[GeForce] NV flip flops position on OC ban.(Possibly locking the bios now!)

[bzb_Elder]

So when Nvidia removes laptop overclocking, it's because it's a "bug":

Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuelG - Nvidia customer care representative
There was a bug introduced into our drivers which enabled some systems to overclock. This was fixed in a recent update.
But when they reverse their decision, it suddenly becomes a "feature":

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterS@NVIDIA - Nvidia customer care representative
We heard from many of you that you would like this feature enabled again. So, we will again be enabling overclocking in our upcoming driver release next month for those affected notebooks.

"There was a bug introduced into our drivers which enabled some systems to overclock." Rather than seeing the glass half empty, this could also mean that systems that shouldn't be overclockable became overclockable with the introduction of the bug. They patched the bug with an update, but in doing so "over-patched" and removed overclockability from systems that should be overclockable.

I don't believe that every mis-spoken word by a "customer care representative" should be taken as intentional deceit by a large company. This is a good example of how a few simple quotes can be twisted different ways to convey different points.

 

[wilds]

Mobile NV GPUs are becoming closer and closer to their desktop brethren. Overclocking allows those notebooks to get closer and closer to desktop performance.

As long as overclocking stays on, I'll continue recommending mobile nvidia as it is far ahead of AMD's mobile platform. Tahiti is getting really long in the tooth, no matter how low its price is compared the the 980m. It seems like to the Tonga based m295x consumes quite a bit of power compared to a stock clocked 980m.

 

[ocre]

Interesting how at first some people actually defended NV's actions or said it didn't matter at all. Now we have some users saying that NV didn't do it for the consumers and that they reversed their decision only because of OEMs, not making a connection whatsoever that better cooling designs, OC software tweaks allow OEMs to differentiate their enthusiast products -- which is what we the customers desire. Glad to see this industry still has gamers who think their voices count and that someone at NV actually listens. Good move NV!

I don't find that interesting at all. It's really not complicated. But....you know...

It is Interesting how you want try to put the focus on "some people" instead of the actual topic. I have no idea why your trying to insinuate but there is nothing funny. It's very simple, it probably really didnt matter to the people who "acted" like it didn't matter. You think that might be it? Perhaps these people didn't care because they don't overclock laptop gpus. Shocking, I know.

I wonder what caused all this in the first place and i am starting to wonder if nvidia really does have a communication problem from one department to the next.

There is a reason behind this but with all the conspiracies and nvidia bashing that goes on nonstop, I doubt we will get far into a real discussion. Just look at the first page, its full of the gtx970 memory mislabeling and even bump gate for the 7th million time. Obviously there is some real story behind this, it would be awesome if we ever get to know............

 

[EliteRetard]

I still have a GT 9800m laptop that can OC
CPU too, I can bump it from 2.13 to 2.65

I thought about trying to sell it, but since people are stupid it feels dishonest.

 

[Silverforce11]

Why are the system builders concerned? It is the customer (both existing and potential) that drives their feedback. Whether it be direct or indirectly, it is due to customer reaction.

Because ASUS, MSI etc make gaming laptops with OC as an advertised feature. They have the cooling for it and the software to make it happen.

NV cannot blanket ban OC via drivers, it would put OEMs in a very difficult situation of "false advertisement" when users no longer are able to OC.

This was a stupid move on their behalf initially, so I am glad for once, it was reversed. Any ban on OC needs to be handled via the OEM, via modified Bioses.

 

[3DVagabond]

"There was a bug introduced into our drivers which enabled some systems to overclock." Rather than seeing the glass half empty, this could also mean that systems that shouldn't be overclockable became overclockable with the introduction of the bug. They patched the bug with an update, but in doing so "over-patched" and removed overclockability from systems that should be overclockable.

I don't believe that every mis-spoken word by a "customer care representative" should be taken as intentional deceit by a large company. This is a good example of how a few simple quotes can be twisted different ways to convey different points.

I agree with the bold as long as it's not used as a convenient excuse. The rest of it is simply double talk.

They disabled it claiming it was a bug so people couldn't claim they were removing a feature that they paid for. End of story. They put it back because they were getting too much negative feedback. Especially after the 970 BS. Even nVidia customers have a saturation point that will turn them away.

 

[3DVagabond]

Mobile NV GPUs are becoming closer and closer to their desktop brethren. Overclocking allows those notebooks to get closer and closer to desktop performance.

As long as overclocking stays on, I'll continue recommending mobile nvidia as it is far ahead of AMD's mobile platform. Tahiti is getting really long in the tooth, no matter how low its price is compared the the 980m. It seems like to the Tonga based m295x consumes quite a bit of power compared to a stock clocked 980m.

Off topic. What does AMD mobile GPU's have to do with nVidia allowing O/C'ing again. This just looks like you are trying to find a negative spin about AMD in an nVidia thread that shows them with egg on their face.

 

[wilds]

Off topic. What does AMD mobile GPU's have to do with nVidia allowing O/C'ing again. This just looks like you are trying to find a negative spin about AMD in an nVidia thread that shows them with egg on their face.

I wasn't trying to bash AMD, I was just thinking about nVidia's mobile chips and how similar they are getting to the desktop-like performance. I want to see what the competition has for mobile for more ideas about overall performance; but it's really hard to do that right now. These high end mGPUs have about 100w TDP which is pretty impressive given the level of performance.

Without overclocking, many of those thick gaming laptops wouldn't be take advantage of additional performance without any concerns for power/heat. Even relatively thin notebooks can get a nice speed boost.

The 680MX/780M/880M are all the same full GK104 (GTX 680/770), but with each consecutive release it got higher clock speed; near reference GTX680! I hope we see a similar thing with the next refresh. nVidia calls the GTX 980 as the GTX 680's successor. They both have very similar power consumption, so I could definitely see a lower clocked GTX 980 in notebook form. I would love to see how high it could overclock.

 

[3DVagabond]

I wasn't trying to bash AMD, I was just thinking about nVidia's mobile chips and how similar they are getting to the desktop-like performance. I want to see what the competition has for mobile for more ideas about overall performance; but it's really hard to do that right now. These high end mGPUs have about 100w TDP which is pretty impressive given the level of performance.

Without overclocking, many of those thick gaming laptops wouldn't be take advantage of additional performance without any concerns for power/heat. Even relatively thin notebooks can get a nice speed boost.

The 680MX/780M/880M are all the same full GK104 (GTX 680/770), but with each consecutive release it got higher clock speed; near reference GTX680! I hope we see a similar thing with the next refresh. nVidia calls the GTX 980 as the GTX 680's successor. They both have very similar power consumption, so I could definitely see a lower clocked GTX 980 in notebook form. I would love to see how high it could overclock.

OK, fair enough.

Exactly how big is the high end mobile market. People like to clump all mobile together when showing this growing market, but how much of it is actually cards like the 980m?

 

[EliteRetard]

That would be interesting to know, and I tried a bit of internet search but didn't find anything. I wonder if somebody here has better google-fu.

 

[pepone1234]

Why are the system builders concerned? It is the customer (both existing and potential) that drives their feedback. Whether it be direct or indirectly, it is due to customer reaction.

Many people say that this overclock removal thing was because of alienware.
Their latest models come with an insufficient PSU and they could have asked nvidia to remove the overclock capability to avoid this problem to become worse.

Dell is the largest nvidia customer of dGPU for laptops so it has better negotiation capabilities. I think the rest of the builders could only be seated and wait.
After all the protests dell could possibly reverted the situation and well, till today. I think dell should have capped OC via bios only on their problematic laptops and let nvidia and the rest of builders alone.

(this is my first post on this forums, time to stop lurking hahaha)

 

[krumme]

It was an illegal act and therefore it was reversed. Perhaps by demand from some oem.
You cant sell an 2000 usd laptop in eg europe and then remove 10% of its performance for some consumers. There is laws against that.
It should be obvious for all, but as a history lessen all should be forced to read the original thread and see the tons of crap that went into defending this. Luckily they are left with a long nose - and they deserve it. Big time. They are actually the ones responsible for things like this to originally happening.
As consumers and enthusiast we need to stand united against things like this whoever does it in the future - no matter the brand.

 

[Techhog]

Mobile NV GPUs are becoming closer and closer to their desktop brethren. Overclocking allows those notebooks to get closer and closer to desktop performance.

As long as overclocking stays on, I'll continue recommending mobile nvidia as it is far ahead of AMD's mobile platform. Tahiti is getting really long in the tooth, no matter how low its price is compared the the 980m. It seems like to the Tonga based m295x consumes quite a bit of power compared to a stock clocked 980m.

There was never a mobile Tahiti.

 

[ocre]

Many people say that this overclock removal thing was because of alienware.
Their latest models come with an insufficient PSU and they could have asked nvidia to remove the overclock capability to avoid this problem to become worse.

Dell is the largest nvidia customer of dGPU for laptops so it has better negotiation capabilities. I think the rest of the builders could only be seated and wait.
After all the protests dell could possibly reverted the situation and well, till today. I think dell should have capped OC via bios only on their problematic laptops and let nvidia and the rest of builders alone.

(this is my first post on this forums, time to stop lurking hahaha)

Well, I want to think you for contributing. This is an actual post trying to discuss what went on and why this really happened. You bring up a very interesting suggestion. My first thoughts were in line with this. I thought it could have been because OEMs went crazy skimpy due to the very low power draw of maxwell at stock. See, the gm204 is extremely impressive when its a reference card but the overclock models start showing higher and higher power consumption. My opinion is that this is because of the high clocks on the 28nm node. That being stuck on this node is not without its trade offs. Nvidia pushed the clocks up to the point of diminishing returns. Sure, the clocks can go higher but the power consumption starts to raise faster and faster.

Anyway, I wonder if why your saying could be true. That dell cheaper out and tried to use nvidia to get out of it

 

[bzb_Elder]

The rest of it is simply double talk.

I wasn't defending or suggesting that this is what happened in reality. I was simply offering another possible scenario. Has NVidia released an official explanation of what really happened and why? If not, we're all speculating, and may never really know.

Many people say that this overclock removal thing was because of alienware.

I'm pretty new too pepone1234, but welcome. This is indeed a good point. If this is what happened, it would be easier (smarter) for Dell to persuade NVidia to introduce an oc cap rather than potentially having to recall their high-end laptops for psu replacement.

 

[wilds]

There was never a mobile Tahiti.

My bad, I meant Pitcairn. Tahiti is 7950/7970 and the 7970m is actually the 7870.

I was getting really bored of 3 years of the 7870 vs 680 limited to 100w.

 

[pepone1234]

Nvidia is starting to block overclock via vBIOS on the newer laptop cards:

http://forum.techinferno.com/genera...t-overclocking-mobile-gpus-12.html#post124474

 

[chubbyfatazn]

Nvidia is starting to block overclock via vBIOS on the newer laptop cards

I wonder if those units shipped before the overclocking "ban" was lifted.

If not, I also wonder if NV will implement some anti-BIOS flashing mechanisms in the future.

 

[wand3r3r]

Nvidia is starting to block overclock via vBIOS on the newer laptop cards:

http://forum.techinferno.com/genera...t-overclocking-mobile-gpus-12.html#post124474

Wow Nvidia is really screwing consumers. (If true, crazy flip flopping)

Great signs of things to come with the market share dominance.

 

[exar333]

Many people say that this overclock removal thing was because of alienware.
Their latest models come with an insufficient PSU and they could have asked nvidia to remove the overclock capability to avoid this problem to become worse.

Dell is the largest nvidia customer of dGPU for laptops so it has better negotiation capabilities. I think the rest of the builders could only be seated and wait.
After all the protests dell could possibly reverted the situation and well, till today. I think dell should have capped OC via bios only on their problematic laptops and let nvidia and the rest of builders alone.
(this is my first post on this forums, time to stop lurking hahaha)

Great post, and I think that definitely makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately, NV should have been wiser and suggested this from the onset, if this was the case. Dell is well within their rights to limit their OCs on their respective machines, and let the consumer decide if that is what they want, or if they want to go with a different OEM.

 

[Silverforce11]

Blocking OC via the Bios should be an optional and legit course of action, at the request of OEMs who have crap notebook cooling and want to minimize overheating issues.

It should NEVER be a blanket ban as that would overwrite the many notebooks designed & advertised with OC capability.

 

[3DVagabond]

Why are we assuming it was the OEM's?

 

[Silverforce11]

Why are we assuming it was the OEM's?

Until I see a OC lock in the bios from an actual gaming laptop, I will stick with my view that crappy notebooks from bulk OEMs actually do want to limit OC.

 

[3DVagabond]

Until I see a OC lock in the bios from an actual gaming laptop, I will stick with my view that crappy notebooks from bulk OEMs actually do want to limit OC.

Originally they did it with the drivers. Straight from nVidia. No mention of anything except it was a bug that they fixed. They said they never intended for O/C'ing to be allowed in the first place. How can that be put on the OEM's?