Yet another sneaky Nvidia trick

[Zap]

Originally posted by: the unknown
What about people with locked BIOS who bought their comp from a retailer like Dell or Gateway? I'm guessing they won't be able to take advantage of this?

If their system came with a supported chipset (780i?) then it should work automagically.

 

[Vinnybcfc]

Originally posted by: krnmastersgt
Overclocking the 9600 through the pci-e bus yields the same results as an overclocked 8800 gt. Yes there is a limit to how much the card can be overclocked, ocing the pci-e bus will have a direct effect on the core clock however it operates faster than just raising the core clock alone, that's why it's so interesting.

No it shouldnt, if you raise the core clock to 800mhz and then instead use the PCI Express setting to raise it to 800mhz they will perform exactly the same.

This thread is starting to come out with incorrect information, the PCIE speed doesnt matter it isnt like these cards are bandwidth limited.

And that was the point of the Techpowerup article to show that.

 

[Janooo]

Originally posted by: Vinnybcfc
...
No it shouldnt, if you raise the core clock to 800mhz and then instead use the PCI Express setting to raise it to 800mhz they will perform exactly the same.

This thread is starting to come out with incorrect information, the PCIE speed doesnt matter it isnt like these cards are bandwidth limited.

And that was the point of the Techpowerup article to show that.

Your card could be overclocked and you have no idea about that. That's what this thread is about.

 

[Demoth]

Originally posted by: Janooo

Originally posted by: Vinnybcfc
...
No it shouldnt, if you raise the core clock to 800mhz and then instead use the PCI Express setting to raise it to 800mhz they will perform exactly the same.

This thread is starting to come out with incorrect information, the PCIE speed doesnt matter it isnt like these cards are bandwidth limited.

And that was the point of the Techpowerup article to show that.

Your card could be overclocked and you have no idea about that. That's what this thread is about.

This could be considered an overclock, but keep in mind that since it was implemented by Nvidia, your still fully covered by warranty if anything goes wrong. Now, if there was a chance of multiple failures of 9600GTs in Dells with low airflow and a bad PSU, this feature would never have been released without a end-user agreement to enable it. The 9600GT will be specifically targetted to the higher end mass produced gaming systems once things settle down.

 

[TulipGTX]

If you wanna know a thing from (A FAKE LIE ME) i will tell you something very interesting this is not a trick its a feature that even the new 9800 gtx has but has to be supported via bios. I mean the card makers can make their own mind if they want to use this feature or not.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: Zap
then it should work automagically.

HAH!

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
Nice it works on p35 boards, as well as nvidia, and therefore is not a 780/650/680i exclusive feature, and has nothing to do with linkboost.

And the 9600gt is the only nvidia card that does this.
Interestingly it reports the same core speed at 100, or 110 yet notice the obvious performance increase in 3dmark. I'd say that's a tad shady.

Incorrect and correct. What we're gathering so far is that it works automagically on (certain) NV chipsets, but you have to manually increase the PCIe base frequency on Intel chipsets. If I attempt to make things more organized;

1. 1. NV somehow tied the GPU clock generator with their chipset's PCIe clock generator, and when their chipsets detect capable (i.e. able to handle high PCIe clocks) video cards, it will automagically increase the PCIe clock, resulting in GPU clock increase.
   
   2. This doesn't show in nTune or GPU monitoring programs. Other programs can detect this behavior correctly but as far as we know NV has never disclosed this information to reviewers.
   
   3. Without knowing the massively increased clock frequency behind the scene, the 9600 GT enjoyed a huge PR. There are many glowing reviews how wonderful the life is while 9600 GT is in the world.
   
   4. Most (all?) revieiws utilize NV chipset when reviewing NV cards. I believe this is what NV recommends to reviewers. If what has been known so far is true, a Intel board user can purchase a 9600 GT without knowing that s/he will not get the same performance that was displayed in the reviews, unless s/he manually overclock the PCIe clock in the BIOS.
   
   5. Overclocking PCIe clock on Intel boards isn't a good idea. And It will never clock as high as NV/AMD chipsets.

Definitely a sneaky and unacceptable move by NV. As I said before, this will be backfired to NV. If I were a reviewer, I'd test all video cards on Intel chipsets for the time being.

 

[SniperDaws]

Yeah but, for people that overclock this doesnt matter.

i usually have my card set to 750/1850/1000 for gaming and my pcie at 100Hz but if i turn up the pcie to 110 it crashes while gaming or benching, this will also happen for the Nvidia/amd boards that automaically adjusts on the fly.

This will only benefit the non overclocker who will get a nice performance boost if he/she is using a supported board.

So its not biggy and i wouldnt say its Sneaky, Nvidia will promote this when they launch the 9800 cards.

 

[imported_dingdong]

it looks like nvidia is getting so desperate.
So it got caught cheating...... again?
This time the driver is reporting lower frequency than the actual running frequency?

It is like benching a cpu claims to be 2GHZ, but it is actually running 2.5GHZ, of course you "see" an increase in performance per clock.
If this is not cheating, then nothing is.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Most reviews utilised X38 chipsets (some 975X). AT used skulltrail for their initial 9600GT review. Hardocp, techreport, bit-tech etc all used intel chipsets.

 

[kmmatney]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020

Originally posted by: krnmastersgt
That makes a lot of sense actually, someone will probably say that isn't entirely fair but I like the way the 9600 is shaping out, and it's big brothers are soon to come out which if they follow the same designs, will be monstrous cards. Maybe we can finally play Crysis at 19x12 with max settings at over 60 fps.

Do all the wishful thinking you can, and even if quantum mechanics says otherwise, it won't change the fact that your claims are incoherent, unfounded and quite simply, unreal.

 

[kmmatney]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
Yeah but, for people that overclock this doesnt matter.

i usually have my card set to 750/1850/1000 for gaming and my pcie at 100Hz but if i turn up the pcie to 110 it crashes while gaming or benching, this will also happen for the Nvidia/amd boards that automaically adjusts on the fly.

This will only benefit the non overclocker who will get a nice performance boost if he/she is using a supported board.

So its not biggy and i wouldnt say its Sneaky, Nvidia will promote this when they launch the 9800 cards.

Can you get a better score with the same overclock, but achieved with a higher PCIE speed? My guess is no, since I don't think the card is bandwidth starved. I think your right - you can achieve the same speed benefit by just overclocking the card the normal way. And anyone smart enough to overclock the PCIE bus in the bios should already know how to overclock their card. Who overclocks the PCIE bus anyways?

If you normally run at 750/1850/1000 for gaming, you should theoretically get the same score if you run at a PCIE bus of 110, and overclock the card to about ~682 Mhz.

 

[ades]

I was actually going to post about this yesterday regarding rivatuner not reading the clock correctly on my 9600gt. I'm not near my computer (back home for the weekend) but the core was running at over 830 according to rivatuner. So my card oced much much higher than I had been thinking. I am going to mess with this tomorrow evening. Yikes, I had it at 790+ whatever bonus it was getting from the pci-e, which like I said I cannot check right now, but I am very curious to see what it's set at.

How does this affect memory speed? or does it only affect core/shader?

 

[apoppin]

Yet another sneaky Nvidia trick

i dunno .. after reading the arguments so far i have decided it is

Yet another cool nvidia feature

One they probably should have proudly documented, unless they felt AMD would somehow use it in their forthcoming GPUs; it looks like a good idea that is easy to copy
... but then there are probably a lot more "sneaky performance enhancing" hidden features for us to uncover

sneaky?


--try smart ...

 

[watek]

Yeah if I put the core clock to 750, rivaturner reads it at 810.

 

[KBTuning]

i feel good about ordering a new 780i and two 9600GT's now

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: watek
Yeah if I put the core clock to 750, rivaturner reads it at 810.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dingdong
it looks like nvidia is getting so desperate.
So it got caught cheating...... again?
This time the driver is reporting lower frequency than the actual running frequency?

It is like benching a cpu claims to be 2GHZ, but it is actually running 2.5GHZ, of course you "see" an increase in performance per clock.
If this is not cheating, then nothing is.

How is it cheating?

nvidia *publicized it* doesn't anyone keep up .... i thought i'd hear from *someone*
cough

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/ph...&ID=1113717&highlight=

New Enthusiast System Architecture Hits Key Industry Milestones

New Extensions for Monitoring and Controlling PC Peripherals Formally Ratified by USB Implementers Forum; Dell Ships World's First ESA-Certified Desktop PC

SANTA CLARA, Calif., Feb. 28 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- NVIDIA Corporation (Nasdaq: NVDA), the world leader in visual computing technologies and the inventor of the GPU, today announced that the Enthusiast System Architecture (ESA) extensions have now officially been adopted by the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF), paving the way for widespread industry adoption. As a result, the ESA protocol, which details the way PC peripherals can communicate with each other, will now be added into the next revision of the USB human interface device (HID)-class definition.

... [more] ...

Originally introduced in late 2007, ESA was designed and introduced to support new monitoring and control capabilities for PC devices such as chassis, power supplies, and water and air cooling peripherals. Until the introduction of ESA, there was no standard communication protocol allowing such components to report information back to users. Essential data, such as temperature, thermal, voltage, and air flow attributes are made available in real-time and are critical to obtaining maximum PC performance and overclocking. With ESA, component manufacturers can now embed a wide variety of digital and analog sensors into their devices which can communicate real-time data for use in analyzing and optimizing overall PC operating conditions. In addition, ESA's logging functionality offers PC manufacturers and system builders an inexpensive and easy way to help identify PC operating abnormalities, and enable them to quickly identify and resolve customer support issues.

Cross-device compatibility and compliance with the ESA specification is being handled by Allion, a leading IT testing organization. Products that have passed the Allion certification process will incorporate the new ESA logo, providing consumers with a valuable tool in their purchasing decision.

For additional information on ESA technology, please visit http://www.nvidia.com/ESA or the USB-IF at http://www.usb.org. The Dell XPS LightFX SDK can be downloaded directly from http://www.dell.com.

There is nothing weird - or "shady" - about Link-Boost increasing graphics card performance on nForce 590 MBs as it just wasn't supported on G80 until right now - with G94. Why is it a surprise that nvidia is using it?

lots of info here [] ... straight from the horse's mouth:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/ph...l?c=116466&p=irol-news

it seems to me the only DIRTY TACTICs are the PR assholes that passed this info along "as shady" to a very GULLIBLE TechPowerUp.com
journalist.
:thumbsdown:

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: apoppin
it seems to me the only DIRTY TACTICs are the PR assholes that passed this info along "as shady" to a very GULLIBLE TechPowerUp.com
journalist.
:thumbsdown:

Don't be ridiculous. How you connect ESA (an open standard by NV's claim) with 9600 GT's clock frequency behavior is beyond me. The simple fact is that NV announced 9600 GT's clock speed as 650 MHz, but when it actually matters it works at different speed. The result is, as you may well know, that it leaved an impression that NV somehow managed to improved upon G92 core, via hardware revision or drivers revision - and so far it looks like neither.

Plus, you're accusing TechPowerUp with absolutely no basis. If you read their stories, it's clear that they'd noticed the discrepancy in initial 9600 GT review, but didn't figure out what exactly was going on. A few days later, they published a more refined findings after apparent effort of proof-gathering. How you think this is a PR stunt by some 'gullible' folks is beyond me, but if you think so you should at least have the courtesy to provide some evidence. Especially when your accusation comprised of such foul languages.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: lopri

Originally posted by: apoppin
it seems to me the only DIRTY TACTICs are the PR assholes that passed this info along "as shady" to a very GULLIBLE TechPowerUp.com
journalist.
:thumbsdown:

Don't be ridiculous. How you connect ESA (an open standard by NV's claim) with 9600 GT's clock frequency behavior is beyond me. The simple fact is that NV announced 9600 GT's clock speed as 650 MHz, but when it actually matters it works at different speed. The result is, as you may well know, that it leaved an impression that NV somehow managed to improved upon G92 core, via hardware revision or drivers revision - and so far it looks like neither.

Plus, you're accusing TechPowerUp with absolutely no basis. If you read their stories, it's clear that they'd noticed the discrepancy in initial 9600 GT review, but didn't figure out what exactly was going on. A few days later, they published a more refined findings after apparent effort of proof-gathering. How you think this is a PR stunt by some 'gullible' folks is beyond me, but if you think so you should at least have the courtesy to provide some evidence. Especially when your accusation comprised of such foul languages.

they used the word "shady" ... obviously it got passed on to them from *somewhere* ... and most of this crap IS amd PR .. who else would even be able to alert them to it?

What nvidia has accomplished with their O/C'ing the OPCI bus is not shady [period]

"foul language", get real - is it only foul if i fucking say it?
- or do i not have the privileges the other members do?
:roll:

 

[BFG10K]

What nvidia has accomplished with their O/C'ing the OPCI bus is not shady [period]

They aren't just overclocking PCIe though, they're overclocking the video card while the driver is reporting incorrect frequencies.

AFAIK linkboost was never about changing GPU clocks.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

What nvidia has accomplished with their O/C'ing the OPCI bus is not shady [period]

They aren't just overclocking PCIe though, they're overclocking the video card while the driver is reporting incorrect frequencies.

AFAIK linkboost was never about changing GPU clocks.

Wrong

i have some interesting news for you ...

Link Boost has been around for awhile .. since '06

Doesn't ANYBODY keep up? .. that means "i" am forced to defend NVIDIA?
:Q
-[no f'ing way .. wtf
-where are the NV PR guys? ... they know this crap better than i do (i guess)!
]

http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_31319.html

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SANTA CLARA, CA?MAY 23, 2006?NVIDIA Corporation (Nasdaq: NVDA), the worldwide leader in programmable graphic processor technologies, continues to redefine the PC as the ultimate gaming platform with the introduction today of the new NVIDIA nForce 590 SLI media and communications processor (MCP), a high-performance motherboard solution for the latest and upcoming x86 PC platforms, including those based on socket AM2 processors by AMD. ...

NVIDIA LinkBoost? technologyi?automatically increases PCIe bus speeds on the motherboard when LinkBoost-enabled GPUs, such as the NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GTX, are installed


SLI-Ready Memory?the first core-logic solution to take advantage of the new Enhanced Performance Profiles (EPP) memory specification, unlocking even higher levels of memory DIMM performance

B3D has a sane discussion on it ... unlike our paranoia:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=47079
[maybe i should go there .. ]

.. and i think AMD's viral PR first pointed this "shady" shit out ... not TechPowerUp ... they are the unwitting 'tools' to get this twisted 'message' out
:roll:

 

[lopri]

I am posting this only to inform users.

What LinkBoost does: Increasing PCIe base clock when NV chipset detects capable NV video cards. Note that this has nothing to do with video cards' clock frequency. I don't feel the need to link any reviews regarding this feature because it has been known pretty much useless when it comes to actual performance increase.

What 9600 GT does: Increasing its clock speed as PCIe clock increases. The logic/practice tell you this has nothing to do with LinkBoost because,

1. One can increase 9600 GT's clock speed independently from PCIe clock speed and achieve the same effect
2. One can increase PCIe base clock on non-NV based chipset and achieve the same effect using 9600 GT
3. No other card behaves as 9600 GT does to PCIe clock frequencies.

It should be clear to users that 9600 GT's clock speed behavior can hardly be explained by age-old LinkBoost. I have used NF4, 5, 6, and now 7 boards and can testify the 'real' LinkBoost does provide performance improvement, but at most ~5% under multi-GPU configuration. Plus, NV has (unofficially) abandoned LinkBoost long time ago when 680i's erratic behavior with it enabled was reported by users. ESA is a totally different concept and I have no idea how someone can bring it up to make a link(?) between it and 9600 GT's clock speed, let alone LinkBoost.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: lopri
I am posting this only to inform users.

What LinkBoost does: Increasing PCIe base clock when NV chipset detects capable NV video cards. Note that this has nothing to do with video cards' clock frequency. I don't feel the need to link any reviews regarding this feature because it has been known pretty much useless when it comes to actual performance increase.

What 9600 GT does: Increasing its clock speed as PCIe clock increases. The logic/practice tell you this has nothing to do with LinkBoost because,

1. One can increase 9600 GT's clock speed independently from PCIe clock speed and achieve the same effect
2. One can increase PCIe base clock on non-NV based chipset and achieve the same effect using 9600 GT
3. No other card behaves as 9600 GT does to PCIe clock frequencies.

It should be clear to users that 9600 GT's clock speed behavior can hardly be explained by age-old LinkBoost. I have used NF4, 5, 6, and now 7 boards and can testify the 'real' LinkBoost does provide performance improvement, but at most ~5% under multi-GPU configuration. Plus, NV has (unofficially) abandoned LinkBoost long time ago when 680i's erratic behavior with it enabled was reported by users. ESA is a totally different concept and I have no idea how someone can bring it up to make a link(?) between it and 9600 GT's clock speed, let alone LinkBoost.

i do .. Look UP^ .. one post before yours

:roll:

you are MISinforming gullible "people"
:thumbsdown:

what is it about THIS that you do not UNDERSTAND?

NVIDIA LinkBoost? technology?automatically increases PCIe bus speeds on the motherboard when LinkBoost-enabled GPUs, such as the NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GTX, are installed

straight from the horses mouth ,,, in 06

http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_31319.html

wtF do i have to defend NVIDIA from AMD PR FUD?

where are the nvidia PR guys?
[help! ]


edit .. since the balance of this forum has apparently shifted ... toward stupidity ... i guess i NEED to get a GX2 to counteract it ...
maybe i will dump CrossFire afterall
:Q

 

[Janooo]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: lopri

Originally posted by: apoppin
it seems to me the only DIRTY TACTICs are the PR assholes that passed this info along "as shady" to a very GULLIBLE TechPowerUp.com
journalist.
:thumbsdown:

Don't be ridiculous. How you connect ESA (an open standard by NV's claim) with 9600 GT's clock frequency behavior is beyond me. The simple fact is that NV announced 9600 GT's clock speed as 650 MHz, but when it actually matters it works at different speed. The result is, as you may well know, that it leaved an impression that NV somehow managed to improved upon G92 core, via hardware revision or drivers revision - and so far it looks like neither.

Plus, you're accusing TechPowerUp with absolutely no basis. If you read their stories, it's clear that they'd noticed the discrepancy in initial 9600 GT review, but didn't figure out what exactly was going on. A few days later, they published a more refined findings after apparent effort of proof-gathering. How you think this is a PR stunt by some 'gullible' folks is beyond me, but if you think so you should at least have the courtesy to provide some evidence. Especially when your accusation comprised of such foul languages.

they used the word "shady" ... obviously it got passed on to them from *somewhere* ... and most of this crap IS amd PR .. who else would even be able to alert them to it?

What nvidia has accomplished with their O/C'ing the OPCI bus is not shady [period]

"foul language", get real - is it only foul if i fucking say it?
- or do i not have the privileges the other members do?
:roll:

I would say it is if the card frequency is not reported correctly.