Help to my FIRST OVERCLOCK, Please !

[Franklogus]

Hi all !!
I will get a Gigabyte 9600XT 128 MB (GV-R96X128D) for my PC next week... I would like some hints about how to do a safe and efficient Overclock on it (with stock cooler). I have bought it because I read some good results of it over the internet - It seems that this model is a nice overclocker, because of its good memory, as I read in a review "The memory chips used on the Gigabyte board are not run of the mill 300 Mhz chips but 350 Mhz ones. A quick run over to Samsung's site confirmed the code - K4D263238E-GC2A - 350MHz 700Mbps/pin."

Sorry if the questions looks like basic; I am a newbie on doing Overclock, and, as it will cost me expensive (I am from Brazil), I wouldn't like to damage it ...

Question 1: I have read that its OWN Overclock program (V-Tuner) isnt' very operative to use (don't works well, because it don't accept small adjusts). What's the program you suggest for me to use, as a alternative (Rage3D, Powerstrip, ...) ??

Question 2: What item (Core or Memory) should I to increase FIRST, for better OC??

Question 3: It seems that the change of one item has impact on the other... Is it true?? So, if I need to increase all them, should I to privilege the MEMORY increase or CORE increase??

Question 4: I have read that there is a program (ATI Tool) that makes easier to reach the potential limit of the video card. Is really recommended to use it?

Question 5: Is there some danger of damage the video card, if I turn off the computer when the screen begins to show some white artifacts??

Question 6: Why there are, sometimes, much discrepancy between final results of an Overclock (with stock cooler), if the base is the same? Sometimes we see some people reach numbers of OC very higher than others, with the same video card and the same supposed conditions ...

Here are 03 final results I got over the internet, for this specific video card:
1) Core / Mem : 576/740 (HotHardware) - WOW!!!
2) Core / Mem : 576/718 (NeoSeeker) - Not Bad! But they used "V-Tuner" (Gigabyte own "utilitary") to OC, what probably toggle the memory increase...
3) Core / Mem : 587/654 (PcStats) - Apparently, not good result for Memory, unlike the Core ...

Would I be able to reach some final result at least "near" from the "first" (576/740) above?? I would like to know my video card limits, but only to decrease it a bit (around 10 mhz would be enough??), in order to have a safe operation (with stock cooling) of it ...

Well, That's it ... Sorry for the excessive number of doubts and THANKS A LOT IN ADVANCE FOR ANY ADDITIONAL HELP / HINT !!

 

[AristoV300]

Well I wouldn't recommend you to use others cards for numbers. Start with overclocking your GPU core to get the maximum stable speed w/o artifacts. Then return it to default speed and then oc the memory. Then when you get both numbers try to get the max stable oc of both together. Use powerstrip or Radclocker to overclock your card. Use 3dmark03 for testing for artifacts.

 

[KF]

>Question 5: Is there some danger of damage the video card, if I turn off the computer
> when the screen begins to show some white artifacts??

I don't see why it would hurt the video card any. Maybe the HD (depending.)

I don't know about GPUs, but CPUs start giving errors long before you get into heat damage, as long as you gradually OC. This is assuming no overvoltage, or maybe a reasonable 10%, (Overvolting can kill chips by itself, without any high temps.) Trying for the max OC that you've ever seen anywhere the first time is asking for trouble. Running a chip with artifacts (errors) constantly, and assuming it will be OK, I find questionable.

I don't think it is a such good idea to just crash XP. True, 99% of the time all you do is get some fixable file errors. But at worst you may have to reinstall everything. You could just shut down the game or benchmark, I would think.

> Question 6: Why there are, sometimes, much discrepancy between final results of an Overclock
> (with stock cooler), if the base is the same? Sometimes we see some people reach numbers
> of OC very higher than others, with the same video card and the same supposed conditions ...

To start off, some people fib, believe it or not. It's fun to impress people who can't check on you. In a different realm, I remember the story of a single-man yaht race around the world. One guy was impressing everyone with the spectacular results that he was reporting over the radio. It turned out he was just wandering in the ocean, and never made the journey. His yaht was found drifting later.

Every chip turns out a little different. Remember they are working to the limits of the chip processes they use, and seldom does every single transistor and connection turn out just perfect. Batches and runs tend to turn out similarly, but not always. Every chip probably has some defects; it's just a matter of how critical they are.

When you push something past its engineering design points, small differences in temperature and electronic noise make a big difference in how far you can push. OTOH, if you stay within design parameters, you can operate without problems under very bad conditions.

 

[Franklogus]

Hi all !
I just finished my first attempt of Overclock my Video Card (Gigabyte 9600XT 128MB - GV-R96X128D), and I am a bit disappointed ...
My final result (I used Rage3D Tweak), with stable operation, was :
- CORE : 553,50 (+ 10,7%)
- MEMORY : 670 [335x2] (+ 11,7%)
My main deception is with the increase that I got with the memory; as I wrote in my first thread, I had read a review (www.neoseeker.com) that said that this model of Video Card from Gigabyte had a memory that could reach at least 350MHz ...
..."The memory chips used on the Gigabyte board are not run of the mill 300 Mhz chips but 350 Mhz ones. A quick run over to Samsung's site confirmed the code - K4D263238E-GC2A - 350MHz 700Mbps/pin"
So, shouldn't I to be able to reach, AT LEAST, 350 Mhz?? I can not understand (even knowing that there are no exactly identical video cards...).
Anyway, I need to inform some important thing to help us to analyse this matter: I installed my new video card inside my "old" PC, which has the basic spec:
P4 1.6GHz
Asus P4SDX
512MB DDR333 (2x256)
120GB HD ATA 133 Maxtor

I am intending to upgrade my processor around christmas, because I guess it is the current "bottleneck" of my system...
So, the questions are:
1) Is my current processor (P4 1.6) a real bottleneck?
2) My overclock results were affected because of it? (my new video card could reach better results working with a better/faster processor)?
3) I ONLY play Race games, and I think (I am not sure about this) that, in this "category" of game, the speed of CPU is crucial; am I right, or not? If yes, would I have a sensible increase of FPS when I will upgrade my processor?... Or, in other words, is my current processor limiting the potential of my new video card (Gigabyte Radeon 9600XT)?
4) Inside my PC BIOS, there is one item with which we can control the "AGP APERTURE", which is currently set to 256MB... Should I set it to 128, because my video card has 128 MB of memory, or keep it set to 256MB??
Well, that's it ... THANKS a LOT for any additional help !!

 

[Monty2004]

1) personally, i think its abit on the slow side, u could do with a upgrade but racing games i believe use the graphics card more as i noticed a massive (and i mean massive) difference in performance when comparing a geforcefx5600 compared to a 9800pro with the same system with coline mcrae rally 4, which is 1 of the lastest racing games.

2) processer wont effect overclock of the graphics card at all, motherboard, power supply, and cooling would effect it, the first 2 only be slight bit, if at all.

3) like i said in 1, u could do with a faster processer, though u would have to benchmark it in these racing games then check with other people with faster processer to see how it is limiting u.

4)theres different opinions on this, though i would set it a half the system memory, which in ur case would be 256mb, as the agp aperture uses system memory when ur graphics card hasnt enough, so u wouldnt want it using all ur memory.


and as for ur graphics card overclock, the normal memory would be rated as 600mhz right, so it would be supplied with enough voltage to use that, so maybe the 700mhz rated memory is getting the same voltage, which would be insuffient for 700mhz. just a theory on y u couldnt reach the rated speed.