-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Is ASIC quality reliable ?
- Thread starter YesImAfroJack
- Start date
I'm not going way off course. You don't understand the topic, that's your fault, not mine.
Higher percentage has never been suggested as an indicator that it's a "better" overclocker, it's an indication on how well that chip will behave under certain circumstances.
Yes you are because its all pointless the Asic doesnt tell how the chip behaves at all because its broken :\
Your trying to explain it when it doesnt make sense at all!
How can it make sense if a chip with 50% can beat a chip with 85%!
Asic score is all about overclocking and if it doesnt work out like it should its pointless.
Ofc higher % has been suggested better OC thats what the thread is about :\...................
Your trying to explain it when it doesnt make sense at all!
How can it make sense if a chip with 50% can beat a chip with 85%!
Asic score is all about overclocking and if it doesnt work out like it should its pointless.
Ofc higher % has been suggested better OC thats what the thread is about :\...................
Interesting topic ...
My msi 7950 had ASIC of 92% but I couldn't get it stable above 1150 MHz no matter how many volts I through at it. (even needed 1.2 vddc for 1150 MHz).
My new gigabyte 7950 with ASIC of 58% (think its thst or 68%) can be overclcoked to 1200 MHz easy.
Maybe due to my msi being faulty batch ? God knows
My msi 7950 had ASIC of 92% but I couldn't get it stable above 1150 MHz no matter how many volts I through at it. (even needed 1.2 vddc for 1150 MHz).
My new gigabyte 7950 with ASIC of 58% (think its thst or 68%) can be overclcoked to 1200 MHz easy.
Maybe due to my msi being faulty batch ? God knows
Correct, basically a higher asic card tends to need less voltage to hit certain core speeds. My 7950 has an asic quality of 90% and can achieve 1200 @ 1.15v, where as ~Dockie 66% asic runs unstable and needs 1.20v+.
There is no reason to suggest a 66% asic card is a poor clocker since with the right amount of cooling it could achieve the same if not more then the 90% asic card, however the 90% asic card will need less voltage.
Having tested around 4+ 7950's of which three were MSI OC V2 I can say that if you are going full water block then a 70-75% asic card is fine, if you want to push max via Air or a universal block for core only then get a higher asic card, it will need less voltage and that means less fighting to keep vrm temps down.
Furthermore core asic quality alone cannot determine how good a card overclocks, as always vdroop, other components can come into play (6pin+8pin, 7970 pcb, newer bios etc)
Kamz
Last edited:
And you're saying all this because you don't understand ASIC.
The bigger number isn't meant to indicate that it's a better clocker.
LOL yes i do. OFC the bigger number is meant to indicate this, thats the full point of it otherwise its pointless.
We are going around in circles here, if the score is not to show how well it should overclock then wtf is it for?
Because if not then its pointless like it already is.
We are going around in circles here, if the score is not to show how well it should overclock then wtf is it for?
Because if not then its pointless like it already is.
Bigger numbers don't always mean better.
Stop talking crap about a subject you don't understand.
No not a suggestion, my comment was quite factual that my cards low asic rating 'does not mean anything to me' based on my oc results.
I agree with your comment that the asic value is only 'supposed' to provide an indication though.
I agree with what its supposed to do but it doesnt do it.
Its not crap mate, if people can get better clocks with lower volts on a lower scored card then it means its CRAP, dont blame me for it not working as it supposed to, it all sounds fine and dandy but it doesnt add up does it :\
And the relationship crap is not that at all, its saying if u have a crap score then watercool it as it cant cope on air :\ but then we see some watercooled cards being beaten by air cooled cards, i dunno how you cant grasp this because its not complicated.
Its not crap mate, if people can get better clocks with lower volts on a lower scored card then it means its CRAP, dont blame me for it not working as it supposed to, it all sounds fine and dandy but it doesnt add up does it :\
And the relationship crap is not that at all, its saying if u have a crap score then watercool it as it cant cope on air :\ but then we see some watercooled cards being beaten by air cooled cards, i dunno how you cant grasp this because its not complicated.
Last edited:
If you look at how voltage is applied to the 79 range, low Asic=high stock [email protected] Asic=lower stock [email protected].
Which leaves you at the reason behind 'Asic Quality' information, low Asic=high maximum voltage, which requires more cooling like water/high end air cooling v's the higher Asic=lower maximum voltage that can be kept in check via a cooler like yours hamish(iirc) on the DCUII.
The new 'secret' power circuitry(Thraks called it secret, not me
) inbuilt to the gcn architecture was in part to enable more gpus were available instead of throwing out a lot more.The lower clock speeds at launch were put in place in part for the same reason, to get more out the door quicker on an early new process enabling them a few months extra sales over Nvidia.
Asic quality is not an indication of how good your gpu clocks, that goes down to the individual chip and the components built around it.
Hamish take this as friendly advice(or not)-it's implied that way, you are telling some they are wrong when you don't know, your guessing(I think) sometimes then jumping into a full tirade of 'your wrong' when it differs from your own view.
That's all very well but not when you don't know what your talking about yourself.
Which could explain why certain people jump on everything you say.
Give me a low Asic every time and I would be happy though.
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2012
- Posts
- 62
Aaaaaand back to me my card refues to go above 1200 core and remain stable unless i give it all of the voltages.
my card refues to go above 1200 core and remain stable unless i give it all of the voltages.Okay, you need to understand and take in that the percentage score given as ASIC doesn't mean "crap" or "good".
Low ASIC doesn't mean crap, high ASIC doesn't mean good. You have no idea what you are talking about, you are the one who can't grasp it. I have tried explaining it to you and you are just ignoring it, telling people that they are ignoring you.
Low ASIC isn't supposed to mean it's crap and can't cope on air. Low ASIC cards are supposed to be the cards that respond the best to better than aircooling.
As in, for people who wish to water/DICE/LN2 cool their GPUs, a low ASIC is more desirable, for those who are solely interested in air cooling, a high ASIC is more desirable.
ASIC is about the chip itself, not the rest of the stuff that makes up the card like the RAM, board, VRMs, power input (2x 6pin or a 6pin and 8pin or even 2x 8pins).
Stop trying to discuss and educate people on a subject that you don't understand, you are incredibly clueless when it comes to this sort of stuff, so either educate yourself, and then engage your brain and think before you post, or stop trying to get in to such debates.
Ok well i get u a bit better now, so in other words ignore the Asic all together and just see how far you can overclock?
Because if someone gets a good over good or bad Asic it doesnt really matter?
If a good ocer on air will only get better on water from my point of view?
A bad ocer on air will not pass a good ocer on air if you switch it to water?
Do you see my point though?
Now your saying a low asic score needs more voltage but from what people are saying it doesnt, this is why i dont get half the things you are saying.
Im not saying no no no my way, im trying to understand it but it just makes no sense.
Because if someone gets a good over good or bad Asic it doesnt really matter?
If a good ocer on air will only get better on water from my point of view?
A bad ocer on air will not pass a good ocer on air if you switch it to water?
Do you see my point though?
Now your saying a low asic score needs more voltage but from what people are saying it doesnt, this is why i dont get half the things you are saying.
Im not saying no no no my way, im trying to understand it but it just makes no sense.
No, low ASIC responds better to more voltage than high ASIC. High ASIC needs less voltage than low ASIC because of less leakage, but it seems that the leakage of low ASIC becomes an advantage over the high ASIC when temps are under control.
As in, a low ASIC card is more likely to overclock better than a high ASIC card when both are under water and over volted.
I don't see your point because you don't really understand the subject. What I do see is that you don't seem to get past the bigger numbers thing, as you keep insisting that the high ASIC is "the best" outright when it doesn't mean that.
As in, a low ASIC card is more likely to overclock better than a high ASIC card when both are under water and over volted.
I don't see your point because you don't really understand the subject. What I do see is that you don't seem to get past the bigger numbers thing, as you keep insisting that the high ASIC is "the best" outright when it doesn't mean that.
Yeah i get you but it doesnt mean u need to put them underwater because people on air with low asic still get good OCs.
Its a double headed coin tbh, there must be very little in it, so its nothing worth worrying about.
I dont insist high is right :\ ive been saying that from the start low can beat high lol? What you been reading?
Best way to test this is find some peeps with low asic and high and do a test, because what your saying should be right but its still not the case 9/10 times.
Its a double headed coin tbh, there must be very little in it, so its nothing worth worrying about.
I dont insist high is right :\ ive been saying that from the start low can beat high lol? What you been reading?
Best way to test this is find some peeps with low asic and high and do a test, because what your saying should be right but its still not the case 9/10 times.
Last edited:
Jesus, stop weehamish. Stop arguing about things you have no knowledge about. You've already said that ASIC is a guess so that concludes your knowledge on the subject.
I concur.
Hamish take this as friendly advice(or not)-it's implied that way, you are telling some they are wrong when you don't know, your guessing(I think) sometimes then jumping into a full tirade of 'your wrong' when it differs from your own view.
That's all very well but not when you don't know what your talking about yourself.
I concur.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 4,504
- Location
- Wales
For reference,
My Gigabyte 7970 ghz edition has an ASIC rating of 66.1%, best overclock so far is 1220/1650.
My Gigabyte 7970 ghz edition has an ASIC rating of 66.1%, best overclock so far is 1220/1650.
What are you on about? My lowest Asic card (71%) clocks higher under water with more volts. My other card has an Asic quality of 81%. It clocks well but nothing special on air or water.
I find it hard to believe you carried on arguing, when you clearly showed you had no idea of how the Asic quality is supposed to be read. You should have apologised and moved on.