• 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.

x1900xtx Toxic 3d speeds

The_Bullet

The_Bullet

The_Bullet

Associate
Joined
7 Mar 2003
Posts
194
Location
Close to the Edge
Hi all. I have just bought and installed a Sapphire x1900xtx Toxic card. The advertised 3d speeds are 675 core and 800/1600 mem. In the cat control panel my default speeds (under "Requested") are 641 core and 774 (1548) mem instead of the advertised speeds. I am using the latest cat drivers from ati (6.7).Can anyone explain why this may be ? Thanks....
 
same thing happens with all their cards, they are all slightly underclocked, for example my x1800xt and my x1900xt are both meant to be 625mhz on the core but actually show up as 621 requested same with memory slightly underclocked jus push them up and see what you can get them up to, could you also post back your results, also be very careful i would honestly only increment 2-3 mhz at a time because that card is very expensive and runs very hot
 
Psycho Sonny said:
same thing happens with all their cards, they are all slightly underclocked
Click to expand...


Correct, but 641 core and 774/1448 memory are the standard xtx requested speeds. The OP owns a saphire toxic which is factory overclocked and pre watercooled. The requested speeds should be a lot nearer to 675 core and 800/1600 memory. I'd be a little concerned considering the hefty price premium over the standard xtx. Sure, he could always oc the extra mhz but that would defeat the purpose of paying £70 more for a factory oc'd xtx.
 
Bizarre said:
Correct, but 641 core and 774/1448 memory are the standard xtx requested speeds. The OP owns a saphire toxic which is factory overclocked and pre watercooled. The requested speeds should be a lot nearer to 675 core and 800/1600 memory. I'd be a little concerned considering the hefty price premium over the standard xtx. Sure, he could always oc the extra mhz but that would defeat the purpose of paying £70 more for a factory oc'd xtx.
Click to expand...

yep what he said
ive got the saph xtx and my clocks at stock read 774 [mem] and 648 [core] so he's aint correct
 
Thanks for the replies. I note that on the box as well as the Sapphire site there is no mention of speeds. However, the speeds are mentioned on this sites product page as well as on all product reviews on various hardware websites. I have read that the Toxic has its own bios (differing from the standard xtx) with the upped clock settings. For some reason my board does not seem to have this bios version. I've not tried upping the clocks yet as I am waiting to get as much info' as I can regarding the toxic clock speeds....
 
The Sapphire site does state 675/1600 for that cards clock speeds in the grey box down the side. Seems strange that its clocked and stock xtx speeds, might be worth emailing Sapphire to see what they say about it.
 
Will be interesting to see what they say. Shouldn't have to clock it yourself to the factory speeds even though it will probably hit them ok.
 
If you can get an original Sapphire X1900XTX Toxic bios it might be just easier to flash the bios to the correct one. You keep your warranty as you havent done anything to the card (ie the card will have its correct bios), that anyone can tell. You will save yourself some time too.

Thats what i would do.
 
I've just ran the Ati "automated clock configuration utility" and it finished with the core speed set at max (689) but the memory didn't move at all staying at 774. So I wonder if flashing the bios will damage the memory as it seems it doesn't want to go over 774/1548. I wonder if this is a "returned" product that didn't work at factory settings and so has had the bios flashed ?. Maybe just my cynical mind... :(
 
If the automated feature in ati overdrive won't raise my mem speed beyond 774 is that a sure sign that the memory is weak, or is it simply a failing of ati overdrive's auto overclocking tool ?. Thanks...
 
The_Bullet said:
I've just ran the Ati "automated clock configuration utility" and it finished with the core speed set at max (689) but the memory didn't move at all staying at 774.
Click to expand...
Automated overdrive used to act the same with my xtx(only overclocking the core on its first run). But if I ran the overdrive feature twice in a row then it would max out the core and memory on the second run.

Also, if your feeling brave you'll find the Toxic x1900xtx bios here

GL:).
 
Thanks for replying. I ran the overdrive feature 3 times in a row with it completing each time. The core went as far as it could (689) but the memory never went past 774/1548. As for flashing the bios, I'm not going to do that until I get a reply from ocuk or sapphire asking me to do so. The only reply I did get was an annoying one saying everything was fine and that I'd made the old 2d/3d speed mistake despite the fact that I worded my query extremely carefully stating it was the 3d "requested" speeds that were not right :mad: :(
 
MMM this gets more interesting, I am on my 3rd X1900XT-X and the first two had requested core speeds of 648 now this one which replaced my second one also requests 641. I wonder if ati have recommended a lower clock speeds with a new Bios, I say this because my 3rd X1900XT-X has a newer bios no. They have had a fair few problems with these cards. Although I do not think that 34mhz will make much of a differance. But you have paid for a factory O/C card so that is what you should get.Keep us updated on your findings :D
 
I've just installed Everest utilities so I can easily monitor gpu and mem temps during the ati O/C test. The gpu temp reached 64c which I believe is fine. The mem reached 76c and I have no idea if this is too hot or not. Anyone have any insights ?. Thanks....
 
Well, despite the fact that I disagree with the culmination of that thread, I am sure that the bios on my card is wrong and also that it seems that the memory is not up to the job as the CCC o/c utility won't budge the memory speed above 774 ;)
 
Exactly the same here. Was wondering why I'm getting a lower 3dmark than other apparently identical systems... this card ought to be specced and perform as advertised, else someone's in for a legal spanking. Did anyone try the bios update or is it RMA time?

abc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom