I took my new Radeon 9800 Pro and OCed it to XT levels using ATITool. It seems stable, however, I notice absolutely no increase in performance at all. I've ran UT2004 benchmarks, and the numbers are exactly the same with and without the overclock. I was under the impression that the XT was ~10% faster than the standard pro? Am I doing something wrong?
9800 Pro OCed to 9800XT gives no performance boost?
- Thread starter Jigglelicious
- Start date
LTC8K6
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2004
- 28,520
- 1,576
- 126
I merely picked an example from the benchmarks you linked to that showed a decent improvement. What happens if you push the cards a bit more than Tom's did? The pro being ahead might suggest CPU limitations even.
Up to 10% means anywhere from 0 to 10%, so I think I've got it covered judging by the benchies from various sites.
We aren't talking about buying an XT anyway, which I agree is a silly thing to do.
We are talking about whether the OP should have had a noticeable performance increase in UT2004 with his overclock. He should have had increases in his benches unless he is CPU limited.
Up to 10% means anywhere from 0 to 10%, so I think I've got it covered judging by the benchies from various sites.
We aren't talking about buying an XT anyway, which I agree is a silly thing to do.
We are talking about whether the OP should have had a noticeable performance increase in UT2004 with his overclock. He should have had increases in his benches unless he is CPU limited.
UT2004 is actually pretty much all CPU and RAM, Yes the video maters but its mostly all CPU and RAM power pushing that thing. Try OC a bit more or reducing your OC and you should see much different scores.
You will get a higher 3dmark01/03 score. Other than that there is not much use to overclock an ATI graohics card.
The reasoning, in my guesstimation, is the high heat of the cards. More heat causes more electrical resistance causing signals to travel slower, even if the frequency is higher. So at this near maxed out frequency the card is already at, the speed increase is offset by the extra resistance exactly.
The reasoning, in my guesstimation, is the high heat of the cards. More heat causes more electrical resistance causing signals to travel slower, even if the frequency is higher. So at this near maxed out frequency the card is already at, the speed increase is offset by the extra resistance exactly.
I had probl;ems with ATITool where i'd oc the card but it wouldn't stray oc'd. If you want to be sure it's oc'd, run 3dmark2k3 before and after ocing it. 3dmark is very sensitive to slight clockspeed increases.
apoppin
Lifer
Stick to NOT reasoning.
:roll:
The 9800Pro will show a definite perf increase when o/c'd. That may NOT translate to FPS increase . . .
especially when the game is held back more by the CPU and systemRAM.
BTW, you WILL get a very noticable perf increase when you FLASH the BIOS of a 9800Pro 256bit/256MB into an XT . . .
even some 9800Pros - 12*MB can be flashed with a perf inc. . . .
if interested -
READ this article CAREfullY
NOT EVERYoneOriginally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
LOL, Nick!!! Whatever you do, dont ever pursue a career in customer relations.
but its true!!!
(moron)
I got my 9800 - XT for $223 shipped on Wednesday. Great bang-4-the-buck.
:roll:
Thanks for the help guys. I ran 3dmark2003 and my score went up from 5750 to 6250 3dmarks by overclocking to XT levels. I guess that at least means that the OC is doing *something*. Still, it would be nice if it could give me a few extra frames in something like Thief3 or UT2k4. Those 32 player onslaught maps really slow things down!
Oh yeah for those wondering, my system specs are:
AthlonXP mobile 2400+ @ 2.2GHz
1GB OCZ PC3200
So I would hope that i'm not very CPU limited.
Oh yeah for those wondering, my system specs are:
AthlonXP mobile 2400+ @ 2.2GHz
1GB OCZ PC3200
So I would hope that i'm not very CPU limited.
the difference between Pro and XT levels on the 9800 will only get you a few fps, you need alot more mhz increase to really see a difference.
the 9600 is a diff story. You can feel the diff in a game if you are running pro vs XT clocks.
the 9600 is a diff story. You can feel the diff in a game if you are running pro vs XT clocks.
Seems like you're CPU limited. When I changed my CPU from a 2.4B to a 2.8E and OC'ed it to 3.41GHZ, I saw a larger increase from the OC from my 9800Pro to 9800XT levels. Actually, I went beyond the XT level at 444/720.
Well, I flashed to the XT bios (since i have a R360 core) and it seems to work fine. My 3dMark 2003 score went up to ~6400, which at least tells me the increased speed is doing *something*. Still, my other games don't seem much faster at all. I suppose huge UT2k4 firefights are CPU limited more than GPU limited.
Just curious, but is there any downside to running with the XT BIOS?
Just curious, but is there any downside to running with the XT BIOS?
The only diff is that you can now enable overdrive and its speeds are the xt speeds w/o an overclock having to be done. Its just now a default xt.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter