Haven't oc'd anything in a while but Far Cry was kinda choppy so...

[Dman877]

Got pretty hot here today so I decided it was a good time to try some minor overclocking. I went straight to 220 fsb for 2.2 ghz and upped the voltage to 1.6 (dunno if it was necessary, just did it pre-emptively) on the cpu. Ran p95 for a few hours so I called it stable. My corsair value is running fine at 220, 2.5/3/3/6 (default settings). It was about 80 here today (25ish celsius?) and the proc topped out at 48C with a TT Venus 12/panflo L1A on it. That sounds fine to me, would like to know what kind of temps other people are seeing though, and what voltage you can run 2.2 at.

Using radlinker I bumped the 9800 Pro to 429/372 (vga silencer originally bought for low noise-output and custom ramsinks) before I saw what I think were artifacts. The memory is samsung 2.8ns. Anyway, I ran farcry for a few hours after ocing everything and when I tried 381 memory I saw some tearing which I hadn't noticed before.

Anyway, with cpu at 2.2 and video card at 429/372 there is a very noticeable improvment in farcry. I play at 12x10 (lcd native) with very high textures and terrain, medium everything else and there is no slowdown. Before the oc I ran nothing above high and there were periods where I could tell it was chugging in the 20's. The cpu oc helped quite a bit in UT2K4, I tried ocing just the graphics card before but didn't notice much improvement, it seems UT is extremely cpu dependant.

3dmark went from 19.5/5.9 to 21.8/6.7, in sandra 2004 my proc is about even, or maybe just slightly faster then an opteron 148.

 

[JSSheridan]

Good stuff. :thumbsup:

 

[Tates]

 

[Soulkeeper]

Nice work
amazing that a game that mostly nobody heard of till a few weeks back is dominating our expensive "top of the line" systems so easily
atleast we can overclock things tho

i hate framerates under 60 to tell you the truth and usually try to get the right resolutions to maintain that or higher even if I have to hit 800x600 with the lowest detail @32 in my games using this corny fx5200 video card that is overclocked nearly 20% on both memory and gpu.

what i don't like is the fact that current cards still struggle to get 100fps in many 2, 3, 4, 5, and even 6 year old games even with the AA/AF off or on low and resolutions at or under 1600x1200

would be nice to see the newest and fastest video cards run the current top of the line games and not have to chug through them at or under 30fps just to get a feeling of what the game looks like with the "goodies" turned on.

would also be nice if old games like UT would take more advantage of this newer hardware that's always coming out, it's added features(mainly from a performance perspective), extra pixel/shader pipelines/internal means to crunching, etc

My GF4 wasn't even fast enough for me to feel fully "in controll" at 1600x1200@32 high detail in the original UT as i wouldn't get enough fps to be able to get full response from the enviroment (think I was getting like 55fps, lows of maybe 30 during heavy combat, without AA, and like under 40fps with 2xAA and the least AF with spikes below 20 at times just walking through a building or something) on a fast run/jump forward/backwards/etc, quick 360 turn, or when like 4+ players are being rendered while jumping around in a detailed map shooting at each other up close and bouncing off walls with multiple light sources and grenade/rocket explosions, all happening about as fast as everyone can click their fire buttons , etc,.

The fx5200 I got is almost half as fast as the GF4 in UT, which I fryed/spilled water on recently and no longer works , and if i remember correctly my GF2 gts (also fried from 2 or 3 years back) and voodoo5 (fortunately not fryed but definately aged and pretty much not usefull in any games released over the past year or two) performed nearly as good with the same or similar settings as the fx5200. does now
the fx5200 reminds me of a GF2 with some DX9 and an extra 128mb of the cheapest memory they sell these days Thus coupled with lackluster performance and an inferior design for pretty much any gaming that can't be done on most newer integrated solutions from ati and nvidia without choking (hmm haha weak). It does overclock well tho, i'll give it that, just don't get much gain from the overclocks because everything still wants 2x+ bandwidth/clockspeed more out of the wannabe/attempted contender in the DX9 solution market .
if only the thing had more pixel pipelines and a few small additions/optimizations to the core to give it more power and use it's resources better along with some more efficient/small/lowervoltage/faster BGA ddr1 memory, like they should have in the first place, for probabaly only slightly more in cost, that could hit 550 or 600+ mhz

guess then the card would prob cost nearly 120+, as it would have the same/similar memory as the faster GF4's had (think some gf3's used bga ddr1, but can't remember), instead of 60 to 85 bucks or so with the cheap pc2700 apacer modules they put on the card, which can get a little over pc3200 spec when overclocked, which i found kinda nice as far as overclock % and the excitement of benchmarking it when coupled with a nice gpu boost. The nature scene on 3dmark2k3 crawls along at like 2fps for me with everything overclocked I think i get like 6 to 10 fps in that space-fighting-scene on that space station in 3dmark2k3. Anything that has DX 9 features seems to grind the card to a halt like it just fed it a few seti packets to munch on while rendering it's benchmarks at the same time so forget dx9 with fx5200, dx8 games aren't gonna look playable unless yur real patient or turn resolution/detail down toward the lowest settings, dx7 games seem to run on the card like it's a GF2 or maybe slightly better if yur lucky (so kinda playable and definately nothing near GF3 performance in anything), but as soon as the details and/or Resolutions get cranked up the fx5200 hits the sidelines for a pathetic-crawling-whimper
the card also seems to like slowing down every now and a while for a few seconds while it's waiting for it's butt-slow memory to load something (which is usually long enough for me to get shot or something in UT, and this is at 800x600 and 1024x768 settings)
ohh welll I can hear the Upgrade warchants, hehehe I swear, soon

btw very nice overclock again
definately seems like an overclock that is above the "average" i would say

Have fun

 

[Stoneburner]

how can you benchmark far cry?

 

[howdyduty]

Whoohoo! OC goodness!

 

[Dman877]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
how can you benchmark far cry?

I'd also like to know that, I kinda wanna record some demo's too so I can get screenshots without the osd on there.