overclocking x1900xt via tray tools?

[Cyber-Mav]

whats the difference between using driver level overclocking and low level overclocking? and which is better/more stable to use?

 

[Cyber-Mav]

hmm, after testing the 2 settings out, driver level seems to be quicker as in the flicker of the screen when the clocks are changed is real quick where as with low level the flicker is slower. looks like driver level is best to use.

 

[Cyber-Mav]

ahh, i noticed something else, with driver level overclocking the memory timings become more relaxed where as with low level overclocking the timings remain as tight as before.

so driver level overclocking has slightly less performance.

 

[MeddlE]

So which are you using? Off to have a play with my settings and see how big the difference is.

 

[Cyber-Mav]

im now using driver level overclocking and its far more stable than low level overclocking. but from what i hear low level oc was never good for x1900 cards using cats 6.4 onwards.

but its apparently fine for x1800xt cards.

not sure how much the performance impact is using driver level since its just relaxing the mem timings on the card but i suspect that the memory can be overclocked just that much higher to make up for the difference.

either way im more happy with the stability iv found using driver level and won;t be using low level again.

if you can do some testing but iv found the best test is the artifact scanner since it shows a fps rate and you can see from that how much difference its made.

 

[Cyber-Mav]

just did the test, driver level shows around 5-7 less fps in the spinning spaceship of the tray tools artifact tester.

thats testing both driver level and low level at the same clock speeds.

 

[charltonfan1]

just did the test, driver level shows around 5-7 less fps in the spinning spaceship of the tray tools artifact tester.

thats testing both driver level and low level at the same clock speeds.

but is that 6-7 extra FPS on top of 700? i.e. what is the total average FPS for both settings?

thanks

 

[Cyber-Mav]

e.g when using driver level overclocking cube shows fps of 962-970. avg 967
when using low level overclocking the fps is shows as 969-978. avg 976

so it is quicker in low level mode.

 

[MeddlE]

I lost about 100 points in 3dmark05 using low level, on top of which when I exited out and it switched back to 2D I got a blank screen. Driver level for me.

 

[FreeStream]

Use driver level, as you get the proper clock control so it doesn't change with vidoes/etc.

I will use ATi Tool next time I reinstall, as it has X1900 timings control and the 2nd core voltage.

 

[charltonfan1]

e.g when using driver level overclocking cube shows fps of 962-970. avg 967
when using low level overclocking the fps is shows as 969-978. avg 976

so it is quicker in low level mode.

ok thanks. so in essence it makes a 0.7% difference but has other benefits

 

[FreeStream]

There shouldn't be a debate about it.


Driver level for 24/7 use, low level for benching, but then you would be using ATi Tool so it defeats the point using low level ATT

 

[Cyber-Mav]

yea driver level is best for stability i have seen. very happy now with the card.