2070 Super overclocking thread

Psycho Sonny · 5 Dec 2019 at 11:59

First things first this is for peak performance - not peak overclock.

For example I've just started overclocking my 2070 super. RAM only at the moment and my results are as per below. Once i get peak RAM performance I will then do the core.

Stock - Graphics Score 10,385
+100 - Graphics Score 10,377
+200 - Graphics Score 10,286
+300 - Graphics Score 10,440
+400 - Graphics Score 10,485
+500 - Graphics Score 10,465
+600 - Graphics Score 10,473
+700 - Graphics Score 10,525
+800 - Graphics Score 10,536
+900 - Graphics Score 10,565
+1000 - Graphics Score 10,568
+1050 - Graphics Score 10,608
+1100 - Graphics Score 10,576

I'm about to try +300 mhz on the memory now. If it's less than 10286 then should I even bother trying higher speeds or leave it on stock? I might try up to 500 for a laugh.

Then I will move onto core overclocking and test the same. However with only +25 increases.

I'm not entirely convinced +1000 is stable going to test +1100 and see what happens. Otherwise I'm going back down to +900

+900 - seems like a nice one to go with. Albeit +1050 seems better I'd rather just be safe than sorry.

tyler_jrb · 5 Dec 2019 at 12:07

Depends how fast it’s running at stock on the super cards I guess.

Most will do 15ghz effective which is +1000 in afterburner. Some will do more depending on the quality of the memory.

Just have to do a couple of runs at each speed to make sure your run is accurate.

Psycho Sonny · 5 Dec 2019 at 12:23

+300 - Graphics Score 10,440

So +300 has made an increase in the score. Looks like I'll be going up to +1000 in 100 increments.

Whilst I agree multiple runs would be ideal. Personally I'm not that anal. I want to get as close to the best without spending 3 days overclocking.

edit:

+400 - Graphics Score 10,485

finally seeing some improvements now.

tyler_jrb · 5 Dec 2019 at 12:42

From testing for me anyway memory seems to give the most benefit especially when hitting the higher numbers. As you hopefully will find out too

.

alec · 5 Dec 2019 at 12:43

Has anyone got a guide for simple undervolt?
Has been ages since I had nvidia card, an you used to be able to just apply voltage offset in afterburner.

Psycho Sonny · 5 Dec 2019 at 13:15

alec said:
Has anyone got a guide for simple undervolt?
Has been ages since I had nvidia card, an you used to be able to just apply voltage offset in afterburner.

unlink power and temp. then just stick power to 95%. that is usually the best limit IMO. you still get all the power. but the card runs cooler.

tyler_jrb · 5 Dec 2019 at 14:37

alec said:
Has anyone got a guide for simple undervolt?
Has been ages since I had nvidia card, an you used to be able to just apply voltage offset in afterburner.

As to not derail thread.
In after burner you have to either hover over the right pane where all the line graphs etc are and press, Ctrl + f. Or use one of the more modern skins which has an icon at the side of the core speed adjuster to be able to access the voltage curve.

Then it’s just a case of picking a set voltage. Say 0.850mv pick one of the little points on the voltage curve which corresponds with that voltage point and drag it up to say 1800mhz. Then click the tick button in the main afterburner program which will create a slight curve but a straight line at 850mv and 1800mhz.

Then after that it’s just a case of testing.

You can also reset all the settings and go into a negative core speed if say what you are trying to adjust is out of range and would otherwise require moving all the points manually. Then follow the same instructions.

snips86x · 5 Dec 2019 at 14:52

I'm running mine at +100/+900 and so far it's stable, till about 6 hours in. If I reboot before hand, it's fine.

Quartz · 5 Dec 2019 at 14:59

Psycho Sonny said:
For example I've just started overclocking my 2070 super. RAM only at the moment and my results are as per below.

You achieve a, what, 2% boost? That really doesn't seem worth the risk.

alec · 5 Dec 2019 at 15:12

What risk? Of game crashing? Hardly any risk in overclocking memory. And any gain is pretty much free.

This is overclockers forum, most of us know risks from overclocking?

The results in OP show a lot of run to run variation. Whatever settings you settle on, do make several repeated runs (default vs OC) to accurately measure the improvement.

Psycho Sonny · 5 Dec 2019 at 16:01

settled on +55 on the core - it's already overclocked to begin with and +900 on the ram.

it's much more than a 2% boost

bru · 5 Dec 2019 at 16:20

Running my Gigabyte variant at +111 core and +1000 memory.

It boosts to 2100 at times, its up and down but mainly over 2000 @67 deg

Quite surprised that my 9 year old xenon [email protected] doesn't bottleneck it more, but it seems to run at not more than 60%CPU.

Psycho Sonny · 5 Dec 2019 at 16:27

bru said:
Running my Gigabyte variant at +111 core and +1000 memory.

It boosts to 2100 at times, its up and down but mainly over 2000 @67 deg

Quite surprised that my 9 year old xenon [email protected] doesn't bottleneck it more, but it seems to run at not more than 60%CPU.

i can only get core to 2040 do you think it's because i have power limit at 95%?

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/22363958

this was my user benchmark. seems like it's running top notch

Jay85 · 5 Dec 2019 at 16:45

I ran a +110 on the core and 1ghz on the memory and ended up with a 10525 score

Judging by your results i feel as though pushing the core isn't really worth it and pushing the memory makes more of a difference?

Jay85 · 5 Dec 2019 at 16:46

I would run the memory below 1ghz though as the memory in the 2070 super is abit naff apparently (space invaders)? correct me if im wrong please.

bru · 5 Dec 2019 at 16:50

Psycho Sonny said:
i can only get core to 2040 do you think it's because i have power limit at 95%?

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/22363958

this was my user benchmark. seems like it's running top notch

Looks like its running well.

Here's mine by comparison.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/22367807

Psycho Sonny · 5 Dec 2019 at 17:20

bru said:
Looks like its running well.

Here's mine by comparison.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/22367807

yours is better due to higher core. both make a difference.

i'm running mine pretty much near the edge on core.

i wonder if going to 100% power limit will let me overclock the core more? i usually run 95% because it was better for my 1080. but maybe 2070 series is different?

bru · 5 Dec 2019 at 17:30

Psycho Sonny said:
yours is better due to higher core. both make a difference.

i'm running mine pretty much near the edge on core.

i wonder if going to 100% power limit will let me overclock the core more? i usually run 95% because it was better for my 1080. but maybe 2070 series is different?

Push the power limit slider all the way to the right, 111% on mine, let the card run free and see what you get. Leave the under volting to the red team.

hyperseven · 5 Dec 2019 at 17:35

@Psycho Sonny which model did you get?

Got the Gamerock and does 16Gbps (+1000) on the RAM and the core just left to OC Scanner as not got a lot of time at the moment to tinker.

Psycho Sonny · 5 Dec 2019 at 18:15

bru said:
Push the power limit slider all the way to the right, 111% on mine, let the card run free and see what you get. Leave the under volting to the red team.

done

hyperseven said:
@Psycho Sonny which model did you get?

Got the Gamerock and does 16Gbps (+1000) on the RAM and the core just left to OC Scanner as not got a lot of time at the moment to tinker.

going to try this tool out too and use it with +900 mhz on the RAM. I got 1050 mhz to run on the ram but i could see an artifact whilst benching. might try 950 as a happy medium