GTX 1080 Overclocking

[BlitzWulf]

Source? I don't recall nVidia claiming the card to be a crazy overclocker.

I don't understand why so many people are up in arms about this cooler. Maybe it's because I'd never consider a reference card to begin with; I could not care less about the Founders Edition, all I take away from these reviews is GP104 performance.
The price does have me worried though. It's really going to suck if AiBs end up selling their entry-level custom cards (Windforce, Twin Frozr..) at $700 and upwards.

i dont know you tell us?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRxoWkSDhVc&feature=youtu.be&t=28

https://youtu.be/yRxoWkSDhVc?t=171

^^^

 

[wahdangun]

^^^

thanks

 

[beginner99]

i see alot of downplaying on this gpu, as if its a total fail or something...
http://wccftech.com/nviidia-gtx-1080-review-roundup/

lets remind to ourself that is 30% faster then the last gpu king gtx980ti, and whatever it comes from overclocking is all good...i dont believe max oc will be 2.1ghz, wait for custom gpu's with better cooling and then hit that 2.5ghz barrier...

It's 30% faster on more than a full node shrink. It offers same performance/$ as 980 or 980Ti after a full node shrink. That is what I call fail. If you as a consumer can't see this, I'm baffled. You do know that we get faster computers for same price because of new processes? What NV is doing is showing you the finger. With this practice, eg. same performance/$ for newer node we would be paying millions for CPUs today if we use same performance/$ as back then. So yes, this sucks pretty big. And if AMD repeats this, shame on them as well.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Source? I don't recall nVidia claiming the card to be a crazy overclocker.

Context matters. They claimed "high quality components" for the Founders Edition and made a big deal during the reveal about a 2.1Ghz overclock, and omigosh, will you look at those thermals, aren't those cute :wub:.

I'm sorry, but it's clear what kind of a message they wanted to send.

 

[coercitiv]

Context matters. They claimed "high quality components" for the Founders Edition and made a big deal during the reveal about a 2.1Ghz overclock, and omigosh, will you look at those thermals, aren't those cute.

It's not context, JHH said it on stage, as previously posted link shows:

The Nvidia designed Founders Edition... gives you crazy overclock ability

Nvidia engineers may have done a great job with this chip, since it's able to clock really high, but the Founder Edition marketing stunt may end up hurting 1080 quite a bit: all they had to to is charge a premium for a premium cooler on FE, not premium shroud and backplate.

 

[tential]

It's not context, JHH said it on stage, as previously posted link shows:

Nvidia engineers may have done a great job with this chip, since it's able to clock really high, but the Founder Edition marketing stunt may end up hurting 1080 quite a bit: all they had to to is charge a premium for a premium cooler on FE, not premium shroud and backplate.

The Founder's edition is NOT a premium for a premium cooler. Nothing on that cooler is premium.

It's just a $100 preorder fee to get it before everyone else does at $600.

There is NOTHING wrong with this. Just why pretend like it's not what you're doing? It should be $800-1000 to get the GTX 1080 now. When you say it's $100 extra for a blower cooler, it just makes me lol at Nvidia. If Nvidia said it was a $100-300 preorder fee... well that's just honest, and if someone wants something early, they need to pay for it, and I don't care HOW MUCH you pay for a GTX 1080 if you want the first cards.

Let's just be honest and call it what it is. A fee to get the cards earlier than everyone else.

 

[Krteq]

I'm not sure if this have been already posted or not.

So, freqs falls to base clock after 20 minutes of load... what a joke.

 

[Erenhardt]

I'm not sure if this have been already posted or not.

So, freqs falls to base clock after 20 minutes of load... what a joke.

Enough for a benchmark run to finish. Actual in game performance for anyone who plays in sessions longer than 5mins is 10% slower than shown in the review charts.
Premium throttling, it is even worse than r9 290 throtling.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I'm not sure if this have been already posted or not.

So, freqs falls to base clock after 20 minutes of load... what a joke.

Whats the source?

Gamers nexus got this over 2 hours testing

http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreview...nders-edition-review-and-fps-benchmark/page-3

This test was conducted over a 2-hour period (~8000 seconds). Rather than Kombustor, we used a real-world game to analyze performance and throttles in gaming scenarios. DiRT Rally was used at its maxed-out settings (4K, 8-tap MSAA, advanced blending, Ultra settings) to torture the card. To further amplify the thermal torture and create somewhat of a worst-case scenario, we also disabled all three front intake fans. This left the GPU entirely to its own devices – mostly the VRM blower fan and alloy heatsink / vapor chambers – to cool itself.

 

[Erenhardt]

Whats the source?

Gamers nexus got this over 2 hours testing

http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreview...nders-edition-review-and-fps-benchmark/page-3

Open bench test bed?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Open bench test bed?

With 3 intake fans?

 

[Grooveriding]

That chart shows what a fail the reference cooler is and how unreasonable the founders marketing is. The two bad aspects of the 1080 and its launch are the founders marketing and that the card is a poor overclocker that cannot realize much additional performance through overclocking. Reviews show about 10% of overclocking headroom best case from where the cards are boosting to at stock. I'm seeing reviews showing under 10% (6%) of additional performance achieved through overclocking.

The founders edition is surprisingly bad marketing from nvidia. A bare bones PCB with a barely adequate leafblower cooler is not premium. I expect there are many potential buyers who will not know they are getting exactly what we've gotten as a reference card from nvidia for many generations without a $100 premium attached though. If you're familiar with the products that get to market you know that the reference(founders) card is a bare bones PCB with what is objectively one of the worst performing coolers that will be released for the GPU. But, there will be a section of buyers unaware of this and will buy it believing there is actually something improved about that version.

I can see not having the patience to wait for a premium model of 1080 and buying a reference founders card for the additional $100 because you can't wait for the improved PCB and cooler designs AIBs will release. The metric of 'must have it at release' is a metric for eating the $100 premium. Otherwise the card is a terrible buy. Throttling, runs hot, overclocks terribly.

I don't expect the 1080 to overclock well even in aftermarket AIB form, but it's reasonable to expect there will generally be better results on aftermarket cards than the reference founders card. At a minimum the GPU won't throttle like it does on the reference founders card because of an improved cooler. Overall overclocking will not be great though, even reviews that cranked the fan to 100% leafblower mode are not showing great results. The 1080 GPU does not have much gas left in tank over stock speeds.

 

[Det0x]

Source? I don't recall nVidia claiming the card to be a crazy overclocker.

I don't understand why so many people are up in arms about this cooler. Maybe it's because I'd never consider a reference card to begin with; I could not care less about the Founders Edition, all I take away from these reviews is GP104 performance.
The price does have me worried though. It's really going to suck if AiBs end up selling their entry-level custom cards (Windforce, Twin Frozr..) at $700 and upwards.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRxoWkSDhVc&t=28

https://youtu.be/yRxoWkSDhVc?t=171

"it gives you crazy overclocking ability"

Focus on card craftsmanship as well

GG craftmanship on the founders edition cards indeed

*edit*

I'm not sure if this have been already posted or not.

So, freqs falls to base clock after 20 minutes of load... what a joke.

Even worse then i thought o_0

 

[moonbogg]

Wut? I thought the 1080 had good overclocking headroom, at least as much as the 980ti. It goes about 200+ over stock boost right? Throw a water block on it and you should be fine. I think the card is a crap value for its price, but putting that aside, I thought it was a decent clocker or at least that was what all the rage was about early on.

 

[tential]

Wut? I thought the 1080 had good overclocking headroom, at least as much as the 980ti. It goes about 200+ over stock boost right? Throw a water block on it and you should be fine. I think the card is a crap value for its price, but putting that aside, I thought it was a decent clocker or at least that was what all the rage was about early on.

Base clock is 1607
Boost Clocks is 1733
Max sustained clock without throttling on reference cooler in an OPEN test bench is ~1800

So throw that into a case with other components and see how that goes.
Throw that into an SFF case with other components and see how that goes...

This is what I'm talking about when I say testing methodology. Look at HardOCP's review of the Nano. That HAD to be tested in a case, to ensure that the cooler could hold up in a case....

Yet with the 1080, we test it open bench, see it has some throttling issues, and instead of throwing it into a case to further test, people just go "GREAT OCer, hits +200 over boost clock!" and don't bother to see how it would go in an actual gaming computer, vs a short benchmark run.

 

[littleg]

With 3 intake fans?

Hard to gauge. In the thermal testing methodology section they say they're using an open bench.

 

[Erenhardt]

Hard to gauge. In the thermal testing methodology section they say they're using an open bench.

It is in the testing methodology: Open testbench.
You can still have fans on open testbench to create additional airflow to keep pasively cooled components in check and supply a lot of fresh air to the rest of the hardware to stay even cooler.

http://www.computerbase.de/2016-05/...bschnitt_bis_zu_1785_mhz_takt_unter_dauerlast

Computerbase showed throttling down to the baseclock when you use 1080 FE in a gaming case - like most gamers do.

 

[moonbogg]

Base clock is 1607
Boost Clocks is 1733
Max sustained clock without throttling on reference cooler in an OPEN test bench is ~1800

So throw that into a case with other components and see how that goes.
Throw that into an SFF case with other components and see how that goes...

This is what I'm talking about when I say testing methodology. Look at HardOCP's review of the Nano. That HAD to be tested in a case, to ensure that the cooler could hold up in a case....

Yet with the 1080, we test it open bench, see it has some throttling issues, and instead of throwing it into a case to further test, people just go "GREAT OCer, hits +200 over boost clock!" and don't bother to see how it would go in an actual gaming computer, vs a short benchmark run.

True, but IMO no one should be expecting good OC performance from a stock blower card. I think with aftermarket coolers and water blocks, 2ghz should be an easy and typical OC, right? If the card was $500 it would be an acceptable product, at least within the context of the last few generations. Historically it would still be a damn joke even at $500. Such a shame really.

 

[littleg]

It is in the testing methodology: Open testbench.
You can still have fans on open testbench to create additional airflow to keep pasively cooled components in check and supply a lot of fresh air to the rest of the hardware to stay even cooler.

http://www.computerbase.de/2016-05/...bschnitt_bis_zu_1785_mhz_takt_unter_dauerlast

Computerbase showed throttling down to the baseclock when you use 1080 FE in a gaming case - like most gamers do.

Yeah, I saw that but they also talk about how they're testing for real world gaming scenarios. Seems a little nonsensical to run this kind of test on an open bench and certainly casts some doubt on the results if that is the case.

 

[pj-]

What does a reference 980ti do in similar conditions?

 

[antihelten]

This appears to be the "case" gamernexus is using:

It's also worth noting that Gamernexus only tested 1 game (DiRT Rally) versus the 21 that computerbase.de tested, and based on the laters test, we can see that this game is actually one of the more favorable ones clock speed wise.

 

[moonbogg]

What does a reference 980ti do in similar conditions?

It tanks. More throttle than a weekend at Nascar.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Im going to point this out again. This is exactly what was argued with the GTX680, GTX780, R9 290 etc. The same dead horse being beaten again and again. The throttling happens to all these cards under certain conditions mostly from bad airflow.

The same crowd hating on A,B,C from card from vendor X or Y. The same crowd hating on the reference coolers etc etc.

Just give it 1~2 months and this will be a non-issue (what throttling?) and the cycle is complete.

The amount of sensationalism on these boards is incredible! Im sure we can do better than this or is it just something to talk about til the actual cards (ref/custom) are in our grubby hands?

 

[RussianSensation]

Im going to point this out again. This is exactly what was argued with the GTX680, GTX780, R9 290 etc. The same dead horse being beaten again and again. The throttling happens to all these cards under certain conditions mostly from bad airflow.

The same crowd hating on A,B,C from card from vendor X or Y. The same crowd hating on the reference coolers etc etc.

Just give it 1~2 months and this will be a non-issue (what throttling?) and the cycle is complete.

The amount of sensationalism on these boards is incredible! Im sure we can do better than this or is it just something to talk about til the actual cards (ref/custom) are in our grubby hands?

I 100% disagree. The criticism is fully deserved because NV assigned a premium for basically nothing. If you have to explain why your FE card warrants a $70-100 premium, you automatically failed. If the product is worth it, the quality speaks for itself with real world results. My R9 295X2 runs at 1100mhz on both GPUs at 74C in the summer. Radeon Pro Duo maintains sub-60C at max load. That's premium design. FE cooler 1080 fails in ever way imaginable. For those who want to water cool, they'd rather take a bare PCB+chip design and save $100. The message that FE is a premium design pisses me off so much that even if FE GTX1070/1080 trash Polaris 10 into the ground, I'll buy slower AMD cards this generation just to prove a point that I am not a sheep that bends over for marketing gimmicks. Only AIBs having GTX1070 for $380-400 might sway my decision. Even if FE1080 was $499 and AIB 1080 was $599, I'd still pay $100 extra for the AIB card. That's how much NV got this wrong. Honestly I can easily afford to change every card in my house to a GTX1080 FE $699 but I just cannot do it. I cannot send a message to a corporation that charging me more $ for inferior design is OK. It's not OK.

Put the brand name behind. R9 290/290X reference were not able to sustain factory advertised clocks. 980 SLI thermal throttling. GTX1080 folding like a deck of cards after 10 min of gaming, failing to reach advertised boost clocks. To run 1080 FE overclocked at sustainable boost requires fan speed at levels only a gamer with closed headphones would find reasonable. The difference is 290/290X were the only cards hated full force by the online Internet community but GTX1080 gets to slide? Ya sure, no, not a chance. All of them are unified by a single factor - reference blower design on a $550+ card is garbage and a slap in the face after what we saw can be done with a Fuy X AIO CLC. The difference is 290/290X/980 (or put any other reference card in here) never charged $70/$100 premium for "premium" materials. GTX1080 is the worst reference card ever made because it comes with a premium for nothing. No one expects a reference blower card to actually be a good product in 2016 (lacking 0 dBA operation at idle, horrible overclocking headroom, loud at max loud) but no one expects a marketing $70-100 premium either. I don't care if AMD/NV/Intel/Matrox put out a reference board but when they release garbage and try to charge a premium for it, they better expect the biggest backlash ever. Had NV priced the reference 1080 for $599 and released the Founders Edition AIO CLC with binned chips (Gigabyte Gauntlet) for $699, I would have at least tried to understand.

The last reference card I had was HD6950 2GB and it was hot and loud. Never again, unless I am going water blocks or 3-4 cards in Quad-Fire/Quad-SLI. Time to bring AIO CLC as standard if they are going to charge us $70-100 premium. What NV did this round is nothing short of disgusting. The want us to finance their nonsensical 57.5% margins because the cooler is made out of aluminum but the card runs hot, loud, cannot overclock worth a damn? I can easily afford to buy 10 GTX1080 cards for mining but NV isn't getting $1 from me for the FE 1080 because of their arrogance of treating customers like Apple sheep.

 

[ZGR]

Im going to point this out again. This is exactly what was argued with the GTX680, GTX780, R9 290 etc. The same dead horse being beaten again and again. The throttling happens to all these cards under certain conditions mostly from bad airflow.

The same crowd hating on A,B,C from card from vendor X or Y. The same crowd hating on the reference coolers etc etc.

Just give it 1~2 months and this will be a non-issue (what throttling?) and the cycle is complete.

The amount of sensationalism on these boards is incredible! Im sure we can do better than this or is it just something to talk about til the actual cards (ref/custom) are in our grubby hands?

This isn't exactly the same argument. NVIDIA didn't charge an additional $100 for the reference/minimalist cooler before. Regardless, I do agree that this will all be forgotten in 1-2 months.