Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Overclocking a Ti-200

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
November 18, 2001 7:54:00 AM

I use the Visiontek 6564 GeForce3 Ti-200 card on an Athlon 1700+ and, buoyed by the review at Sharky Extreme, figured I'd try a little overclocking. I used NVMax to set the card at 200MHz core clock and 460 Memory, the settings of a standard GF3. Now, I managed to score 6836 at 1024*768, which ended up over 200 pts higher than when I had the card clocked at 188/422, (which the NVMax says is within my hardware's limits) but I experienced a few glitches, especially in the Lobby demo in both low and high detail. Polygons would warp and distort, some in the background, but mostly on the main character; he'd run, and certain points would stay where he was 5 seconds ago, and he'd look like he had 2 or 3 black leather spikes sticking out of him. Other than that and a similar case in the high polygon test, there was nothing out of the ordinary. Now, I didn't mind the last set of scores, but since the Sharky people got their chip to 220/485 with few problems. Is there something I am doing wrong? Do variables with the case cooling, ambient temperature, etc. really lower the overclockability of a video card that much, and what could I do within reason to get near their overclocking capabilities? Keep in mind, there's nothing else in this box overclocked.
My system, besides the video card: Athlon XP 1700+ CPU running at 1466MHz with a Cooler Master DP5-6I31A HSF on an Asus A7V-266 with 512MB DDR Ram from Crucial. 2 80mm case fans, in the usual spots I'm currently using the stock thermal pad, but I will be upgrading to Arctic Silver soon.

More about : overclocking 200

November 18, 2001 6:31:01 PM

Quote:
Do variables with the case cooling, ambient temperature, etc. really lower the overclockability of a video card that much, and what could I do within reason to get near their overclocking capabilities?

Yes, ambient tempurature in the case can result in the card running hotter, and therefore give you less overclocking ability.

Check out <A HREF="http://www.1coolpc.com" target="_new">1CoolPC</A> for some easy to add cooling for your video card. They have fans you can mount above your expansion slots to add airflow and you don't have to modify the card at all.

Also, adding an extra intake fan in the front blowing in the direction of the expansion cards can help too.

And, there is sometimes the variable of some cards just overclock better than others, even in the same production line.

Chesnuts roasting on an open CPU
Bill Gates nipping at your wallet
November 19, 2001 9:23:03 PM

As Bront stated, all chips are not the same. Production quality can vary between different runs of the same chip on the same fab plant. Some of the Ti-200's are failed Ti-500's. The chip couldn't run at the 500's speed, but was otherwise fine and so was "demoted" (given slower RAM and sold as a Ti-200). Since these chips are failed Ti-500's you won't be able to get them up to the Ti-500's level of performance, otherwise nForce would be selling them as Ti-500's.

Some Ti-200's, on the other hand, are chips which can run at Ti-500 levels but are sold as Ti-200's simply because there is a bigger demand for the 200's than the 500's. These chips are capable of running at the Ti-500's level of performance, except that they are paired with cheeper RAM.

Of course, there's no way to tell the difference between these 2 except through testing (overclocking) them. As a rule the reviewers get the best samples (since they can influence many people) and the OEM's get the worst samples (since they buy in bulk at discounted prices, they get the discounted chips). I'm not quite sure how this works with nVidia, since they actually don't produce the cards, just the processors, but a good example of this is the ATI Radeon 8500 which is clocked at 275 mHz if you buy from ATI retail and at 250 mHz if you buy from an OEM.

Of course, heat plays a factor too. Who knows, with better cooling you may just be able to pump up that Ti-200 even more.

--------------
Knowan likes you. Knowan is your friend. Knowan thinks you're great.
Related resources
November 20, 2001 5:31:53 AM

At 188/422 it runs rock stable, and NVMax doesn't complain. I'd like to get it to 200/450, but I'm realistic about my chances. After looking at the cooling solutions on the website listed above, I do have a question or two. Where do the fans direct the air? It seems it'd be bouncing off the case and eventually getting vented out the back, but wouldn't that possibly raise the ambient temperature in the case? I suppose I could just leave that side open....
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
November 25, 2001 9:54:28 AM

I'm currently putting my new Ti200 through its paces and after some initial disappointment with the stock Hercules drivers I've reverted to the NVIDIA reference set and am having great results. So good in fact, that I'm sure I must be missing something. I've currently got it up to 210/500 for a score of 6822 at 1024 x 768. There are zero visible defects and all seems well. I've nearly maxed it out now and haven't broken it yet. Obviously it needs more thorough testing, but I'm happy so far!

<b>Style is when you lean against a lamppost and it looks as though you're doing it a favour</b>
November 27, 2001 10:48:08 PM

That is a good clock speed man.. why cant i get my asus 8200 ti200 over 180/405?

still, i'm getting 7150 on 3dmar2001 (1024*768*32) with a 1.3 athlon and 21.81 drivers.
I can't complain i guess.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
November 29, 2001 7:40:53 AM

I'm wondering now if I spoke a bit too soon (don't you hate that!) The day after I got those figures I went back to the machine and it wouldn't boot the 'OS at all. It looked like a disk problem, but I'm wondering if my adventures just made it cranky. A quick reinstall of XP later and I'm off again. Maybe I'll try bedding things in a little more thouroughly this time. Maybe it was too good to be true after all.

<b>Style is when you lean against a lamppost and it looks as though you're doing it a favour</b>
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
December 6, 2001 12:33:30 AM

I have the PNY version of the card. So far so good .My first nite trying. Up to 240/480 with no artifacts. Will do 240/510 with a lot of artifacts but finishes 3DMARK2K1. P3550e@857 5299 so far will try more later. http://gamershq.madonion.com/compare2k1.shtml?2152811

I aint signing nothing!!!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by rick_criswell on 12/05/01 09:34 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
December 28, 2001 11:26:05 PM

It depends on the chips used (as said in the posts above) but I think the GPU is much less overclockable than RAMs are. My Leadtek GF3 Ti200 won't go beyond 230 core (100% working at that speed though) but the RAM is overclockable to unbelievable 550...
I was rather astonished at that amount of overclocking ability even without any passive cooling on the RAMs. From the writing on the chips I guess they are the same as on the Ti 500 (3.8 NS).

On the other hand with a ti 200 you don't get the guarantee that fast chips are used and since you normally can't look at the card itself, it's some kind of gambling.

BTW dunno how you can get such high 3DMark results:
Without overclocking I get 5900, with the above overclocking I get 6700 on a TB 1.4 GHz, 640 MB SDRAM, Abit KT7A 133.

Just for the record:
I don't think you can do this to every TI 200. I suspect Leadtek basically used the same chips as on the 500 and simply didn't add the passive cooling and the other add-on stuff (Heatmonitor, additional connectors).
December 30, 2001 9:01:40 AM

okay i just got a chaintech geforce 3 ti200 and i have never overclocked a graphics card. i have NVmax or somethin like that but i cant use it because i have the most recent drivers. is there another way i can overclock it because i think my 3d mark 2k1 scores are pathetic, 6100. maybe i didnt adjust my agp in the bios or something, who knows, but i would like to squeeze every last bit of juice from this graphics card with its stock cooling.
December 30, 2001 4:10:59 PM

steady on dude, that score would be envied by a lot of people. I see your point though.

What os you got? also what is the rest of your rig like?


-- If I had a hammer........
December 30, 2001 4:13:32 PM

how do you get the clock speed over 220?
after trying a bit harder i can get my asus v8200 up to 220 without any problems, (the memory on the other hand....)
using the asus tweak or the nvidia hidden tweak

-- If I had a hammer........
December 30, 2001 7:12:31 PM

axp 1800+
abit kg7 raid
crucial pc2100 ecc ddr sdram
soundblaster live
netgear and kingston 10/100mbps NIC's
seagate 7200 15gig (C) and maxtor 5400 40gig (d)
need to know anything else?
vid cards a chaintech geforce 3 ti200 if i didnt already put that
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
December 31, 2001 2:41:28 AM

what model Leadtek ti-200 do you got? t, td, tdh? i am thinking of overclocking my ti-200t but i noticed it doesnt have any ram heatsinks. should i put some one there before i begin to try to overclock?
January 1, 2002 12:46:44 PM

It might be that your NICs are the cause of the low scores.
Before i added one in my system i was getting 7300. Now i get 6900. Even if i disable the NIC in windows system manager i still get like 6900. I have changed nothing else since installing the network card.

I need an engineer!
January 3, 2002 9:09:51 AM

a nic is causing a problem with graphics? how is this possible?

more bang for thy buck gives me better benches then matisaro ;) 
January 3, 2002 9:11:14 AM

oh yea, i overclocked my core/memory by 5mhz or whatever to both, not that much of a difference but i got a 6222 on 3dmark2001 and when i went higher the scores went lower, wierd i think

more bang for thy buck gives me better benches then matisaro ;) 
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
January 5, 2002 1:07:36 PM

I'm using Riva tuner . Which allows a lot higher overclocking than the detonator settings. I also screwed a 60mm fan over the existing heatsinks for more air movement over the wholecard. Ifinally got my highest score of 6241 with a lot of artifacts@ 235/512 with a P3 800@948 158 fsb and memory at 158 2/2/2/7/9. I also use a program to force 4/way itnterleave on the memory and AGP4x on the video. (the 815 chipset dissables AGP4X and 4/way interleave on memory above 140fsb.)

I aint signing nothing!!!
January 11, 2002 6:37:05 PM

The NIC isnt causing problems as such, it is just slowing my system down a bit. Probably because it is using resources. Having said that, it has the same effect even when disabled in windows system manager.


-- There are no answers to find in the bottom of a glass. But you can have fun looking for them.
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
January 11, 2002 9:58:13 PM

I allways reboot after running a test. If I run the test 2 or three times in a row without restarting I get lower scores even if I raise the core clock or memory clock. Allways reboot before running the tests again.

I aint signing nothing!!!
January 15, 2002 8:22:14 AM

I got Leadtek G3 Ti200t and overclocked 220/500, no problem.
But detonator driver can't be set beyond that frequency.
How can we raise this bar?
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
January 17, 2002 10:16:38 AM

I've got a Creative GF3 Ti200, and used GeForce Tweak to let me overclock, have now overclocked to 200/460 but only noticed 30odd 3DMarks difference?! (Is now 5320 marks, on an Athlon 1.1, 512MB RAM, Win98SE) How does that happen?

EDIT: It seems rock solid at that speed, not had any visual weirdness or crashes...

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by JohnWooStyle on 01/17/02 07:20 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
January 17, 2002 7:34:04 PM

I haven't run under default speed, so I don't know the difference. I successfully overclock Leaktek WinFast Ti 200t to 230/530 and it comes 3Dmark2001 5792 (Athlon 1 GHz 512 MB Win98SE DX8.1 23.11)
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
January 19, 2002 4:47:31 AM

Got a Gainwared GF3 Ti200 (dubbed ti450) that I have overclocked to an amazing 250/265 stabily without any artifacts. So far my highest score for 3dMark2001 at default settings are 8738. I would try to overclock the sucker a little more but that's the max setting for the latest detonator driviers.

http://gamershq.madonion.com/products/orb/?3d2k1_detail...
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
January 24, 2002 2:51:05 PM

Sup guys, I also bought a Gainward GF3 TI200 but I dont know anything about overclocking. Can u tell me any links that can help me do it? What programs do I need? My current number in 3dmark2001 is 6818.
My computer spects are:

Abit kr7a-RAID motherboard
AMD Athlon 1900 processor
256 mb RAM
60 gig hd
total of 7 fans including the one in the CPU
Gainward GF3 ti200 vid card

Thanks
January 24, 2002 3:22:23 PM

"What programs do I need?"

You can use the software that comes bundled with the card. I believe it's called Expertool. If you get the latest Detonator driviers from www.nvidia.com you can change the core/memory frequency through Display Properties. Personally I use a program called Riva Tuner which can be found just by doing a websearch.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
January 25, 2002 12:49:54 PM

Ok, I have the expert tool and the new NV drivers. Now, how do I know the numbers I need to change and at what speeds? Any links that can help me doing this, or u guys can tell me how to do it?

Thanks bros
January 26, 2002 12:35:45 AM

change the core clock speed and the memory speed. Change them a little at a time ~(say 5Mhz) and check for stability with a bit of heavy gaming and/or 3dmark 2001. If all looks well (no funny effects or lockups) try moving them up a little more. It's all trial and error i'm afraid.

-- There are no answers to find in the bottom of a glass. But you can have fun looking for them.
February 7, 2002 6:39:36 PM

Heh.. I'm running a Visiontek GF3 Ti 200 overclocked to 200/460, which is about the highest the memory will go without glitches, and 3D Mark 2001 has only been giving me a score of 5118 with the full battery of tests at 1024 x 768.

My system was pretty cheap to build, but not crappy by any stretch:

Athlon XP 1600+ (1.4 GHz)
ECS K7S5A mobo
256 MB CL 2.5 DDR SDRAM (I didn't adjust any memory timings in the BIOS, 'cause the settings for that are pretty arcane-looking)
20 GB Seagate 7200 RPM HD
GF3 Ti 200 overclocked to 200/460
Running Windows XP Pro

I'm using the mobo's onboard sound (which I know takes a chunk out of CPU efficiency) and LAN for now. I wonder what's keeping my score so low. Hrmm... Maybe I had FSAA forced on during the tests? Too bad the system is down right now. I'm curious.

Anyway, I've found that I have more flexibility OCing the processor on my GF3 than the RAM, oddly enough. I've pushed it to 233 with no artifacts and no stability issues, but the RAM won't go higher than 460.
!