ASIC Quality - What is it? Compare?

Discussion in 'Video Cards and Graphics' started by jacktesterson, May 16, 2012.

  1. jacktesterson

    jacktesterson Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2001
    Messages:
    5,490
    Likes Received:
    2
    hey Guys,

    See this term thrown around here a lot lately.

    I know I can google, but can somebody give me a quick run down on what is is and what is generally good and bad? And how do I get my result? (that was discussion boards are for, right? :) )

    Thanks
     
    #1 jacktesterson, May 16, 2012
    Last edited: May 16, 2012
  2. Loading...

    Similar Threads - ASIC Quality Compare Forum Date
    Help with making sense of VERY high ASIC quality - RX480 Video Cards and Graphics Jul 31, 2016
    ASIC Quality Video Cards and Graphics Jul 21, 2016
    CrossFire - Higher ASIC Quality as Master GPU? Video Cards and Graphics Nov 24, 2014
    GTX 780 ti Owners - post your ASIC quality score Video Cards and Graphics Jan 11, 2014
    Sapphire's response to ASIC quality Video Cards and Graphics Apr 6, 2013

  3. MisterMac

    MisterMac Senior member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    Messages:
    779
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think anyone has an answer.

    GPU-Z claims what it says when you get the results.

    Higher quality mean lower volt, lower leakage, better oc'ing for AIR.
    (water and water blocks being a completely different metric).

    And so far... for me atleast it seems true...
     
  4. jacktesterson

    jacktesterson Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2001
    Messages:
    5,490
    Likes Received:
    2
    Interesting. I will load up GPU-Z when I get home, see what it says.

    Curiosity, what have others been getting?
     
  5. railven

    railven Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    5,993
    Likes Received:
    62
    Something about the quality of the components, ie lower rating == high leak thus consumes tons of power, produces tons of heat, thus lower OC, and etc.

    You can get it from the newest GPU-Z program, forgot the actual icon, but its on the right side of the program result screen - I think it's a blue question mark.

    My Sapph 7970 Ref had a low score, like 69.7 or something like that :(

    Still it OC's fine and produces low temps (everyday clocks are max CCC sliders, fan never gets above 33% and temps always below 65c)
     
  6. spinejam

    spinejam Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,471
    Likes Received:
    1
    Right click on header of GPU-Z window and choose ASIC...
     
  7. ShintaiDK

    ShintaiDK Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2012
    Messages:
    20,385
    Likes Received:
    118
    GPUZ gives you the result. It also tells you the good or bad.

    98.6% for my GTX 680.
     
  8. jacktesterson

    jacktesterson Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2001
    Messages:
    5,490
    Likes Received:
    2
    Be interested in seeing everyone put there score in here, and if they think its a true result.
     
  9. d3fu5i0n

    d3fu5i0n Senior member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    0
    As far as I've read up, that's pretty accurate.
     
  10. LOL_Wut_Axel

    LOL_Wut_Axel Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Messages:
    4,309
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'd say it's completely inaccurate and it's rather a random number they pull out of their behind.

    For example, the utility rates my GTX 460 at 68% even though it comes factory overclocked to 850MHz on stock voltage. Clearly it's a binned GPU.
     
  11. d3fu5i0n

    d3fu5i0n Senior member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    0
    I meant that their description is accurate, not what GPU-Z rates things as.
    To be honest, I'd just take the results with a 'grain of salt' and leave things be - you get what you get, right? :cool:
     
  12. jzmagic

    jzmagic Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
    Until they reveal how exactly ASIC is calculated, there's really no reason to put any credence into it.
     
  13. blackened23

    blackened23 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    8,556
    Likes Received:
    0
    edit: duplicate
     
  14. blackened23

    blackened23 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    8,556
    Likes Received:
    0
    To clear up a misconception here: A lower ASIC doesn't indicate poor overclocking. You want slight leakage for a better overclock. A higher ASIC in fact could be worse for overclocking on air.

    Personally I wouldn't put any credence in what ASIC tells you. I had a 7970 that was in the 70s that OC'ed to 1300mhz 24/7 stable during stress testing. That was with an accelero, but still.
     
  15. JBT

    JBT Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Messages:
    12,093
    Likes Received:
    0
    From what I have seen the ASIC Quality CANNOT be compared between two different GPU models.
     
  16. Despoiler

    Despoiler Golden Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,139
    Likes Received:
    31
    The ASIC value isn't "calculated". It's an arbitrary number the chip maker assigns the chip ie how they determine the bin of it. GPU-Z just reads the value.
     
  17. blastingcap

    blastingcap Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    6,656
    Likes Received:
    5
    GPU-z basically reads off info burned into the chip at time of testing, and for some GPUs like 79xx it seems to be more or less true. But NV GPUs are a different story, which is why you can get senseless numbers like 104% quality.

    IF ACCURATE, and if the ASIC% means what TPU says it means, then the higher %, the lower your voltage needs to be to hit stock speeds, and the better it will undervolt. The lower the %, the higher your default voltage to hit stock speeds, but the better it will overvolt--but you will also need to water cool it to keep temperatures safe.

    70-79% is about average for 79xx series and 78xx series apparently.

    For other GPU series GPU-z gives you nonsensical % anyway, especially for NVIDIA GPUs which apparently use a different scale than AMD GPUs. They might fix this for future versions of GPU-z.

    As someone said above, you can't compare percentages between different GPUs, only within the same GPU, due to different scales for different GPUs.
     
    #16 blastingcap, May 16, 2012
    Last edited: May 16, 2012
  18. chimaxi83

    chimaxi83 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    Messages:
    5,611
    Likes Received:
    8
    Not sure I'd give this number much weight. My Gigabyte reference 680 has an ASIC of 100% :sneaky:

    [​IMG]
     
    #17 chimaxi83, May 16, 2012
    Last edited: May 16, 2012
  19. d3fu5i0n

    d3fu5i0n Senior member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    0
    A perfect 100%, haha.
     
  20. MisterMac

    MisterMac Senior member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    Messages:
    779
    Likes Received:
    0
    As you can note, NVidia's 600 chips have qualities of 90 to 100

    7800\7900 seems to have qualities from 70 to 80.

    If your below this, your chip sucks.


    Since i had a 63% 7850 and it did shit - i'd now say there is some credence as long as you compare GPU to GPU model.
    Atleast for AIR Oc'ing.
     
  21. jacktesterson

    jacktesterson Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2001
    Messages:
    5,490
    Likes Received:
    2
    My 7850 scored 86.5%

    I am at 1260/1375 @ 1.23v currently, considered much above average.

    Maybe program isn't so wrong.
     
  22. Tempered81

    Tempered81 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2007
    Messages:
    6,375
    Likes Received:
    0
    It doesn't mean much. They use a value found on each chip denoting what they call "quality" during the binning process. It really has no reflection on overclock relative to voltage & temperature, since people with 60% and 80% can clock higher than others with 71% and 84%, while some 78% and 68% are the bottom of the barrel. See what I mean, it has no relationship.

    The final stable overclock of your board greatly depends on the quality of the board and the quality & quantity and spec of components used. Take 100 reference 580 boards, or 100 reference 7970 boards as an example. Last I checked gpu-z's ASIC quality check feature didn't even work for most Nvidia cards, while the number reported is useless for AMD cards. W1zzard however tell us something like lower = better overclocking with regular cooling while higher = better oc with better cooling.

    So the chips are binned in complicated process that I don't have all the details on. I'm not an EE in charge of asic validations. Chips have a measured leakage and a temperature operational range, those values are measured and combined to form the hard-coded readable data for 'asic qual'. The chips are assigned a default voltage ID based on the results of leakage testing. For each product in AMD's case there is a range for which the voltages must be set. Here's where it starts getting tricky.

    Say the TahitiXT 7970 board has a possible 4 default VID states on reference designed boards in a range of 1005-1180mv. It might not be exactly that, but it's close. Now 100 dies pop out of the wafer fully functional at the desired 925mhz within that range and the desired temperature & leakage range. The too leaky/too hot parts are discarded or binned into a lower product. Each of the 100 samples will overclock at a different speed using a different voltage releasing a different quantity of heat because of various quantities of leakage. The result may be that the worst one does 950 @ 1150mv near the maximum temperature range, while the best one does 1250 @ 1025mv near the bottom of the temperature range. The 'best' chip in the above example is considered "rare" and would be used for the dual-gpu/mobile segments where the temperature quals are more strict - just a higher bin.

    But in our example, all 100 chips are planned to be used as 7970 products - lets say because they are all fully functional, and even worse or even better samples exist for different skus for the sake of the example. The unbelievable aspect (for me at least) is that each of these 100 samples are assigned a VID in the reverse order that you would expect them to be. I would think the rare cherry sample would have the 1005mv VID, but that is not the case. Contrarily that best rare cherry sample ships out the door with the HIGHEST VID. The VID choice is based mostly on the leakage & temperature metrics. The least leaky, coolest running most efficient chips are given a higher VID to fit a temperature range and to create consistency in the SKU. You might be asking why would they artificially limit something like this? The answer is because even the worst pieces of silicon still need to become 7970 SKUs to keep yield up.

    So the binning process is going to measure a lot of things.
    Speed. What mhz will it run while completing the gamut of tests (926-1450mhz+) ?
    Heat. Is the temperature maintainable for the hottest dies assigned the lowest VIDs?
    Leakage. Are the worst silicons still going to achieve the desired binning requirements to become 7970 products?
    And tons of other more precise metrics that I do not understand.

    Of all the 100 dies, and their measured quantities of leakage they will all clock to various heights but not all will be solely limited by leakage. Although leakage would be the primary deciding factor, because it is a measurement of efficiency and a poor sample usually requires more voltage to maintain a similar overclock as a lower leakage part, while putting out more heat. But the complex nature of the binning process to make a larger lot of SKUs means for some bass-ackwards methods of assigning default voltages. You also can't always say that your 7970 is a better or worse overclocker because it was given one of the 4 default voltage lookup tables that is more/less than another sample. The ASIC quality, together with the default voltage, and the known temperature of the card when overclocking all combine to give you some sort of relative measurement of its overclocking ability.

    This is where the quality of the board comes into play. Each of the individual logics on the board are also binned just like the great big die is! The memory ASICs, the mosfets, chokes, inductors, master and slave buck controllers even each capacitor and resistor are all binned and specced when they are manufactured. There is a lottery involved when assembling the PCB as well. You would hope to win the lottery on the PCB & the die! A combination of the top 100 die sample & top 100 PCB sample results in the best video card overclocks that you see. A combination of the worst die and the worst board results in the lowest clocking samples. Say Shamino & Kingpin are overclocking 100 samples (these samples have to be 580's for KP but the same metrics apply). Kingpin's skills are going to be in use at each benching session. Say he isn't even using LN2 yet and for our examples sake, he's only going to measure each card's limit with its stock HSF.

    Now each of the 100 GTX580s is going to yield a different result to the most consistent seasoned VGA overclocker in the world. Each GF110 die and reference GTX580 PCB combination is going to vary in quality with a number between 0-99. That end result is not wholly measured by gpu-z's ASIC quality number, even though it may be relative in one part of the binning process. I don't know off hand what a GTX580's air overclocking range is but let's just say 795-1050mhz. Evenly space out 100 different results within that range, and there you have it. One card will be the best clocker with that stock HSF, and the even stranger part, is that one particular best card might NOT be the best card for reaching 1500mhz on LN2. That might happen to be the 76th ranked card in the line-up. Which gives credence to the ASIC qual explanations from W1zzard.

    Now you would be surprised to see that his best sample had a crazy ASIC quality number like 68%, and you expect that number to be 95-99%.
     
  23. jacktesterson

    jacktesterson Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2001
    Messages:
    5,490
    Likes Received:
    2
    My 7850 has a much above average score from what I've read, and my OC's seem to reflect it.

    Just a coincidence I'm sure
     
    #22 jacktesterson, May 16, 2012
    Last edited: May 16, 2012
  24. tornadog

    tornadog Golden Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    0
    this is my ASIC score

    [​IMG]
     
  25. kami

    kami Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 1999
    Messages:
    17,625
    Likes Received:
    4
    My 680 (EVGA SC+) reads exactly 100.0%

    I don't put much stock into it until they explain how they get these numbers.
     
  26. Concillian

    Concillian Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,739
    Likes Received:
    3
    I have an 80.x% ASIC on my ASUS 7850.

    It seems to be stable at slightly higher core speed than millivolts:
    1.075v --> stable at 1075 MHz (didn't test between 1075 and 1115)
    1.165v --> stable at 1175 MHz
    1.250v --> stable at 1260 MHz


    It's stable in 3DMark much higher than that (~50MHz higher), but will crash in games until brought down near the same clock as the voltage.

    Been running at 1.25v / 1260 / 1450 for a week or so, as I haven't had time to put on my Accelero and some heatsinks on the VRMs, which I want to do before pushing it harder.
     
    #25 Concillian, May 16, 2012
    Last edited: May 16, 2012