The Official 8800GT 512/256mb Review/Overclocking Thread

Sir Random · 2 Nov 2007 at 00:17

Tom|Nbk said:
Just for comparison my GTX =

Min 25
Max 49
AVG 40

considering we have the same cpu etc and the fact that Crysis is supposed to run just as good on the GT as the GTX there seems to be something up there.

Surely that can't be right for 'very high' settings? what's your GTX clocked at?

I don't even get 40fps average at 'high' settings (GTX @ stock), and 'very high' knocks another 10fps off.

willhub · 2 Nov 2007 at 00:22

Yea it wont be on very high settings tom used, if it was he's the only one who can run it with 40fps average at Very High with a single 8800GTX.

smsmasters · 2 Nov 2007 at 00:23

Tom|Nbk said:
Just for comparison my GTX =

Min 25
Max 49
AVG 40

considering we have the same cpu etc and the fact that Crysis is supposed to run just as good on the GT as the GTX there seems to be something up there.

Did you make sure that you opened up crysis then checked the settings are on very high before running the benchmark script? Is this 1680x1050 res?

willhub · 2 Nov 2007 at 00:23

smsmasters said:
That is illogical.

Mine:
e6600 @ 3.6ghz
GPU: 700Mhz
Memory: 1000Mhz
Shader: 1700Mhz
13093 3D Marks

Yours:
3.4.ghz
GPU: 700Mhz
Memory: 1050Mhz
Shader: 1700Mhz
13073 3D Marks

We practically have the same overclock on the 8800GT but my CPU is 3.6ghz and yours is at 3.4ghz. Of course there will only be a little difference in 3dmark06...

An increase in the CPU of 200Mhz will give more than 20 3DMarks increase :rolleyes:

, I would have expected you to know that tbh :rolleyes:

smsmasters · 2 Nov 2007 at 00:25

willhub said:
An increase in the CPU of 200Mhz will give more than 20 3DMarks increase , I would have expected you to know that tbh

It's would "have" not would "of". :rolleyes:

Anyway, I highly doubt an increase of 200Mhz to the CPU would make much difference. :rolleyes:

In fact, it doesn't. Run superpi at 3200Mhz then run it again at 3400Mhz and the difference will be tiny. Quad core is where the score will really increase. Please stop talking gibberish.

Who agrees with me?

I find it highly irritating when someone tries to state something that is incorrect.

End of rant, can't be bothered debating over integers.

Sir Random · 2 Nov 2007 at 00:31

smsmasters said:
It's would "have" not would "of".

Anyway, I highly doubt an increase of 200Mhz to the CPU would make much difference.<snip>
Who agrees with me?

It's easily tested, lower your oc by 200Mhz and run 3DMk.

markyb · 2 Nov 2007 at 00:39

Guys Heres mine, had a chance to play with the CPU speed tonight which seems nice and stable now.

E6300 @ 3.22Ghz -12464
E6300 @ 3.3Ghz - 12583

Both with the same GPU clocks

willhub · 2 Nov 2007 at 00:46

smsmasters said:
It's would "have" not would "of".

Anyway, I highly doubt an increase of 200Mhz to the CPU would make much difference. In fact, it doesn't. Run superpi at 3200Mhz then run it again at 3400Mhz and the difference will be tiny. Quad core is where the score will really increase. Please stop talking gibberish.

Who agrees with me?

I find it highly irritating when someone tries to state something that is incorrect.

End of rant, can't be bothered debating over integers.

Look above this post, you notice what markyb has got with less than 100Mhz jump.

I'm sorry but last time I checked Super Pi was not 3DMark06, perhaps you should check what you are using before you post anything, you've litrally allready been proved wrong.

Also, dont correct my english, this is not an english class :rolleyes:

smsmasters · 2 Nov 2007 at 01:03

willhub said:
Look above this post, you notice what markyb has got with less than 100Mhz jump.

I'm sorry but last time I checked Super Pi was not 3DMark06, perhaps you should check what you are using before you post anything, you've litrally allready been proved wrong.

Also, dont correct my english, this is not an english class

Obviously Superpi is not 3DMark06, however it does outline the differences in cpu speed.

Ok did some more testing:

e6600 @ 3.6ghz 13093
e6600 @ 3.4ghz 13078
e6600 @ 3.2ghz 13028

Can't be bothered to post screenshots for this...

We have different motherboards so other variables come into play, such as chipset latencies, memory timings, etc...

I'm not surprised we have different scores...

Also, it is "literally" not "litrally".

Big.Wayne · 2 Nov 2007 at 01:05

Supplied for Comparison!

Tom|Nbk · 2 Nov 2007 at 01:39

smsmasters said:
Did you make sure that you opened up crysis then checked the settings are on very high before running the benchmark script? Is this 1680x1050 res?

Ahh now then.

I was on High when I ran that

Oopsie

Haven't tried Very High

Oversight due to me being half asleep

mrk · 2 Nov 2007 at 06:45

Well my 8800GT just sold for £152 inc postage so I'm quite chuffed

Flukester · 2 Nov 2007 at 07:46

Lo guys,

Had to sign up just to add to this thread...

3DMark06 with spec in siggy is ~13400, dam impressed with these cards.

Mant · 2 Nov 2007 at 08:03

Hi guys,

Sorry if this has been asked, I don't think it has, but what is the fan noise like on these cards during idle AND load?

Cheers

The Asgard · 2 Nov 2007 at 08:06

Mant said:
Hi guys,

Sorry if this has been asked, I don't think it has, but what is the fan noise like on these cards during idle AND load?

Cheers

Its totally silent in any condition.

mrk · 2 Nov 2007 at 08:08

Yup, when I posted the toms hardware guide which said the noise was no diff to the GTS people said THG were being silly because some other sites said it was noisy...

dr. sarf · 2 Nov 2007 at 08:16

Mant said:
Hi guys,

Sorry if this has been asked, I don't think it has, but what is the fan noise like on these cards during idle AND load?

Cheers

Yeah they're pretty much silent but it depends on what you like to have temp wise. Running under the Nvidia software it automatically adjusts the fan duty but for me, it didnt do it enough. It kept it at 29% fan speed with temps of 88dg. So I have Rivatuner controlling the fan speeds now and usually runs at 60% duty, which is no louder than the rest of the case fans I have.
But, have a play and set it to 100% - that noise will make you chuckle

Comparing it to the GTS at 100% fan duty, this card is a lot louder. But now I have it configured as I want, it never gets hot enough to warrant 100% speed.

Tooks · 2 Nov 2007 at 08:47

dr. sarf said:
I assume you're in XP with a score like that? Our scores are similar and the CPU scores are about the same, yet I have 2 of these babies and only 600 marks above you. *sulks*

Yeah, XP, should have mentioned it!

So, are your 2 GT's running in 8x slots then, being SLI?

I know vista runs a little less quickly, but I would have expected more from your setup?

Big.Wayne · 2 Nov 2007 at 09:13

mrk said:
Well my 8800GT just sold for £152 inc postage so I'm quite chuffed

Did you mean 8800GTS? or have you flogged your 2 day old card already! :eek:

willhub · 2 Nov 2007 at 09:15

smsmasters said:
Obviously Superpi is not 3DMark06, however it does outline the differences in cpu speed.

Ok did some more testing:

e6600 @ 3.6ghz 13093
e6600 @ 3.4ghz 13078
e6600 @ 3.2ghz 13028

Can't be bothered to post screenshots for this...

We have different motherboards so other variables come into play, such as chipset latencies, memory timings, etc...

I'm not surprised we have different scores...

Also, it is "literally" not "litrally".

Ok what I think cant mean anything then because your PC is totally different but at 3.2Ghz my score is more than 20 3dmarks lower compared to 3.4.

Competitor rules

** The Official 8800GT 512/256mb Review/Overclocking Thread **

The Official 8800GT 512/256mb Review/Overclocking Thread