Upping core voltage on 9800 Pro/XT

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

My 9800 Pro (with R360 core but Pro PCB, which I
believe is a BBA) now has an XT BIOS. (If you're
interested I had more luck in the end with a BIOS
I found for an HIS card modified with a 128MB
limit, than the modified Club3D BIOS that many
people seem to use. Both BIOS's were considerably
older than the one installed on my card
originally. I wonder what the intervening updates
might have included). My card nearly runs at XT
clock speeds (412/365) flawlessly, but not quite.
At the moment I have the case open and a desk fan
directed into it. In this fashion, ATitool tells
me I can have stable settings of about 403/373.
At those settings (needless to say) 3DMark03 runs
fine. With the default settings everything is
fine apart from a few (very few, probably fewer
than 10 or 20) single-pixel snowy sparkles that
show up in Mother
Nature. You might not even notice them if you
weren't looking. [I have run FarCry (not for very
long) at the default speeds and not noticed
anything untoward].

To be honest, I don't think there's much wrong
with the card at these speeds, but the thing is I
know it's not working perfectly. I shouldn't have
thought it was the GPU temperature that is causing
the sparkles, since I've fitted the Arctic VGA
Silencer, which claims to operate the GPU at much
lower temperatures than the standard cooler (and
the desk fan's there too). I thought I might
benefit from increasing the voltage to the GPU.

I did try changing the AGP signalling voltage to
1.6V, but that made no difference (I think) and I
can't really see why it should make any, to the
core. I've googled a little and found the Rojack
Pot articles on volt-modding the Pro and the XT.
I'm pretty certain, I need to follow the
instructions in the Pro article, as I just don't
have the components described in the XT article.
I'll almost certainly do it by pencilling my
resistors in. I think the R360 has a default
voltage slightly higher than the R350. (The
articles mention nearly 1.8V measured on a
standard XT compared with just 1.7V or less on the
standard Pro). I'm wondering whether the Pro PCB
is modified to provide the higher core voltage
when the R360 core is included. I guess I'll find
out when I measure the stock voltage.

So my questions are:
Is it likely that increasing the GPU voltage will
rid me of my sparkles at 412MHz?
Is there a sensible way to measure the GPU
temperature?
Any tips on pencilling (beyond the article) from
someone who's done it?

Thanks.

Neil
16 answers Last reply
More about upping core voltage 9800
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    "Neil" <neil@chapellane69.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:40f30d8a$0$93992$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...
    > My 9800 Pro (with R360 core but Pro PCB, which I
    > believe is a BBA) now has an XT BIOS. (If you're
    > interested I had more luck in the end with a BIOS
    > I found for an HIS card modified with a 128MB
    > limit, than the modified Club3D BIOS that many
    > people seem to use. Both BIOS's were considerably
    > older than the one installed on my card
    > originally. I wonder what the intervening updates
    > might have included). My card nearly runs at XT
    > clock speeds (412/365) flawlessly, but not quite.
    > At the moment I have the case open and a desk fan
    > directed into it. In this fashion, ATitool tells
    > me I can have stable settings of about 403/373.
    > At those settings (needless to say) 3DMark03 runs
    > fine. With the default settings everything is
    > fine apart from a few (very few, probably fewer
    > than 10 or 20) single-pixel snowy sparkles that
    > show up in Mother
    > Nature. You might not even notice them if you
    > weren't looking. [I have run FarCry (not for very
    > long) at the default speeds and not noticed
    > anything untoward].
    >
    > To be honest, I don't think there's much wrong
    > with the card at these speeds, but the thing is I
    > know it's not working perfectly. I shouldn't have
    > thought it was the GPU temperature that is causing
    > the sparkles, since I've fitted the Arctic VGA
    > Silencer, which claims to operate the GPU at much
    > lower temperatures than the standard cooler (and
    > the desk fan's there too). I thought I might
    > benefit from increasing the voltage to the GPU.
    >
    > I did try changing the AGP signalling voltage to
    > 1.6V, but that made no difference (I think) and I
    > can't really see why it should make any, to the
    > core. I've googled a little and found the Rojack
    > Pot articles on volt-modding the Pro and the XT.
    > I'm pretty certain, I need to follow the
    > instructions in the Pro article, as I just don't
    > have the components described in the XT article.
    > I'll almost certainly do it by pencilling my
    > resistors in. I think the R360 has a default
    > voltage slightly higher than the R350. (The
    > articles mention nearly 1.8V measured on a
    > standard XT compared with just 1.7V or less on the
    > standard Pro). I'm wondering whether the Pro PCB
    > is modified to provide the higher core voltage
    > when the R360 core is included. I guess I'll find
    > out when I measure the stock voltage.
    >
    > So my questions are:
    > Is it likely that increasing the GPU voltage will
    > rid me of my sparkles at 412MHz?
    > Is there a sensible way to measure the GPU
    > temperature?
    > Any tips on pencilling (beyond the article) from
    > someone who's done it?
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Neil
    >
    strange my sapphire 9800 pro 128meg(256bit) runs flawless at 411 378(3 hrs
    of 3d mark 2001se looping) and i havent added any extra cooling its the r350
    chip.Is that normal?my defaults are 378/337.50 I dont over clock usually but
    because everyone seems to be talking about it I thought id test my card is 3
    hrs a long enough test?no problems though everything ran smooth no pixel
    locks or particals is my card special lol?
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    I've fitted the Arctic VGA
    > Silencer, which claims to operate the GPU at much
    > lower temperatures than the standard cooler (and
    > the desk fan's there too). I thought I might
    > benefit from increasing the voltage to the GPU.
    >
    > I did try changing the AGP signalling voltage to
    > 1.6V, but that made no difference (I think) and I
    > can't really see why it should make any, to the
    > core.

    Um. I have an artic on a 9800 pro and can get comforatably up to 430/370 (max is 445/380). Although
    variability is a factor in silicon in general, your temps still seem low. Have you got the high and
    low fan settings mixed around? I keep mine on high all the time btw. Also might be worth checking
    that you are getting good thermal contact.

    Upping the voltage makes the card hotter, which is more than likely making the heating problem
    worse.

    could be that you simply have a card with a hot GPU? I have the same problem with my processor,
    XP2800 which simply crashes if the temp goes beyond 60 for more than a second, so any real
    overclocking is out. Luck of the draw.

    S
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    On 7/12/2004 5:07 PM Sham B brightened our day with:

    > I've fitted the Arctic VGA
    >
    >
    >>Silencer, which claims to operate the GPU at much
    >>lower temperatures than the standard cooler (and
    >>the desk fan's there too). I thought I might
    >>benefit from increasing the voltage to the GPU.
    >>
    >> I did try changing the AGP signalling voltage to
    >>1.6V, but that made no difference (I think) and I
    >>can't really see why it should make any, to the
    >>core.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Um. I have an artic on a 9800 pro and can get comforatably up to 430/370 (max is 445/380). Although
    >variability is a factor in silicon in general, your temps still seem low. Have you got the high and
    >low fan settings mixed around? I keep mine on high all the time btw. Also might be worth checking
    >that you are getting good thermal contact.
    >
    >Upping the voltage makes the card hotter, which is more than likely making the heating problem
    >worse.
    >
    >could be that you simply have a card with a hot GPU? I have the same problem with my processor,
    >XP2800 which simply crashes if the temp goes beyond 60 for more than a second, so any real
    >overclocking is out. Luck of the draw.
    >
    >S
    >
    >

    I have an arctic cooler on my 9800 Pro and the max core overclock I get
    with ATITool is ~402. I don't know about ATITool though, it spots
    artifacts that I don't even see.
    Before I ever used ATITool I ran my old 9600 Pro at 475 (400 default)
    core and never had a problem, but when I tried it with that card it said
    the max overclock was ~448.
    I'm kind of frustrated I thought ATITool would clear things up, just
    makes things more confusing for me.

    And how is it possible that ATITool says my memory can handle a max of
    372, I've got regular Hynix memory and from what I've read people have a
    hard time getting that to run at 365 with ramsinks on.

    What do experienced 9800 overclockers use to judge their max overclock?
    Is ATITool to sensitive to artifacts?

    --
    "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

    - Inigo Montoya
    Steve [Inglo]
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    "pudj" <paddy@@pudg..karoo..co..uk> wrote in
    message news:46ucnawQO-bWiG7dSa8jmA@karoo.co.uk...
    >
    > strange my sapphire 9800 pro 128meg(256bit) runs
    flawless at
    > 411 378(3 hrs of 3d mark 2001se looping) and i
    havent added
    > any extra cooling its the r350 chip.Is that
    normal?

    I have read (on the internet so it must be true)
    that the R350 generally overclocks better than the
    R360. If your core was R360 I'd recommend the
    BIOS upgrade (given you can run at those speeds).
    It certainly affected my benchmark score
    significantly. [Standard score 5550, upgrade BIOS
    only 5760, up clock speed to XT only 5900, do both
    6200 in 3DMark03]. I only have one demanding
    game, and never really studied the frame rate
    closely enough to see if it made any difference in
    that.

    > my defaults are 378/337.50 I dont over clock
    usually but
    > because everyone seems to be talking about it I
    thought
    > id test my card is 3 hrs a long enough test?no
    problems
    > though everything ran smooth no pixel locks or
    particals
    > is my card special lol?
    >

    I think 3hrs is enough. I used ATitool and tried
    to make it defect free for about 2 hours or so,
    which is where I came up with my 403MHz figure.
    You might try ATitool, though if you're happy with
    your current results it might put you off a bit.
    It spots defects a long time before your eye, and
    your maximum defect-free clock speeds might come
    down. (See someone else's post below).

    Neil
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    "Inglo"
    <ingloogoo@zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.xcc>
    wrote in message
    news:aLJIc.9988$eX6.6378@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    > I have an arctic cooler on my 9800 Pro and the
    max
    > core overclock I get with ATITool is ~402. I
    don't know
    > about ATITool though, it spots artifacts that I
    don't even see.
    >
    > ...snip...
    >
    > What do experienced 9800 overclockers use to
    judge their
    > max overclock? Is ATITool to sensitive to
    artifacts?
    >

    You don't want to talk to me then I'm a noob, but
    I know what you mean about ATitool picking out
    very small artifacts. I'm undecided whether that
    is a good or bad thing. I test my CPU & system
    memory overclock with Prime95 and insist that it's
    defect free - other people just accept the fact
    that their machine doesn't crash (hardly) at all
    and say that's ok. On the other hand, I can't see
    how an imperceptibly defective GPU overclock could
    lead to (say) corrupted data on a hard disc. But
    I've certainly done that (before I knew better)
    with a CPU & system memory overclock.

    Neil
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    > > I've fitted the Arctic VGA
    > > Silencer, which claims to operate the GPU at
    > > much lower temperatures than the standard
    > > cooler (and the desk fan's there too). I
    thought
    > > I might benefit from increasing the voltage to
    the
    > > GPU.

    > Um. I have an artic on a 9800 pro and can get
    > comforatably up to 430/370 (max is 445/380).

    By ATitool or by eye?

    > Although variability is a factor in silicon in
    > general, your temps still seem low. Have
    > you got the high and low fan settings mixed
    > around? I keep mine on high all the time btw.

    It's on high.

    > Also might be worth checking that you are
    > getting good thermal contact.

    I never removed the shim from the card, but I cut
    some slots in the VGA Silencer so it fits over the
    outside. I certainly think it's not being held
    off the core. I never managed to get the screws
    to do up all the way to the rubber washers; I
    couldn't get enough purchase on the little screw
    heads and the clip seems too strong to bend. It
    does seem firmly attached though. In your opinion
    would that be significant?
    >
    > Upping the voltage makes the card hotter, which
    > is more than likely making the heating problem
    > worse.

    I was guessing I didn't have a heat problem, just
    an inability-to-handle-the-frequency-problem.
    That's why I thought a core voltage increase might
    help - in a get-the-capacitors-charged-to-a-
    threshold-voltage-faster sort of way. But I'm not
    sure.
    >
    > could be that you simply have a card with a hot
    > GPU? I have the same problem with my processor,
    > XP2800 which simply crashes if the temp goes
    > beyond 60 for more than a second, so any real
    > overclocking is out. Luck of the draw.
    >
    I can't really complain - I have some lucky system
    memory PC2100 that runs ok at 164MHz with low
    latency. (It will do Memtest at 175MHz if I
    increase the latency. But either differences
    between the test and WinXP or the extra stress the
    OS puts on other things (processor, chipset,
    AGP/PCI, I don't know) means I can't have a stable
    system with that FSB).

    I win some, I lose some. [At least I got an
    R360].

    Neil
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    "Neil" <neil@chapellane69.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:40f30d8a$0$93992$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...
    > My 9800 Pro (with R360 core but Pro PCB, which I
    > believe is a BBA) now has an XT BIOS. (If you're
    > interested I had more luck in the end with a BIOS
    > I found for an HIS card modified with a 128MB
    > limit, than the modified Club3D BIOS that many
    > people seem to use. Both BIOS's were considerably
    > older than the one installed on my card
    > originally. I wonder what the intervening updates
    > might have included). My card nearly runs at XT
    > clock speeds (412/365) flawlessly, but not quite.
    > At the moment I have the case open and a desk fan
    > directed into it. In this fashion, ATitool tells
    > me I can have stable settings of about 403/373.
    > At those settings (needless to say) 3DMark03 runs
    > fine. With the default settings everything is
    > fine apart from a few (very few, probably fewer
    > than 10 or 20) single-pixel snowy sparkles that
    > show up in Mother
    > Nature. You might not even notice them if you
    > weren't looking. [I have run FarCry (not for very
    > long) at the default speeds and not noticed
    > anything untoward].
    >
    > To be honest, I don't think there's much wrong
    > with the card at these speeds, but the thing is I
    > know it's not working perfectly. I shouldn't have
    > thought it was the GPU temperature that is causing
    > the sparkles, since I've fitted the Arctic VGA
    > Silencer, which claims to operate the GPU at much
    > lower temperatures than the standard cooler (and
    > the desk fan's there too). I thought I might
    > benefit from increasing the voltage to the GPU.
    >
    > I did try changing the AGP signalling voltage to
    > 1.6V, but that made no difference (I think) and I
    > can't really see why it should make any, to the
    > core. I've googled a little and found the Rojack
    > Pot articles on volt-modding the Pro and the XT.
    > I'm pretty certain, I need to follow the
    > instructions in the Pro article, as I just don't
    > have the components described in the XT article.
    > I'll almost certainly do it by pencilling my
    > resistors in. I think the R360 has a default
    > voltage slightly higher than the R350. (The
    > articles mention nearly 1.8V measured on a
    > standard XT compared with just 1.7V or less on the
    > standard Pro). I'm wondering whether the Pro PCB
    > is modified to provide the higher core voltage
    > when the R360 core is included. I guess I'll find
    > out when I measure the stock voltage.
    >
    > So my questions are:
    > Is it likely that increasing the GPU voltage will
    > rid me of my sparkles at 412MHz?
    > Is there a sensible way to measure the GPU
    > temperature?
    > Any tips on pencilling (beyond the article) from
    > someone who's done it?
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Neil
    >
    >
    Interesting posts here...
    Question is: what is stable overclocking? I purchases my Sapphire 9800 Pro
    and overclocked it successfully at +/- 415 / 370 MHz, which in fact is only
    a little 10 % overclock. Because in practice, I didn't see any difference
    between 378 MHz and 415 MHz, after a few weeks I returned to a 5 % oc, which
    makes 397 / 354 MHz, just for safety reasons. After 4 months however, while
    viewing a movie, all of a sudden my display switched to a splendid
    collection of random very small colored squares and blocks. Shutting down
    and waiting for 10 min allowed me to restart, but only for a pair of
    seconds. I had to admit that the card was blowed up. Fortunately, it has
    been exchanged under warranty and I'm not very proud about this. That's why
    I want to warn other users: successfully overclocking is not only measured
    by taking a single shot of impressive high frequencies. It's also looking at
    what happens with the hardware a few months later. But this evolution in
    time is never reported or reviewed.
    Maybe some new topic for Tomshardware or overclocker's sites: "Six months of
    overclocking"?
    And finally, why overclocking a 9800 Pro if you can't see any difference?
    Mine is now running at bios speed !!!
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    Is there any correlation between core type, PCB
    type and max. core speed?

    So far in this thread we have:

    Me R360 ProPCB 403MHz
    Inglo ? ? 402MHz
    Pudj R350 ProPCB? 411MHz (more?)
    ShamB ? ? 430/445MHz

    Not necessarily all done through ATitool.

    I'm still curious as to whether the ProPCB
    undervolts the R360 core leading to it
    overclocking poorly. If anyone wants to add to
    this list feel free. I think I'll get my meter
    and look at the core voltage.

    Neil

    [A curious point: My vidcard supplier (scan)
    stuck their own warrantee invalidation sticker
    right over the place where you might want to
    solder/measure voltages to increase the core
    voltage. They're not as green as they're cabbage
    looking].
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    > By ATitool or by eye?
    >
    I use Powerstrip to up the clocks. I dont use ATI tool, rather, I slowly set the OC up over time
    whilst playing my normal games (Most of the recent ones...I find that Lock-on is the best test of
    the GFX and CPU, although its prolly not a popular game, but also recently played BV and KOTOR a
    lot). I run 10Mhz down from the max clock that satarts causing artifacts (ie noticeable by me when I
    play). so its 'By eye'.


    > I was guessing I didn't have a heat problem, just
    > an inability-to-handle-the-frequency-problem.
    > That's why I thought a core voltage increase might
    > help - in a get-the-capacitors-charged-to-a-
    > threshold-voltage-faster sort of way. But I'm not
    > sure.
    >>
    Um. Yeah, that might be the case, but the point is that your core seems to be low on overclockabilty
    to start off with, and upping the core voltage is just increasing the severity of the problem that
    is holding it back... If its some tranisistors that are at the low end of spec, then you are
    increasing the chances of burning them out, and if its overall heating of the GPU, then you are
    adding to the problem.

    If you must overvoltage (and realistically, if I was in your position, I know I would try it, being
    a consumate tinkerer :), Id be tempted to suggest starting with an underclock+overvoltage (rather
    than hitting the GPU with an overclock and overvoltage without knowing what is really holding it
    back) and moving forward from there.

    S
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    On 7/13/2004 2:55 PM Neil brightened our day with:

    >Is there any correlation between core type, PCB
    >type and max. core speed?
    >
    >So far in this thread we have:
    >
    >Me R360 ProPCB 403MHz
    >Inglo ? ? 402MHz
    >Pudj R350 ProPCB? 411MHz (more?)
    >ShamB ? ? 430/445MHz
    >
    >

    I have a R350 core on a Pro PCB and used ATITool.
    Computer chips are just not all created equal. I think it would be
    ridiculous for me to feel disappointed in my overclock results.

    I'm getting 50+ fps in FarCry at relatively high settings with the core
    at 396 and the mem at 366 so I'm pleased enough.
    The only reason to go higher is just my inveterate tinkering nature.

    --
    "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

    - Inigo Montoya
    Steve [Inglo]
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    ElJerid wrote:
    > Interesting posts here...
    > Question is: what is stable overclocking? I purchases my Sapphire
    > 9800 Pro and overclocked it successfully at +/- 415 / 370 MHz, which
    > in fact is only a little 10 % overclock. Because in practice, I
    > didn't see any difference between 378 MHz and 415 MHz, after a few
    > weeks I returned to a 5 % oc, which makes 397 / 354 MHz, just for
    > safety reasons. After 4 months however, while viewing a movie, all of
    > a sudden my display switched to a splendid collection of random very
    > small colored squares and blocks. Shutting down and waiting for 10
    > min allowed me to restart, but only for a pair of seconds. I had to
    > admit that the card was blowed up. Fortunately, it has been exchanged
    > under warranty and I'm not very proud about this. That's why I want
    > to warn other users: successfully overclocking is not only measured
    > by taking a single shot of impressive high frequencies. It's also
    > looking at what happens with the hardware a few months later. But
    > this evolution in time is never reported or reviewed.
    > Maybe some new topic for Tomshardware or overclocker's sites: "Six
    > months of overclocking"?
    > And finally, why overclocking a 9800 Pro if you can't see any
    > difference? Mine is now running at bios speed !!!

    I agree, overclocking is only really useful if you see a difference. I kinda
    went 'all the way' for my nature, and went into watercooling. This didnt
    help my CPU much, but my GPU has improved a lot. I have the soft-modded 9500
    NP 128 MB, which now O/C's close to 9800 Pro clocks; 375 MHz. This is
    100MHz, or 36%, very noticable in high detailed settings...

    Just my 2 eurocents ;-)

    Thomas
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    Thomas wrote:
    > I agree, overclocking is only really useful if you see a difference.
    > I kinda went 'all the way' for my nature, and went into watercooling.
    > This didnt help my CPU much, but my GPU has improved a lot. I have
    > the soft-modded 9500 NP 128 MB, which now O/C's close to 9800 Pro
    > clocks; 375 MHz. This is 100MHz, or 36%, very noticable in high
    > detailed settings...

    PS Running for over a year with the card, half a year with the watercooling.

    Thomas
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

    "Neil" <neil@chapellane69.free-online.co.uk> wrote
    in message
    news:40f45a4e$0$92651$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...
    >
    > I'm still curious as to whether the ProPCB
    > undervolts the R360 core leading to it
    > overclocking poorly.

    I've checked and I have only 1.67V. The RojackPot
    articles on voltmodding these cards quote the
    "found" voltages on the example (Sapphire, I
    think) cards used to be 1.6-1.7V Pro and 1.8V XT.
    I'd hate to get my hopes up based on a sample of
    one (other card). Anyone else measured their core
    voltage lately?

    I'll be moving boxes in the near future, I think
    I'll get my soft pencils out at the same time.

    Neil
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    I don't think the point of upping the vcore is to charge the capacitors faster
    -- most of 'em are just bypass caps anyway.

    >I was guessing I didn't have a heat problem, just
    >an inability-to-handle-the-frequency-problem.
    >That's why I thought a core voltage increase might
    >help - in a get-the-capacitors-charged-to-a-
    >threshold-voltage-faster sort of way. But I'm not
    >sure.


    -Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    I've got my Sapphire 9800 Pro at 441/378. 378 is the limit on the memory (any
    higher and I see artifacts), but I don't think I've hit the limit for the GPU
    yet (but I have a better fan [60mm Pentium fan], VAGP at 1.7V and arctic silver
    as my TIM). Is the below the best your 9800 Pro could do?

    >I'm getting 50+ fps in FarCry at relatively high settings with the core
    >at 396 and the mem at 366 so I'm pleased enough.
    >The only reason to go higher is just my inveterate tinkering nature.
    >
    >--
    >"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
    >
    >
    >- Inigo Montoya
    >Steve [Inglo]
    >


    -Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

    That's an amazing overclock for a 9500. Nearly 33%.

    >I agree, overclocking is only really useful if you see a difference. I kinda
    >went 'all the way' for my nature, and went into watercooling. This didnt
    >help my CPU much, but my GPU has improved a lot. I have the soft-modded 9500
    >NP 128 MB, which now O/C's close to 9800 Pro clocks; 375 MHz. This is
    >100MHz, or 36%, very noticable in high detailed settings...
    >
    >Just my 2 eurocents ;-)
    >
    >Thomas


    -Bill (remove "botizer" to reply via email)
Ask a new question

Read More

Radeon Core Graphics