Can anyone point me in the direction of any articles or have information that outlines what sort of overclocking capabilities that the 1080 GTX may have.
Thanks
Thanks
This chart shows the clock-rate versus time. The GTX 1080 chokes on its thermals (and power), and begins spiraling once it's racked-up heat over the period of an hour-long test. 82C is the threshold for a clock-rate reduction on the GP104 GPU, as we show above.
You can see that the clock remains stable for a good 10+ minutes, but starts dying after that. The clock-rate recovers about 15 minutes later. These dips cause screen severe frame dropping or complete screen blackouts, in the worst cases.
LOL Here's an interesting one.
They thought they had a stable O/C @ 2GHz. Then after about 10 minutes that happened.
If someone really wants a 1080 I can't imagine any worse of a purchase than thesereference"Founders Editions". Pay an extra $100 and get a pretty poor cooling solution for your extra money. I'd wait for the custom cards and hope they charge a more reasonable price. $700 and the card does this? And there were rumblings of guaranteed O/C's in excess of 2GHz.
Come on folks. Even with a non aggressive fan profile with only 55% fan speed being reached at worse, The boost clocks still hovered between 1760 and 1785 which is still above the stated 1734 boost clock.
A slightly more aggressive fan profile could change these numbers. Even 10% increase could show meaningful differences in sustained boost clocks.
You all know this, yet, still...... whatever it is you're doing.
Granted, fan speed increases will increase noise. How much noise? I don't know. But I'd imagine that's where this conversation will turn now that I've mentioned simply increasing fan speeds.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2441-diy-gtx-1080-hybrid-thermals-100-percent-lower-higher-oc-roomThen again, it seems to be stable at cca 2150MHz with watercooling, so those rumblings perhaps werent so off.
Now the specific rumblings about 2,4 - 2,5 GHz, they might have exxagerate things quite a bit. We shall see.
This chart shows the clock-rate versus time. The GTX 1080 chokes on its thermals (and power), and begins spiraling once it's racked-up heat over the period of an hour-long test. 82C is the threshold for a clock-rate reduction on the GP104 GPU, as we show above. You can see that the clock remains stable for a good 10+ minutes, but starts dying after that. The clock-rate recovers about 15 minutes later. These dips cause screen severe frame dropping or complete screen blackouts, in the worst cases.
Our new overclocking was more successful. We were able to maximally achieve 2202MHz in Kombustor's particle simulation, but we were only able to hit this core frequency by cheating voltage away from the VRAM (downclocking VRAM by -500MHz). That's not really acceptable but it was a good test to learn more about how Pascal's overclocking works. More realistically, we were able to attain a ~2189MHz OC in Kombustor.
That doesn't translate well into games, and so can be discarded as synthetic only performance (but was stable, unlike previous, non-liquid efforts). When tuning for gameplay, we ended up settling on 2164MHz core OC and a +600MHz memory OC. That's not as impressive as 2202MHz, but it works, it's stable, and it's a measurable and noteworthy gain over the FE version of the card (which sat at ~2025-2050MHz).
Dunno where anyone is getting that NV promoted this as an overclocker. I don't remember that coming from NV.
That cooler is terrible and that PCB is just as bad. Everyone who cares about performance should avoid both. Send NV the message that the enthusiast is not to be milked (unless they want to, in which case :thumbsup.
WTB custom cards or hell, I'd love to see what a custom BIOS can do.
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2441-diy-gtx-1080-hybrid-thermals-100-percent-lower-higher-oc-room
The 1080 looks like it has very similar issues to the 290/290x at launch and is really begging for better cooling/power delivery.
Other interesting notes from the Gamersnexus test:
Nvidia didn't ramp up the fan speed enough, apparently. Maybe to avoid having the 1080 tagged with the "hot and loud" label.
Overclocking to 2150+ with custom cooling seems reasonable.
Dunno where anyone is getting that NV promoted this as an overclocker. I don't remember that coming from NV.
On the reveal he said something like "it's an overclockers dream"
Come on folks. Even with a non aggressive fan profile with only 55% fan speed being reached at worse, The boost clocks still hovered between 1760 and 1785 which is still above the stated 1734 boost clock.
A slightly more aggressive fan profile could change these numbers. Even 10% increase could show meaningful differences in sustained boost clocks.
You all know this, yet, still...... whatever it is you're doing.
Granted, fan speed increases will increase noise. How much noise? I don't know. But I'd imagine that's where this conversation will turn now that I've mentioned simply increasing fan speeds.
so you see almost no problem at all? who would have thought that D:
What do you mean "almost" no problem at all?
On the reveal he said something like "it's an overclockers dream"
It's similar to what the gtx 680 was, a mid range card released near its limit.
LOL Here's an interesting one.
They thought they had a stable O/C @ 2GHz. Then after about 10 minutes that happened.
If someone really wants a 1080 I can't imagine any worse of a purchase than thesereference"Founders Editions". Pay an extra $100 and get a pretty poor cooling solution for your extra money. I'd wait for the custom cards and hope they charge a more reasonable price. $700 and the card does this? And there were rumblings of guaranteed O/C's in excess of 2GHz.