Flashing Video Card BIOS

[Shamrock]

The Leadtek BIOS was most popular I believe because the Leadtek card is made according to nVidia's reference design. So pretty much any card made according to the reference design can use that BIOS. It worked perfectly with my Aopen 5900 NU because it's nVidia's reference design.

The only reason I'm not using it now is because I only got 10 Mhz more out of the RAM before artifacts showed up, and I got about 30-40 Mhz more out of the GPU, but I never tested for long term stability. So... since my card was a good overclocker to begin with... 490/940... I still didn't gain much headroom by using the 5950 Ultra BIOS that is supposed to relax RAM timings and increase voltage to the GPU so I switched back to my 5900 NU BIOS.

Now if only I could write a custom BIOS so I don't have to keep using coolbits...[/quote]

Jeff,

Try this:

http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=254

it even has a hex editor, this is how I changed the ID of my Gainward BIOS, so it would match my card. It's more powerful than given credit for.

 

[howdyduty]

THUGS hit the nail on the head. Nice comparison info. Thanks.

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
You guys arent reading. Flashing reduces the memory timings, AND MAKES THE CARD SLOWER unless you get more than 70mhz more out of the flash...

Anyone know the differences in all the BIOSes-- 5950u vs. 5900u vs 5900 vs 5900xt/se?

I got one of those PNY 5900u cards that were in 5900xt boxes at Circuit City. I've had no problems overclocking it to 550/950, but do notice that it gets kinda hot. It has the 5900xt/se BIOS that PNY put on there (no idea why).

But this whole idea of memory timings and temperatures going down, as well as max overclocking going up while benchmarks going down intrigues me.

I'll grab all 4 PNY BIOSes and flash each one to my card and benchmark several games and programs. I'll come up with a set core/mem speed to test with each to see truly how much of a difference the BIOS makes. I'll also note the temperatures immediately as 3Dmark03 completes. I'll also test and see the max stable overclock I can get that will run at least a 5x loop of 3Dmark03.

So, anyone interested in seeing the results, gimme a good few days or so and I'll post an update. I'll be using an XP1700+ oc'ed to 2240mhz (166x13.5) in a somewhat warm room, so temps might be an issue with things like max overclock and so forth (so that part will be a YMMV).

Anyone have any suggestions of what they'd like to see benchmarked? Currently installed are 3Dmark03, FarCry, UT2k4, KotOR, and some others.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Shamrock
The Leadtek BIOS was most popular I believe because the Leadtek card is made according to nVidia's reference design. So pretty much any card made according to the reference design can use that BIOS. It worked perfectly with my Aopen 5900 NU because it's nVidia's reference design.

The only reason I'm not using it now is because I only got 10 Mhz more out of the RAM before artifacts showed up, and I got about 30-40 Mhz more out of the GPU, but I never tested for long term stability. So... since my card was a good overclocker to begin with... 490/940... I still didn't gain much headroom by using the 5950 Ultra BIOS that is supposed to relax RAM timings and increase voltage to the GPU so I switched back to my 5900 NU BIOS.

Now if only I could write a custom BIOS so I don't have to keep using coolbits...

Jeff,

Try this:

http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=254

it even has a hex editor, this is how I changed the ID of my Gainward BIOS, so it would match my card. It's more powerful than given credit for.[/quote]

I used that before... but it wouldn't let me change the default frequencies.

*EDIT* Or rather, I didn't know what values to edit in the hex editor to change them...

 

[PhoenixOrion]

Personal Experience: Performance and Quality Comparison from Flashing an eVGA Geforce FX 5900 128MB (May 3, 2004)

Flash Core Mem 3Dmark03 IQ with FarCry
stock bios 5900 300 850 5177 No artifacts
stock bios 5900 400 850 5162 No artifacts
stock bios 5900 449 850 5446 No artifacts
stock bios 5900 436 922 5032 Locks up
flashed to 5900 ultra 450 850 5428 No artifacts
flashed to 5900 ultra 450 850 5480 No artifacts
flashed to 5900 ultra 450 850 5242 No artifacts
flashed to 5900 ultra 450 850 5397 No artifacts
flashed to 5900 ultra 459 869 5489 Image artifacts
flashed to 5900 ultra 466 883 5517 Artifacts/snow flickers
flashed to 5950 ultra 450 850 5351 No artifacts
flashed to 5950 ultra 475 950 5632 Artifacts/snow flickers

Conclusions:
Flashing a stock 5900 to 5950 ultra may bring more voltage hence provide stability with overclocked core and memory but the 3dmark result was lower than stock 5900 u or nu versions at about the same comparable core clocks.
The 2.2ns RAMDACS do not do so well above 850mhz. All testing with the memory clocks higher than 850 resulted in image artifacts or lock ups. Even though people say that they can overclock and produce high 3dmarks I don't think they can run their videocard at those settings for everyday use with clean and stable images especially in a resource hog game such as FarCry.

 

[PhoenixOrion]

Continuation to previous post, the best setting I found was to flash 5900 to 5900 ultra bios, instead of 5950 ultra. This makes the driver have the 3D default at 450/850. An increase of 50mhz in core and keeping the memory at same frequency. You can go through the game of FarCry without any image artifacts, have AA/AF enabled at medium levels, turn the flashlight on all the time without drop in FPS, game video settings all on "High" with water rendering at "Very High", 1024x768x32 and temps didnt go above 60C.

 

[Gamingphreek]

My memory and core are happily (and with ease) running at 5900 Ultra Levels. Could someone please recommend a Video BIOS for my MSI5900XT-VTD128 .

Thx,
Kevin