NVIDIA RTX 50 SERIES - Technical/General Discussion

[CornyOC]

Describing GPU tuning with just the words 'overclocking' or 'undervolting' ends up with confusion. Firstly, they're fundamentally the same thing - setting efficient voltage for *your* particular chip. Secondly, 2 words is not enough to describe everything people are doing. If I set a more efficient curve, don't allow the card to draw more power than stock, is that overclocking? If I do limit the power but the card is boosting higher than stock but also using less power, is that overlocking or undervolting? Saying things like 'undervolting is better than overclocking', what does that even mean? If I tune my curve so it's as efficient as possible, it is not intrinsically 'better' to limit power lower than stock. It's just using the overhead you gained for a different outcome. Creating an efficient curve is the most important thing.

I personally don't see the point. Those who can afford a 5090/5080 will not care much for 100W more or less. What's that gonna cost, like another 20p a day? Surely not an issue for somebody who just buys a GPU for 2 grand. And as for mid tier GPU, they don't really consume that much power, so why bother to undervolt and save a few pennies? To be clear I am not specifically talking about "undervolt", because like you have said, these terms come with loose definitions. I am talking about the incentive to reduce power draw in order to make the card most efficient at cost of some performance.

My intent is always to increase FPS whilst retaining stability, so more FPS in games without crashes, artifacts and stutter/lag. That's all I want, I don't care if my card will draw another 50W or run hotter (as long as it doesn't deteriorate the components ofc). Usually my overclock results in 5-10% performance gain in a stable manner. Can do more for benchmarks, but then I am not really interested in pushing the GPU with questionable VBIOS and LN2 stuff (the thought of doing those things to my precious and expensive GPU makes me cringe).

 

[Awahwah]

My curve hasn't been 100% stable in all games/functions. More tinkering to be done.

 

[benjii]

I personally don't see the point. Those who can afford a 5090/5080 will not care much for 100W more or less. What's that gonna cost, like another 20p a day? Surely not an issue for somebody who just buys a GPU for 2 grand. And as for mid tier GPU, they don't really consume that much power, so why bother to undervolt and save a few pennies? To be clear I am not specifically talking about "undervolt", because like you have said, these terms come with loose definitions. I am talking about the incentive to reduce power draw in order to make the card most efficient at cost of some performance.

My intent is always to increase FPS whilst retaining stability, so more FPS in games without crashes, artifacts and stutter/lag. That's all I want, I don't care if my card will draw another 50W or run hotter (as long as it doesn't deteriorate the components ofc). Usually my overclock results in 5-10% performance gain in a stable manner. Can do more for benchmarks, but then I am not really interested in pushing the GPU with questionable VBIOS and LN2 stuff (the thought of doing those things to my precious and expensive GPU makes me cringe).

I don't care about power, I care about heat. Those obviously go hand-in-hand. My PC is air cooled, so I do everything I can to make my PC as quiet as possible, that's why I tend to undervolt.

 

[Rawr]

I don't care about power, I care about heat. Those obviously go hand-in-hand. My PC is air cooled, so I do everything I can to make my PC as quiet as possible, that's why I tend to undervolt.

Yeah same. I undervolted my 3080 for the same reason. If I can get it cooler without much performance loss that sounds great in a aircooled system. On my 3080 FE it meant I didn't hear the fans on it truly ramp up to stupid loud levels much at all. I think I'd have gone insane if I had to listen to that thing on max ramp a lot.

 

[heatonpkmassive]

I can't be arsed. This card tops out at 58 Celsius when running at almost 3Ghz while gaming due to its 4090 cooler, but I do also have a large case.

I'm too lazy to try and eke out a few more fps and I have a 1kw power supply, my PC is ideal for the more lazy gamer.

 

[SuperElectric]

I personally don't see the point. Those who can afford a 5090/5080 will not care much for 100W more or less. What's that gonna cost, like another 20p a day? Surely not an issue for somebody who just buys a GPU for 2 grand. And as for mid tier GPU, they don't really consume that much power, so why bother to undervolt and save a few pennies? To be clear I am not specifically talking about "undervolt", because like you have said, these terms come with loose definitions. I am talking about the incentive to reduce power draw in order to make the card most efficient at cost of some performance.

My intent is always to increase FPS whilst retaining stability, so more FPS in games without crashes, artifacts and stutter/lag. That's all I want, I don't care if my card will draw another 50W or run hotter (as long as it doesn't deteriorate the components ofc). Usually my overclock results in 5-10% performance gain in a stable manner. Can do more for benchmarks, but then I am not really interested in pushing the GPU with questionable VBIOS and LN2 stuff (the thought of doing those things to my precious and expensive GPU makes me cringe).

Same, I've spent quite a while trying the undervolt thing. I can't get close to the performance of a simple overclock, which gives me an easy 6%. I've tried the guide and many mv/mhz combos and I can either get 2% more performance with 70W less power or 6% more performance at the stock 600W...

 

[Rawr]

I can't be arsed. This card tops out at 58 Celsius when running at almost 3Ghz while gaming due to its 4090 cooler, but I do also have a large case.

I'm too lazy to try and eke out a few more fps and I have a 1kw power supply, my PC is ideal for the more lazy gamer.

You must have picked up one of the higher end cards for it to be running that cool at higher watts levels though?

Those of us doing this are ones who have cards running closer to 80 at full throttle so undervolting/making it more efficient can have an impact.

 

[Nitefly]

Describing GPU tuning with just the words 'overclocking' or 'undervolting' ends up with confusion. Firstly, they're fundamentally the same thing - setting efficient voltage for *your* particular chip. Secondly, 2 words is not enough to describe everything people are doing. If I set a more efficient curve, don't allow the card to draw more power than stock, is that overclocking? If I do limit the power but the card is boosting higher than stock but also using less power, is that overlocking or undervolting? Saying things like 'undervolting is better than overclocking', what does that even mean? If I tune my curve so it's as efficient as possible, it is not intrinsically 'better' to limit power lower than stock. It's just using the overhead you gained for a different outcome. Creating an efficient curve is the most important thing.

The way I see it:

- overclock: increasing the clock speeds over stock (for performance).

- undervolt: decreasing the voltage compared to stock (primarily for for temps or noise).

They used to be ‘opposing approaches’ but now more than ever they are complementary; an undervolt that keeps temperatures lower can help enable / sustain a mild overclock.

 

[heatonpkmassive]

You must have picked up one of the higher end cards for it to be running that cool at higher watts levels though?

Those of us doing this are ones who have cards running closer to 80 at full throttle so undervolting/making it more efficient can have an impact.

Well not really, it's just a Founders Edition. But like a lot of 4080 cards, it has the same cooler as the 4090 version.

It's why I love the card, overspecced cooler and decent boost frequency. Nobody was happier than me to see what uplift the 5000 series would provide from where I am now, that's saved me a few quid.

This card's a keeper until a potential 5080ti or the 6000 series.

 

[Rawr]

Well not really, it's just a Founders Edition. But like a lot of 4080 cards, it has the same cooler as the 4090 version.

It's why I love the card, overspecced cooler and decent boost frequency. Nobody was happier than me to see what uplift the 5000 series would provide from where I am now, that's saved me a few quid.

This card's a keeper until a potential 5080ti or the 6000 series.

Oh right, I didn't notice you said 40 series, for some reason I thought you were on about the 50 series. I think the 50 series is just running a lot hotter so it's more necessary. I remember people saying even the 4090 FE ran surprisingly cool all things considered.

 

[Varys]

Every single game benchmark I have done showed gains of 5-8% in performance running the overclock vs stock. And stock on mine is higher than most cards. Need all the frames @ 4k/240

I said I saw no difference in games between the undervolt v the overclock, NOT stock v overclock

 

[razorpakk]

My curve hasn't been 100% stable in all games/functions. More tinkering to be done.

AC: Shadows have shown instability where a full playthrough of Alan Wake 2 didn't. Then again, it might just be AC being buggy.

The way I see it:

- overclock: increasing the clock speeds over stock (for performance).

- undervolt: decreasing the voltage compared to stock (primarily for for temps or noise).

They used to be ‘opposing approaches’ but now more than ever they are complementary; an undervolt that keeps temperatures lower can help enable / sustain a mild overclock.

Although it is technically undervolting, it could be rebranded as "curve optimization".

 

[Rusty0611]

I said I saw no difference in games between the undervolt v the overclock, NOT stock v overclock

You’re doing something wrong then .

Edit: when I said stock for mine, it’s still voltage tuned and as such is boosting higher than it does generally out the box so should be ample performance to be had by increasing the core/memory clock on top of that for yours as well. Though whether it’s worth it or not is a different question… temps, power, noise etc. Luckily, I don’t need to worry about any of those too much

 

[Rusty0611]

Question for any folk who has theirs running 24/7 at 3100-3200: what sort of voltage have you got set for this frequency? Mines higher than it should be but looking to shortcut and pick a lower value that someone else has stable and go from there. Too lazy

 

[harmattan]

A spec comparison I haven't seen elsewhere, here are the weights of various 5090 I pieced together from listings and reviews (weights do not include the extra fans on some of the higher-end models e.g. Aorus):

Aorus - 3.100kg
Astral - 3.042kg
Suprim - 2.840kg
Vangaurd - 2.407
Triple Fan - 2.380kg
TUF - 2.370kg
Solid - 2.287kg
Trio - 2.119kg
Gamerock - 2.222kg
Gainward Phantom - ~2.000kg
Windforce - 2.000kg
Ventus - 1.882kg
Founders Edition - 1.814kg

Note how weight largely, and unsurprisingly, correllates with thermal performance (and tier) of each model. Takeaway is, for all the gusto about airflow cooling design (they all use 3x fan setups except the FE), it's really the size of the good-old aliminum sink and copper pipes that count. The only real outlier is the Aorus on which I did a double take on (and reconfirmed with a few listings) -- use a support backet with that one, kids.

Note: I could find no reviews of PNY or Inno3D card weights anywhere.

 

[Rusty0611]

Should have weighed mine: Gigabyte 5090 Xtreme Waterforce. But looks to be 1.238kg but obviously lots of the weight offset to the radiator. Auros Master is chunky. Does come with a support bracket I know. Wonder how many people don’t use it

 

[Absolutely Clueless]

A spec comparison I haven't seen elsewhere, here are the weights of various 5090 I pieced together from listings and reviews (weights do not include the extra fans on some of the higher-end models e.g. Aorus):

Aorus - 3.100kg
Astral - 3.042kg
Suprim - 2.840kg
Vangaurd - 2.407
Triple Fan - 2.380kg
TUF - 2.370kg
Solid - 2.287kg
Trio - 2.119kg
Gamerock - 2.222kg
Gainward Phantom - ~2.000kg
Windforce - 2.000kg
Ventus - 1.882kg
Founders Edition - 1.814kg

Note how weight largely, and unsurprisingly, correllates with thermal performance (and tier) of each model. Takeaway is, for all the gusto about airflow cooling design (they all use 3x fan setups except the FE), it's really the size of the good-old aliminum sink and copper pipes that count. The only real outlier is the Aorus on which I did a double take on (and reconfirmed with a few listings) -- use a support backet with that one, kids.

Note: I could find no reviews of PNY or Inno3D card weights anywhere.

Thanks for this! Super helpful.

Time to run a regression and predict the cooling performance of a 5kg 5090.

 

[jonneymendoza]

A spec comparison I haven't seen elsewhere, here are the weights of various 5090 I pieced together from listings and reviews (weights do not include the extra fans on some of the higher-end models e.g. Aorus):

Aorus - 3.100kg
Astral - 3.042kg
Suprim - 2.840kg
Vangaurd - 2.407
Triple Fan - 2.380kg
TUF - 2.370kg
Solid - 2.287kg
Trio - 2.119kg
Gamerock - 2.222kg
Gainward Phantom - ~2.000kg
Windforce - 2.000kg
Ventus - 1.882kg
Founders Edition - 1.814kg

Note how weight largely, and unsurprisingly, correllates with thermal performance (and tier) of each model. Takeaway is, for all the gusto about airflow cooling design (they all use 3x fan setups except the FE), it's really the size of the good-old aliminum sink and copper pipes that count. The only real outlier is the Aorus on which I did a double take on (and reconfirmed with a few listings) -- use a support backet with that one, kids.

Note: I could find no reviews of PNY or Inno3D card weights anywhere.

If the FE used a proper power connector, the FE card will blow all the others out of the water because thermally it is ******* amazing and whisper quiet under load.

I have never seen my FE go above 70c in gaming

 

[wunkley]

I don't get, what people don't get, about undervolting/ overclocking. You can do both at the same time and double win.

The daily conservative undervolt + overclock profile I've settled on for my 5080 is 0.91v at 2950Mhz core and +1400Mhz on the Vram (Default core volts are ~1.01v and core clocks 2750Mhz).

So I'm overclocking AND undervolting, and get more performance Vs stock whilst shaving off about 80watts of power which results in less heat and noise. What is not to like about this?

I've also done a super aggressive PBO undervolt / overclock setup on my 9700X (superb CPU by the way) so it runs at low volts whilst boosting all cores to max. Again, more performance Vs stock whilst drawing less power, and having less heat and noise. My air cooled rig is really quiet now and flies.

 

[Sin_Chase]

I don't get, what people don't get, about undervolting/ overclocking. You can do both at the same time and double win.

The daily conservative undervolt + overclock profile I've settled on for my 5080 is 0.91v at 2950Mhz core and +1400Mhz on the Vram (Default core volts are ~1.01v and core clocks 2750Mhz).

So I'm overclocking AND undervolting, and get more performance Vs stock whilst shaving off about 80watts of power which results in less heat and noise. What is not to like about this?

Depends on your requirements. I've undervolted my 5090 but not raised the core or memory clocks at all...I dont need any more performance at the moment. So no need for more heat and power consumption!