OC'ing Athlon + GF2 GTS doesn't help much in games?

[gramb0]

Hello,

Just put my new sys together last weekend and of course I couldn't resist overclocking it. Benchmarking I am using Quake 3 1.27h demo127 and 3D Mark 2001.

I tested at default speeds and then overclocked and found this (FSAA off)

Default
-------
Asus A7V133
Athlon 1200 (266) @ 1200 (9 x 133)
Micron 256meg PC133 CAS2 SDRAM
Asus V7700 Pure GeForce 2 GTS @ Stock (200/333) with 6.50 ref drivers
WD Expert 7200rpm ATA66 drive
SB Live! OEM
Windows ME (with Via 4-in-1 4.30b, Southbridge patch)

Quake 3 Arena "High Quality" @ 1024x768x32bpp demo127: 90.5fps
3D Mark 2001: 3056

OC
--
Asus A7V133
Athlon 1200 (266) @ 1360 (10 x 136)
Micron 256meg PC133 CAS2 SDRAM
Asus V7700 Pure GeForce 2 GTS @ OC (230/400) with 6.50 ref drivers
WD Expert 7200rpm ATA66 drive
SB Live! OEM
Windows ME (with Via 4-in-1 4.30b, Southbridge patch)

Quake 3 Arena: "High Quality" @ 1024x768x32bpp demo127: 100.6fps
3D Mark 2001: 3390

So although the 3D Mark score increases nicely, the performance in games isn't much of a jump. One annoying thing is this chip doesn't want to boot at 1400MHz (10.5 x 133). I know it's not heat as it is only running 42c after 3D Mark/Quake @ 1360MHz. AXIA Week 11 too. Oh well. It's skipping "Nature game" "Environmental bump mapping" and "Pixel shader" due to incompatibilties and says 3D Mark is running D3D Hardware.

Anyone have any suggestions on how to get Athlons/GF2 GTS running faster with OC? Or is it just not worth it (the extra heat/instability for such few fps).

ttyl

 

[V]

I think the Geforce GTS is the bottleneck. Overclock that as high as you can and get some good cooling on it if you didn't already do so.

 

[HaVoC]

Wait a minute...look at your Mhz increase vs. actual performance change. I won't consider the 3DM2K1 scores because they really tend to be limited by vid. card especially since it heavily favors DirectX 8 cards like the GF3.

You are getting over 10% increase in Quake3 Arena. That's nothing to sneeze at. I think most of your performance increase is coming from the video card. If I were you though, I would make damn sure the system is AS stable overclocked as stock speed. You aren't really getting that much more out of the CPU so might as well run it stock to be sure you are getting full stability.

 

[shathal]

Yes, video cards are most definately the bottleneck.

Check a P3 1GHz and a P4 1.7 GHz and an Athlon 1.33 with the same GFX card running @ 1024x768 at 32bpp - the scores will be nearly identical ... small discrepencies do happen.

You'll notice BIG differences in 640x480 in 16bpp, as the GFX-card will not be bottlenecking there, that's just raw CPU-power. But in terms of "actually playable resolutions" the difference is not so much CPU-dependant nowadays as much as GFX-card (or rather, mostly memory-bandwidth) dependant.

So - you key is in getting a faster/better GfX card, either by upgrading or OC-ing it.

 

[airjrdn]

I'd also lower the multiplier back to default and raise the bus speed higher.

 

[gramb0]

Thanks for the tips guys. Havoc you are right, I was thinking more about this and realized that a 10% increase in frames isn't too bad at all, can't really expect much more considering the % overclock I am dealing with. And yes I figure the video card is the bottleneck as frame rates don't change much between 1200 and 1360 (I will up the voltage today and try for 1400 or higher). Actually Tribes 2 runs a bit better with a faster CPU.

Good idea airjrdn, I will try to run the FSB at 145/150 with a lower multiplier and see what happens.

ttyl