NVIDIA Response GTX 600 Series Voltage Control

[tviceman]

You seem to be bent on e-fighting about Nvidia. I really couldn't care less dude, AMD or Nvidia, I use both. I don't care to argue, I'm just here to make fun of the video card religion.

Anyway, I never said anything about "redlining at 1050". If I'm wrong, please quote me. What I said was Kepler is close to its limit as far as its speed/voltage, hence the lockdowns Nvidia has in place. Spin my statement however you want

I'm not not bent on fighting in favor of Nvidia or any other company. I'm in favor or rational and intelligent reasoning and not jumping to conclusions without discussing or examining all the information available.

The current iteration of Kepler (which was supposed to be midrange, but Nvidia overclocked the hell out of it

Your statement could be easily spun any which way anyone would want. You specifically said Nvidia has "overclocked the hell out of it," to which I showed you that their efficiency would have suffered dramatically if your statement was true, to which you then said at 1050 it's not redlined (contradicting yourself), accused me of "fighting for nvidia," then brought up off topic information about performance degredation in an apparent attempt to deflect. But ok.

 

[tviceman]

Why won't NV warranty any voltage increase over 1.175V then? GK104 was not red-lined in terms of frequency since there is room for overclocked after-market versions above reference clocks. However, it seems that either NV thinks GK104 silicon cannot sustain above 1.175V long-term or they are trying to reduce RMA from fear of failed overvolted Kepler chips, which says it's all about $ and not caring about the enthusiasts. The entire issue of RMA between AIBs and NV clearly highlights that NV will not warranty any cards that are overvolted beyond spec.

Sorry, but NV is not portraying the image of a company that cares about enthusiasts if it completely clamps down on voltage control after allowing AIBs to go ahead with it. Do you actually believe that MSI and EVGA would spend $$$ before launching the Lightning and EVGA Classified and launch both of those products and later go backtrack and realize "Sorry, these products are not worth the RMA costs to us." To me that sounds very naive. What likely happened is NV let them claim warranty against failed Lightning and Classified chips and then later redacted this option after other AIBs complained that MSI and EVGA has superior products. Why would both MSI and EVGA suddenly drop overvolting out of the blue after both have spent resources on developing Power Edition/Lightning and Classified cards? It doesn't add up.

I am not buying it at all that AIBs are to blame for this. Why was voltage control allowed on GTX400/500 series? Not warranting overvolting is 100% NV's doing and if RMA costs to AIBs were significant in the past, they wouldn't have had voltage control on AMD or other generation of NV cards. It doesn't add up historically unless in the past NV warrantied the overvolted Fermi chips and this generation they stopped. Clearly, NV just cares about the bottom line. They made the cheapest reference design for GTX600 series in years and by removing voltage control, going with cheap 4 VRM power phases, crackling stock fan, extremely cheap cooling heatsinks on 670s. They are either not confident in their engineered products to support overvoltage, or are greedy about every extra cent saved from RMA because they went with the cheapest possible designs this generation that had no tolerance for over-voltage. I guess you can call that "smart engineering" from NV but to me that doesn't inspire much confidence in teh quality of the components chosen for their reference cards. Even the reference 7970 can take 1.25V and not die. Sure the noise levels and power consumption are terrible on a reference 7970 but it takes voltage without even breaking a sweat. Tahiti XT 28nm works at 1.25-1.3V but NV won't warranty anything above 1.175V on their 28nm tech? Why is that?

If someone is an NV shareholder, they should be thrilled about this I suppose. As a PC gamer, this either tarnishes GTX600 series reputation for me as being flaky and unable to safely exceed voltage levels beyond specs based on NV's internal testing of this 28nm node, OR it paints NV as a $ greedy corporation that only cares about every extra cent and not pleasing the PC enthusiast gamer. Furthermore, since NV won't cover the warranty for failed after-market AIB cards, it is ruining differentiation for NV's own AIBs. The entire market for Lightning and Classified and Power Edition cards is under threat on the NV side because what's the point of a $550-650 after-market card with top-of-the-line components if can't support overvoltage without a hard mod?

Ironically, you yourself bought the MSI GTX670 PE because it had voltage control. Why else would you have paid a premium for that card over say Gigabyte Windforce 3x or purchased it over the much quieter Asus DCUII 670? Clearly voltage control is important since it allows 670s to go to 1340-1350mhz. NV dropped the ball here for the high-end enthusiast who overclocks. At the very least, they can redeem themselves by offering "K" or some other special edition voltage unlocked chips and charge a premium to cover RMA costs.

Russian, I agree with just about everything you said here. The answer to your question is money, at least that is what I think Nvidia's motivation behind the voltgae lock is. But I have no idea what anything you just said has to do with my statement. All I said is that I do not believe GK104 is being "red lined" at 1050mhz. I wasn't discussing Nvidia' warranty policy, Kepler's potential RMA increase with overvolting, or Nvidia's voltage lockdown.

Simply, I believe there is reasonable to substantial core clock headroom in most GK104 chips at the maximum voltage Nvidia has specified for it's operation. Beyond that, I agree with just about everything your post to some degree or another.

 

[Sharchaster]

Ironically, you yourself bought the MSI GTX670 PE because it had voltage control. Why else would you have paid a premium for that card over say Gigabyte Windforce 3x or purchased it over the much quieter Asus DCUII 670? Clearly voltage control is important since it allows 670s to go to 1340-1350mhz. NV dropped the ball here for the high-end enthusiast who overclocks. At the very least, they can redeem themselves by offering "K" or some other special edition voltage unlocked chips and charge a premium to cover RMA costs.

Premium? I own the GTX 670 PE, and the main reason why I bought it, is because the card is the cheapest Price than Gigabyte and ASUS that you've mentioned + have best customer service in my country (don't compare the price between Newegg and my country, it's completely different).

So I think it's NOT just overvoltage (for me at least, for many people I don't know), AND Ironically that you're talking about. yeah I know most of people have bought it just because it had control voltage that most of people/enthusiast want it.

other than that, I agree with your opinion, that's because MONEY, MONEY, AND MONEY. Fortunately, I don't want to upgrade to GTX 700 series, I'll be waiting for Maxwell.

 

[Siberian]

Kepler is a great oc chip. My GTX670 with a base clock of 920MHz runs at 1300MHz - that's 41% higher.

AMD fans for some reason are trying to say otherwise.

 

[Rvenger]

AMD fans for some reason are trying to say otherwise.

Most don't overclock well and this is not an AMD discussion.

 

[3DVagabond]

On the top of my head, the actual GPUs supplied by AMD could be far cheaper per order than comparable NV GPUs given nVIDIA's stubborness in this area. There could be more stock for AMD cards (due to nVIDIA products slowing down their sales) to be shifted whereas it would giving more incentive to empty some via warranties so that the cost of storage goes down? The voltage limits of the GCN silicon is pretty good i.e. the AIBs have the data to know that the cards wont just die/or rapidly degrade over time with appropriate VRM circuitry/cooling etc? Kepler on the other hand shows worse degradation over time with voltages over 1.175V?

Im thinking its all about the cost at this point in time.

It's not just this gen for AMD cards. AMD has never warrantied O/C'd cards and the AIB's have still offered it. For some reason though nVidia won't warranty them and all of the AIB's pull the feature. 1+1 isn't equaling 2 here. There is some other reason they won't do it. If nVidia is telling the whole truth, then it's because the AIB's aren't willing to take the risk with nVidia chips where they are with AMD chips. That, or nVidia isn't telling us everything and the AIB's have some other concerns.

 

[sontin]

Most don't overclock well and this is not an AMD discussion.

And this is different to AMD?
The 7950 boost edition is not even able to sustain the boost clock at all. It's switching between the base clock and the boost...
This think is unclockable without the adjustment of the powertune slider.

GTX670 cards running nearly at the highest boost step every time and can overclock to +-1250MHz - that's 15% more clock.

And using the average boost clock of 980MHz that would be 27% more. How is this not "well"? My GTX580 was not even able to go over 800MHz without a higher vcore. My GTX480 could run at 770MHz without vcore adjustment.

 

[Grooveriding]

My 680s have already degraded and don't overclock as well as they used to. I've seen other posters here and on other forums say the same.

We'll probably see nvidia bring voltage control back for the 7XX series if it's not another tiny chip getting released pushed near its limits to try to compete.

Think the reason they have voltage locked down on the 6XX is that they are already pushing the chips hard enough to have them at their current clock speeds. You know something is up when you can degrade a chip on its stock voltage with overclocking.

 

[Keysplayr]

My 680s have already degraded and don't overclock as well as they used to. I've seen other posters here and on other forums say the same.

We'll probably see nvidia bring voltage control back for the 7XX series if it's not another tiny chip getting released pushed near its limits to try to compete.

Think the reason they have voltage locked down on the 6XX is that they are already pushing the chips hard enough to have them at their current clock speeds. You know something is up when you can degrade a chip on its stock voltage with overclocking.

Ship them to me. I'd definitely like to check out this degradation.

 

[NIGELG]

Ship them to me. I'd definitely like to check out this degradation.

I'm guessing your particular sample of Kepler chip has little or no degradation,am I right?

This is an interesting topic for cards....do they degrade and lose their initial overclocks?How much damage or wear do over volting and overclocking cause and is it measurable?

Speaking from my experience only my 5850 has the same overclocks at 775/1125MHz since April 2010.No over volt but I don't see any degradation in my overclock since then.

 

[JM Popaleetus]

I honestly cannot believe how up-in-arms you guys are about this.

The voltage is locked. Deal with it. Don't like it? Buy AMD.

Who cares if the 6XX series is already at its max? It competes/beats AMD at the same price points. Overclocking potential is NOT guaranteed.

 

[SirPauly]

nVidia offered why they're locked down:

We support overvoltaging up to a limit on our products, but have a maximum reliability spec that is intended to protect the life of the product. We don’t want to see customers disappointed when their card dies in a year or two because the voltage was raised too high.

Based on this, anything over 1.175, nVidia feels uncomfortable with and would garner more RMA's, resources spent and disappointment for potential customers, which may tarnish their name brand.

Could be the lessons with Fermi is what one may be seeing with Kepler with manual control with volts. Sadly, adjustable volts over spec is not officially supported or warrantied by nVidia, which may take precious choice away for OC enthusiasts, that enjoy to tweak their hardware to its fullest.

It seems nVidia's focus is on more efficient designs, features like GPU Boost, instead of pushing volts to the bleeding edge. Is it the right move? Time will tell! Is nVidia moving forward or backwards? One can make cases for both, one may imagine.

 

[JM Popaleetus]

on this, anything over 1.175, nVidia feels uncomfortable with and would garner more RMA's, resources spent and disappointment for potential customers, which may tarnish their name brand.

And what exactly is the problem with this? They're protecting themselves and customers.

(Not calling you out directly SirPauly, just asking in general.)

 

[NIGELG]

Actually I see no problem with it.

 

[blackened23]

nVidia offered why they're locked down:



Based on this, anything over 1.175, nVidia feels uncomfortable with and would garner more RMA's, resources spent and disappointment for potential customers, which may tarnish their name brand..

Their press release said it had nothing to do with RMAs. Although I have a feeling that the PR was a bit disingenuous.

ANYWAY, thinking this whole topic over I don't like it as a lightning user. On the other hand, I see people talk about returning their cards all the time due to them not hitting an arbitrary overclocking goal (1300, for example) which I think is really stupid. So with the RMA argument, I can kinda see that.

I still think that nvidia should allow AIC makers more flexibility with their aftermarket designs in terms of voltage. Going forward this will severely lower the value of custom designed boards.

 

[hyrule4927]

And this is different to AMD?
The 7950 boost edition is not even able to sustain the boost clock at all. It's switching between the base clock and the boost...
This think is unclockable without the adjustment of the powertune slider.

Overclocking increases power consumption? Who would have seen that coming? And as for adjusting the powertune slider . . . wow, what a strenuous task, how could you even begin to deal with that sort of mental and physical exertion? It's really too bad the boost edition is the only option available to consumers . . .

 

[KingFatty]

So now when we buy a video card, will the specs on the box include "expected lifetime" or something? I think it's good that we don't ever have to think in terms of how long our hardware will last, like it's disposable, so it's good that NVidia is making sure their products are going to last a long time.

 

[hyrule4927]

So now when we buy a video card, will the specs on the box include "expected lifetime" or something? I think it's good that we don't ever have to think in terms of how long our hardware will last, like it's disposable, so it's good that NVidia is making sure their products are going to last a long time.

And if you don't mess with it then you still know it will last a long time, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't have the option to do whatever you want with your GPU . . .

 

[SirPauly]

Their press release said it had nothing to do with RMAs. Although I have a feeling that the PR was a bit disingenuous.

ANYWAY, thinking this whole topic over I don't like it as a lightning user. On the other hand, I see people talk about returning their cards all the time due to them not hitting an arbitrary overclocking goal (1300, for example) which I think is really stupid. So with the RMA argument, I can kinda see that.

I still think that nvidia should allow AIC makers more flexibility with their aftermarket designs in terms of voltage. Going forward this will severely lower the value of custom designed boards.

Reducing RMAs has never been a focus of Green Light.

The key is nVidia feels so strongly against volts over 1.175 -- they don't warranty at all. If they did warranty or offer adjustable volts with kepler -- like Fermi -- what would this mean from a resource stand-point? How many dollars? What would it mean for their efficiency theme? Potentially more consumers disappointed that their GeForce products died early based on over-volts? How would this effect their name brand? How much thought process and future forward thinking goes into dynamics over manually controlling volts?

 

[cmdrdredd]

And this is different to AMD?
The 7950 boost edition is not even able to sustain the boost clock at all. It's switching between the base clock and the boost...
This think is unclockable without the adjustment of the powertune slider.

GTX670 cards running nearly at the highest boost step every time and can overclock to +-1250MHz - that's 15% more clock.

And using the average boost clock of 980MHz that would be 27% more. How is this not "well"? My GTX580 was not even able to go over 800MHz without a higher vcore. My GTX480 could run at 770MHz without vcore adjustment.

That is because amd doesn't have boost perfected like nvidia did. It was a rushed feature for amd if you ask me.

This is like someone buying a Corvette and then are locked out of tinkering with the engine and specialty shops are disallowed from selling vettes with a turbo or chip.

 

[slapmehard]

The 680 is already at the same max bios limit of 580 @ 1.21v. so they might be nervous.
Maybe it would have been better to appese the crowds that want software voltage to have put out boards with max 1.11 volts then you can move the frecking slider for the rest.:hmm:

 

[Zanovar]

Ship them to me. I'd definitely like to check out this degradation.

I dont think hes gonna send them,and if he did what would you check?

 

[Shmee]

Whether the nvidia PR was telling the truth or not, there are 2 options here. Either the nvidia partners marketed a feature which was later removed because the partner wanted nvidia warranty, in which case THEY are to blame and are falsely advertising, or nvidia required them to be removed, in which case nvidia is to blame for this mess.

Either way, unless there is a company that can come forward and reassure customers that they will keep enabled what they payed for (Voltage control) I will not be so happy to buy any geforce cards in the near future, whether from evga, msi, or nvidia itself.

 

[ocre]

And if you don't mess with it then you still know it will last a long time, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't have the option to do whatever you want with your GPU . . .

and you do have that option still. Its your card to do whatever you want with it. If you really want huge voltage control, hardware mods exist. They sell kits for it and there is plenty of step by step guides for rookies. You can also have it done by someone else if its important. The HW mod will give you extreme voltage capabilities.

But i would also like add that many dont get extreme clocks from it. Even with complete voltage control to ultra high amounts, the 680 only gets in the 1400mhz range. We see 1300 to 1350mhz boost with the voltage cap. Its just not getting a lot higher even with a major over volt.

All this drama is pointless.

 

[Smoblikat]

8XXX here I come.