't yet neuter overclocking on GTX900 desktop parts because there is too much competition with AMD for now. You can bet if competition gets to the same level as it is in mobiile right now, NV will neuter overclocking on the desktop too to support market segmentation and higher ASPs due to people stepping up to higher-end SKUs. That is their cunning plan all along.

Right now NV advertizes overclocking on the desktop because cards like 960 are total under-performers compared to competition without it.

"Nvidia announce Geforce GTX 960 cards; boasts 1.5 GHz overclocking potential" :sneaky:

http://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia-announce-geforce-gtx-960-cards-boasts-15-ghz-overclocking-potential




$$$, product segmentation, enticing the consumer to pay extra for upgrading from 965M to 970M to 980M to 970M SLI.



There is no source; it's just conjecture.

The arguments that NV limited this due to overheating are completely unsubstantiated.

"- the X7 - at the turn of the year and proclaimed it to be "the world's thinnest SLI gaming laptop."The sub-23mm chassis caught the eye of gamers craving something a little more current-gen in terms of styling, and knowing that it's on to a good thing, Aorus has seen fit to repurpose the chassis with subsequent revamps."

This thin laptop is cooling 2x 970Ms (!) or 150W graphics power usage alone! It gets better as the CPU is a a quad-core Intel Core i7-4870HQ capable of hitting speeds of up to 3.7GHz

For anyone keeping track, that's 219W of gaming at load, cooled by 2 fans and heat pipes, 100% warrantied for 2 years, while running both GPUs at full speed at 87C.
http://www.aorus.com/x7pro.aspx

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/laptop/76145-aorus-x7-pro/?page=9

If this sub-23mm laptop with dual GTX970Ms and a 47W i7 works perfectly fine, what are the chances that a modern high quality high-end gaming laptop with a single 965M, 970M or a 980M will overheat? Really now? :hmm:

The comments on NV-favoured forums like TPU are your typical defense of NV and actually some members attack laptop gamers and anyone who is even decided to buy a gaming laptop or overclock their laptop's GPU, as if enthusiast laptop gamers don't even count despite mobile dGPU gaming being > 50% of the entire GPU market! Amazing.

http://www.techpowerup.com/209820/n...bile-gpu-overclocking-with-driver-update.html

They overhead/throttle all the time. Yes, it looks pretty, thanks for the photo. That doesn't actually mean anything though. I suggest you buy a gaming laptop then play an intensive game for 3+ hours. LMK how your boost clocks look, vs looking at a nicely put together laptop and assuming there's plenty of heat dissipation and room to spare for overclocking. 3dmark which loads a test that runs for a few seconds, idles while the next test loads, runs for a few more seconds, idles for a couple minutes while the CPU tests completes, etc is hardly intensive. It has time to cool down and not nearly under load like a gaming session would put on it.

 

[96Firebird]

What is the source for you guys believing this?

Are you not familiar with the abbreviation "IMO"?

 

[Cloudfire777]

You're actually wrong... Increased temps will reduce the life of the components, not just the GPU but other components as well. Maybe not the first or send or even 10th time. But those extra few C for that little while longer adds up over time. Not to mention the circuitry responsible for providing the power, those get hot too. You seem to be under the impression that the GPU is the only thing affected, it isn't. There's supporting hardware that also take the abuse. Next time you accuse people of having zero understanding, make sure you actually know what you're talking about instead of merely thinking you know what you're talking about.

Another thing you're wrong about... nVIdia having no right to disable overclocking. It's their GPU, designed to work at a certain frequency. They have every right to disable it.

Heh, don`t call anyone who have been using gamer notebooks for almost 10 years and have extensive experience with notebooks wrong. I`ve overclocked pretty much all my mobile GPUs over the years, what have you to show for?

Here is a couple of hints:
Extremely few game with 95C on the GPU. These temps are for when you benchmark the GPUs to get the best score.
Secondly, nobody games on full massive overclock the entire time they are using the notebook.

Gamer notebooks, and I`m not talking about Macbooks or similar thin like designs, can easily do heavy overclocking without going in to 90s Celsius.Which you would know if you had any experience with said notebooks. Secondly, a +135MHz on the core won`t skyrocket the temperature in 99% of the notebooks.
Ooops, there goes your theory that you degrade the GPU over time since its well below any thresshold where you damage the GPU even with prolonged usage.
Once you start increasing voltage along with overclocks well above +135MHz, well then we are talking a different scenario. But voltage is locked on mobile GPUs. And again...if you have that unlocked, meaning using a modified vbios, you are doing it on your own risk.

Like I said if you actually took the time to read my post, OEMs should decide if their notebooks are capable of overclocking or not. They are the one designing the cooling and know what the notebook is capable of. Nvidia don`t, they just make the chip.
That way, the paper thin notebooks that are mostly for show and design can have their limit while beefier notebooks, like my Alienware 18, can have entirely different terms of dealing with overclocking.
This have always been the way before the newest drivers appeared. Taking away a feature thats been working for users for many many years, is bound to get them in a PR trouble. And rightfully so.

I`d like to see the whole gamer community blow up if Nvidia did this on desktop GPUs. "Because it`s Nvidia GPUs" according to your own words...

 

[exar333]

This isn't 2004 anymore. As RS stated above, you can very easily OC your laptops these days. Lots of laptop design are actually recycled from year to year, and essentially they are 'over-built' to some degree for Maxwell. Laptop GPUs often get the best binned parts now for power efficiency and often allow almost as much overclocking as the Desktop part.

Limiting this is very troubling. Instead of owning the part, this feels more and more like you are renting or leasing these products.

Custom BIOS's used to be for only LN users. Now, we need to hunt forums for a BIOS that allows us to OC our standard cards. That's WRONG in my opinion. The industry is moving in the wrong direction. As others have stated, I was also neutral in terms of NV/AMD but this really pushes me to AMD for my next purchase.

 

[mindbomb]

this shouldn't matter on many levels. First, overclocking a laptop is a bad idea. Second, gaming on a laptop is a bad idea. Third, you can still edit the video card bios to put in whatever clocks you want.

To me, the real scandal is how things like powertune and gpu boost can silently throttle your card, making performance inconsistent. And this affects everyone since kepler.

 

[exar333]

this shouldn't matter on many levels. First, overclocking a laptop is a bad idea. Second, gaming on a laptop is a bad idea. Third, you can still edit the video card bios to put in whatever clocks you want.

To me, the real scandal is how things like powertune and gpu boost can silently throttle your card, making performance inconsistent.

Sorry, but I am calling shens on both of these statements. OCing GPUs is VERY much a great option on laptops built for the cooling and MANY people will disagree on gaming on a laptop. Your statement is just silly and uninformed.

GTX 980M = TDP ~122w
GTX 970M = TDP ~100w

You often get the SAME laptop and choose what GPU you want. Going the 970M route means you have 22w of OCing headroom. That's a good 15-20% more performance and the laptop is BUILT to handle it.

NV is just trying to limit you and push the higher SKUs. Plain and simple.

 

[oobydoobydoo]

What is up with nvidia these days? It's like they are trying to see how far they can push and how much they can abuse their own customers before they crack


Disabling overclocking? My guess the reasoning for this is they currently stratify mobile GPUs by clockspeed (and often nothing else) so overclocking basically gives you a more expensive gpu. But so what, it should still be binned lower.

I just don't get how a company so beloved by its fans can treat them so poorly.

 

[exar333]

What is up with nvidia these days? It's like they are trying to see how far they can push and how much they can abuse their own customers before they crack


Disabling overclocking? My guess the reasoning for this is they currently stratify mobile GPUs by clockspeed (and often nothing else) so overclocking basically gives you a more expensive gpu. But so what, it should still be binned lower.

I just don't get how a company so beloved by its fans can treat them so poorly.

Well said.

I support a company trying to make money, but I get really irritated when you buy a product and you lose features over time. That's dishonest and does treat your customers poorly.

I am having a hard time justifying a NV purchase this year.

 

[tential]

Does anyone in this thread own a GTX 980m or GTX 970m?

 

[krumme]

Does anyone in this thread own a GTX 980m or GTX 970m?

Yes. Read the thread. You are just looking for excused for what is just normal market segmentation. Instead this crap talk about oem asking for it, blowup laptops, what not. Why this pr bs instead of saying what it clearly is? And why all this idiotic run for other explanations? I have no respect for that.

At least my old 20% nv laptop that i bought knowing it could oc is just roling on. Else i would feel cheated.

 

[dragonwolf8504]

I used to own a Sager with an AMD 8970M which did my gaming fine, in other words did I need to upgrade, no. And I am also not in Team Red, or Team Green, I'll pick whatever will run my games and at the price I can AFFORD! I choose to upgrade as I am leaning towards Nvidia due to my games running a little better and had the extra cash when I upgraded to my new 980M. I wasn't about to spend $200 extra on the 780M though at the time of getting the AMD 8970M when they were pretty close. That and I didn't have the cash, now I got the cash and own a MSI GT72 w/ the 980M and it's a really nice gpu, I bought the laptop to last me a long time, heck a 970M probably would have still been overkill for my gaming needs, but I figured why not go big? I also figured that once a max overclock was figured out by me and other's I would save the OC for furthering the longevity on my laptop. But now Nvidia decides locking out the Overclocking on mobile gpus is a good idea. That's bull. Unless Nvidia turns around I will be buying AMD whenever my next pc purchase happens or just plain nothing. If Nvidia is gonna lock out mobile gpus 'for the good of everyone' I'm afraid it may go to desktops next. Then what? May not be soon, but if they think they can do that to force users to go up the next level what's stopping them from locking away Overclocking gpus on desktop to do the same thing. Upsell. Nvidia doesn't care about the customer/ user, only their pockets and it's time we band together to show them that they need to wake up! First the desktop 970 gate and now this all in about a month. For shame Nvidia. Either get your heads out of your asses or your customers will be jumping for the Red ship and I will be one of them.

 

[exar333]

And for people who think 'no one gets hurt' by this change, just look at the examples provided in the thread.

Step 1: User buy NV GPU
Step 2: User OCs NV GPU
Step 3: NV updates driver to remove OCing
Step 4: User has less performance after 'update' and a LESSER product than what they paid for

:thumbsdown:

 

[tential]

It would be hilarious if after they do this, they release a GTX 980 Ti version that's basically an OCed GTX 980M.

Edit: Even better if people returned their GTX 980M Laptops for GTX 980Ti M Versions after OCing has been disabled to get an "OC".