Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Whats a good overclock?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
June 28, 2006 1:30:28 AM

Some of you may remember me. I was... ahem still am the idiot with the 9200se. Well I overclocked it and got a core of 319.5mhz and a memory speed of around 207mhz. Stock speeds are 200mhz core and 166mhz memory. Is this a good overclock? Also, what should I put as my priority to clock higher, memory or core? I am asking this because on new cards, you see like 500mhz core and 300mhz memory but it's DDR3 so you get like 500/900 speeds don't you? Why is the memory so much higher? Also, what else can I do to squeeze out some more speed. My specs should be in my signature. Thanks in advance for any help.

More about : whats good overclock

June 28, 2006 10:20:34 AM

Quote:
Some of you may remember me. I was... ahem still am the idiot with the 9200se. Well I overclocked it and got a core of 319.5mhz and a memory speed of around 207mhz. Stock speeds are 200mhz core and 166mhz memory. Is this a good overclock? Also, what should I put as my priority to clock higher, memory or core? I am asking this because on new cards, you see like 500mhz core and 300mhz memory but it's DDR3 so you get like 500/900 speeds don't you? Why is the memory so much higher? Also, what else can I do to squeeze out some more speed. My specs should be in my signature. Thanks in advance for any help.
No DDR3 just means it the 3rd "revision" if you will, of DDR. It's more about being able to scale to higher speeds, just like going form 90nm - 65 nm in a CPU should help it clock higher. DDR3 is still just Double Data Rate, therefore DDR3 @ 300= 600. :wink:
June 28, 2006 10:27:40 AM

Thanks for the heads up 1Tanker, but doesn't anyone out here know what should be of a higher priority with an overclock.
Related resources
June 28, 2006 1:30:26 PM

The higher priority would be replacing that card. You can get a . much, much better card for $115 (X1600 Pro), or a 6600GT. Heck, I even have an old 9600 Pro 128 that you can have for free that is a lot better than the 9200SE (I used to have one of those too).
June 28, 2006 2:03:04 PM

What model 9200se is it?

I've got one in the (ahem) 'project' system...any OC'ing tips?[/quote]
June 29, 2006 2:34:19 AM

It's not just the mhz ...the way the information is processed is much better in newer card.

Forget the 9200 oc it will not lead you further.
June 29, 2006 3:26:31 AM

In regards to SciFiMan I would really like a whole new system rather that a card, so that is my saving priority at the moment, but a mere shop assistants wage doesn't go too far :lol:  . Anyway, thanks for the offer. BTW, are most of you guys from america, cause you all post at like 8-9am in the morning australian time, or are you just coffee junkies :D  .
*EDIT* For Mesa Rectifier the card is some random brand called alastor, and I wouldn't give anyone oc'ing tips just yet. All I can say is use ATI Tool. I hate to sound vindictive margag, but I can't forget the 9200oc as that is the only card I have at the moment :oops: 
June 29, 2006 3:41:15 AM

That looks like a good overclock on that card. usually the core will overclock a lot higher than the memory.

That and probly get a new card, that 9200 is pretty outdated if you want to be gaming, Its perfect for internet and other non graphically intensive activities.

I still have a 9000 series card from that company - Alastor

Alastor just repackaged cards that were made by saphire, they look Identical and even ATI tool shows mine as a Saphire card. The only difference was the box it came in.
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
June 29, 2006 3:58:37 AM

Sci Fi man is knocking on the door or that's the efing escort sevice.
June 29, 2006 11:03:19 PM

ive forgotten what exactly the difference is, but the core be overcolcked to speed up one thing and the memory for another(someone help me out here). its something like load times=memory, core=overall render speed. or something lol. i used to kno ths off by heart but its been awhile since someone asked.
June 29, 2006 11:19:42 PM

Yeah, I was wondering that too, just didn't say it properly (you know, there isn't an emoticon for a really gumby person, like me for example)
June 30, 2006 4:37:36 AM

Rendering performance = core clock. That's first priority, period.
July 9, 2006 10:19:56 AM

Quote:
The higher priority would be replacing that card.


the only way to rid yourself of evil is to burn it. and kill a dog to appease the gods. then your pc will be clean.
July 17, 2006 8:20:59 AM

Quote:
The higher priority would be replacing that card.


the only way to rid yourself of evil is to burn it. and kill a dog to appease the gods. then your pc will be clean.
:lol:  , wait kill a dog 8O . When I get my new puter (eventually) hopefully the card will be gone for good. However, I just re-read the forum and in regards to margag_ what do you mean by it will not lead me further. I got a little bit faster, which is better that nothing.
Another question, after like an hour and a half of freelancer (little brother used computer) he calls me in and wants to know what going on. Argh, #$%#$ artifacts. I turned off that computer, earthed my self and touched the heatsinks on the ram and core, and they weren't that hot. Is that because of crappy thermal compound, or is something else the culprit?
July 19, 2006 3:31:07 PM

I dont know this for sure, but it would be fun if to volt-mod your card. The thing i dont know if it helps you OC'ing it.
July 22, 2006 3:55:08 AM

To FeareX When I get my theoretical new computer, I might just give that a go. I wonder how high it could go before it dies? My card doesn't have a thermal sensor does it?
EDIT - I trawled through google and couldn't find anything on voltmodding a 9200se. Does anyone know of a site that says something?
October 1, 2006 6:15:29 PM

The 9200SE is a plagued card, with no features and no performance at all, It is even overpowered (on paper) by a Radeon 7500 (2xPipes, 3xTMU, 1xVPU - 1740 Fillrate) which has core processing more elaborated and more memory bandwidth compared to a 9200SE (4x1x1 - 800) which is using 64 Bit path and more crippled core... Sure it maybe support the new shader but It cant render them at sufficient speed. Some have TV out and these have no fan, this can be the only good points about 9200 Series.

The point is still in brute fill rate to compare these low-end card, just to compare the 7600GT which is somewhat mainstream, has a (12x1x5 6720 ) subsystem. When overclocked you can expect 7500 fill rate, nearly as much as ten 9200 gpu if you look at it :p 
October 1, 2006 7:13:33 PM

Nice "Kane" quote. Do you play RA or TibSun on that rig of yours? I can't play on mine even at the slowest setting. The enemy moves faster than I can click.
October 1, 2006 7:17:18 PM

I'm in not much better shape video card wise.

I have an ASUS brand nVidia 5200 FX w/ 128MB DDR1 @ 400Mhz (stock), 128bit memory interface and 249.75Mhz Core Clock rate.

It overclocks perfectly to

315Mhz Core and 509Mhz On The Ram

It has a simple stock heatsink with a fan, and its all on a fullsize PCB - not the smaller low profile PCB's.

So 26.13% increase in core clockspeed and 27.25% increase on memory speed. I'm using RivaTuner. I have not tried to exceed its recomendations on overclock.

These speeds that I can overclock almost to 5200 Ultra speeds, and can well surpass a 5500 128bit model. Although the 5500 256bit models must have an advantage still.

This overclock helps significantly in Call of Duty and Lego Star Wars, but I would stand no chance with games like FEAR or Oblivion... Even Lego Star Wars can only be played at Low-to barely medium settings.

All in all overclocking makes since if you have no choice. I personally have no choice for at least 2 months - but by then with Vista on the horizon, ATI and nVidias next generation of cards coming out I still will not be able to justify replacing the 5200 at this time.

If I was to replace it I would have to get an AGP card or a new motherboard with PCI-Express for my socket 754 AMD Athlon64 3000+...

[/end rambling]
-Jeff
October 3, 2006 1:04:06 PM

Hey Raeven_Zero, Yeah I Really played C&C Tiberian Dawn on my rig and all was Ok, I Used SoundFX 2000 for SB16 software emulation under XP, It really Rock and is compatible to all game I tested. For Video, you can use a Slomo Launcher to slow the game down. Except I didnt need that, in the DOS game with SoundFx2000, it was normal speed when you didnt set it to maximum. However, If you're playing the Win95 version of C&C on a powerful XP machine, expect it to be too fast. Launch the game using this shortcut (if game is in /Games/ ) :
"C:\Games\C&C\RUNC&C.EXE -cdc:\games\C&C"

For the 9200SE, I would recommend to put a 80mm Fan on it with a homemade rack, it would cost nothing and maybe would increase overlocking success, since these get pretty hot...
October 6, 2006 12:41:03 AM

I was tinkering with the ATI Catalyst overdrive utility for my X1900XT. Stock core is 500 and VRAM 594mhz.
let it run through to "recommended" settings for OC'ing.
628 core and 797 VRAM.
I did a 3DMark6 and it only made a modest improvement on SM2 and SM3.0 for a total of 102 over stock settings. I didnt tinker with the board or CPU. Temps were very reasonable. max during setting testing via Catalyst was about 75 C.
October 6, 2006 1:00:27 AM

lol overclocking a ati 1900xt

you must be bored or crazy (ie. you play oblivion)

j/k - I don't know what else to say, I have a very sore throat.

-Jeff
October 6, 2006 1:05:13 AM

Little bit of both...
October 11, 2006 6:12:44 PM

I have read about very little gains when overclocking a X1900XT. Are you suggesting it is just not worth it? I would love to know, for I will eventiually have to fight off the urge to overclock mine when I get my system up and running.
!