Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Video Card Clock Speeds..

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 10, 2007 12:15:06 AM

Hello everyone,

Im looking for some realistic numbers reguarding the FPS of games based of the clock speeds of the graphics cards. Bottom line is that im looking at picking up an 8800GT here soon and there is 3 options im willing to pick from.

All Cards being EVGA

Superclocked - 650 Core / 1900 Memory
KO - 675 Core 1950 Memory
SSC - 700 Core / 2000 Memory

Now these cards are running $289, $309 and $329

Basicaly what im looking for is how much does say the 50 core and 1000 memory diffrence really affect the FPS?
November 10, 2007 1:32:37 AM

they dont't really, $40 will only get you about 3 fps max, buy the 650 and OC yourself if you want to.
November 10, 2007 2:31:45 AM

Not exactly sure if you're going to find those kind of comparisons on these cards just yet. Not in real world games anyway.

But, ditto to over-clocking the card.
I finished building my new system last week and just yesterday downloaded a pretty awesome over-clocking utility. (Riva Tuner) I have an eVGA 8800GT SC

I'm still in the middle of overclocking the system. So I have only played with the utility a bit.

All I did was push the stock core setting of 650 to 675 (KO) and here are the PC Mark 06 score I got in the FPS department.

Stock VGA speeds
Overall Score: 12970
1 - Return to Proxycon 45.1 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 46.611 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 1.437 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 2.106 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 50.073 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 54.719 FPS



Over-clocked core
Overall Score: 13014
Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 46.332 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 44.008 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 1.441 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 2.117 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 51.379 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 55.755 FPS


All I did in this was push the core speed up to 675. All the rest of the system setting are the same between the two scores.

Of course this is PC Mark, so it's a synthetic benchmark. Real world gaming may have different results. BUT, faster is always better.


The FPS really only go up about 1 FPS with an increase of 25MHz, but I didn't touch the memory settings yet either. I have a good feeling I won't have a problem running this card at SSC speeds. Maybe more if I get better cooling.

Hope this helps!
Related resources
November 10, 2007 5:14:27 AM

The result is going to be different in each game, FEAR would probiblty notice a slightly bigger difference than most. Anything you get in overclocking is free and is therefore can't be a bad thing as long as your temps are ok. If you were to OC say your processer, GPU and memory, the combind OC's could net you 15-20 fps in some games. Lets say that you have two 8800 GTX in SLI and you OC each GPU 50MHz x2 and one card OC'ed get you 5 fps, you now have 10 more fps. You get the idea.
November 10, 2007 5:19:06 AM

Flingpoo said:
Not exactly sure if you're going to find those kind of comparisons on these cards just yet. Not in real world games anyway.

But, ditto to over-clocking the card.
I finished building my new system last week and just yesterday downloaded a pretty awesome over-clocking utility. (Riva Tuner) I have an eVGA 8800GT SC

I'm still in the middle of overclocking the system. So I have only played with the utility a bit.

All I did was push the stock core setting of 650 to 675 (KO) and here are the PC Mark 06 score I got in the FPS department.

Stock VGA speeds
Overall Score: 12970
1 - Return to Proxycon 45.1 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 46.611 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 1.437 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 2.106 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 50.073 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 54.719 FPS



Over-clocked core
Overall Score: 13014
Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 46.332 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 44.008 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 1.441 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 2.117 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 51.379 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 55.755 FPS


All I did in this was push the core speed up to 675. All the rest of the system setting are the same between the two scores.

Of course this is PC Mark, so it's a synthetic benchmark. Real world gaming may have different results. BUT, faster is always better.


The FPS really only go up about 1 FPS with an increase of 25MHz, but I didn't touch the memory settings yet either. I have a good feeling I won't have a problem running this card at SSC speeds. Maybe more if I get better cooling.

Hope this helps!


Your scores are very close to mine for the FPS in the most of the test, except for the processer you score much higher than me because of your quad. Other than that ours are pretty close considering that I have an 8800GTX and you the 8800GT.
November 10, 2007 8:15:12 PM

Okay, I cranked her up to SSC speeds. Both core clock and memory clock.

Riva Tuner detected default SC speeds at 650/1625/950
I took it to SSC specs to 701/1752/1000

the middle number is the shader clock which I have set to change with the core clock automatically. The last number, the memory clock is doubled for "effective" clock speed as listed on the EVGA website as SC 1900 and SSC 2000

I got a 3D Mark score of 13552!
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/resultanalyzer.jsp?pr...
The only other overclocking I have done so far with my system is the processor. Q6600 running at 3.0GHz.
Memory is running in automatic until I top off my processor speed.

Here are the FPS results:

Detailed Test Results

Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 47.511 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 48.392 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 1.455 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 2.116 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 53.602 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 57.565 FPS



So as a result to synthetic benchmarks my overall score improved quite a bit, but only went up about 2 FPS.

I also manually set the fan to run at 100% to protect the 8800GT, so it's a little loud. I guess it's up to you if you want to spend the extra cash or not. I'm not sure if the SSC has better cooling than the SC. If not, I can't see spending the money if you are willing to overclock it yourself.

As far as PC Mark is concerned you wont see much change in FPS from one card to the next, but you will have some bragging rights with your overall score. Seems I did it on the cheap with a SC. :D 

I'm actually interested to see what it will do with a game benchmark. I know the World in Conflict demo has one built in with just a push of a button. I may download it again. Unless someone can tell me how to activate the benchmark in the UT demo.
November 11, 2007 12:34:23 AM

Flingpoo said:
Okay, I cranked her up to SSC speeds. Both core clock and memory clock.

Riva Tuner detected default SC speeds at 650/1625/950
I took it to SSC specs to 701/1752/1000

the middle number is the shader clock which I have set to change with the core clock automatically. The last number, the memory clock is doubled for "effective" clock speed as listed on the EVGA website as SC 1900 and SSC 2000

I got a 3D Mark score of 13552!
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/resultanalyzer.jsp?pr...
The only other overclocking I have done so far with my system is the processor. Q6600 running at 3.0GHz.
Memory is running in automatic until I top off my processor speed.

Here are the FPS results:

Detailed Test Results

Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 47.511 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 48.392 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 1.455 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 2.116 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 53.602 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 57.565 FPS



So as a result to synthetic benchmarks my overall score improved quite a bit, but only went up about 2 FPS.

I also manually set the fan to run at 100% to protect the 8800GT, so it's a little loud. I guess it's up to you if you want to spend the extra cash or not. I'm not sure if the SSC has better cooling than the SC. If not, I can't see spending the money if you are willing to overclock it yourself.

As far as PC Mark is concerned you wont see much change in FPS from one card to the next, but you will have some bragging rights with your overall score. Seems I did it on the cheap with a SC. :D 

I'm actually interested to see what it will do with a game benchmark. I know the World in Conflict demo has one built in with just a push of a button. I may download it again. Unless someone can tell me how to activate the benchmark in the UT demo.


Could you also report what the score is for just the graphics card only score? I want to compare it to my 8800GTX, it will be interesting to compare the two different cards when one cost almost double the price.
November 11, 2007 12:48:48 AM

systemlord said:
Could you also report what the score is for just the graphics card only score? I want to compare it to my 8800GTX, it will be interesting to compare the two different cards when one cost almost double the price.

No problemo.

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 13552 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 5754 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 5558 Marks
CPU Score 4386 Marks
November 11, 2007 7:43:49 AM

Flingpoo said:
No problemo.

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 13552 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 5754 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 5558 Marks
CPU Score 4386 Marks


Are you running the basic version? The reason I ask is my resolution is pre-set at 1280x1024, I just took my GPU core to 648MHz and can't push it any further even with the OC bar set to 750MHz. I'll get back to you with my strange 3Dmark06 score, something isn't right here. Trouble shooting.....

Overall score with clocks below 12400
GPU core 648MHz OC
Shader 1350MHz stock
Memory 900MHz stock
November 11, 2007 2:45:32 PM

Yes, I'm using the free/basic version. The resolution on the free version is set to 1280X1024 and can't be changed.
November 11, 2007 4:34:21 PM

I downloaded World in Conflict and ran the demo with both the stock 8800GT SC speeds and then loaded the SSC speeds via RiverTuner and found some interesting numbers.

I ran the demo with a resolution of 1680X1050 with the settings at "very high".
When I changed the resolution from the default 800X600 to 1680X1050 it changed the setting to "custom" for some reason. I put it back to "very high" and really didn't get good frame rates. Even with this brand new system with a 8800GT

I don't know. I think the installation of the demo didn't go well. It was a little buggy starting up and minimized to the desktop. I restarted the computer and everything seemed fine after that.

Here are the results:

8800GT SC at 650/1900

Average FPS 22
minimum FPS 9
Maximum FPS 49

At SSC speeds 701/2000

Average FPS 23
Minimum FPS 11
Maximum FPS 47

Strange that the maximum FPS would go down. I think to be more accurate I would probably have to run the demo five time each and average it out. I don't think I'm going to do that though. I actually would like to play a game before the day is through. ;) 

Like I mentioned above the demo was a little buggy. I actually ran the overclocked speeds twice. The first time the score was actually lower than the stock speeds. I restarted the computer and ran it again for the results I posted.



Well, I think you may have you're answer. Not exactly a professional benchmark test results, but I would say there's not much of a difference in real world game FPS between an SC and a SSC. Perhaps eVGA could have only put out a stock nVida spec card and their SSC card. There's really no need for four different models if the actual game don't run any better, IMO. It does however give you a couple of price point to buy an overclocked version though. I also don't know if the SSC can be pushed higher than the SC, so that may be a benefit as well if it is possible.

There you go!
Safe to say you only get one or two FPS per 50MHz.
Not sure if it's worth the extra cash, but you will have some bragging rights with your 3D mark score! :D 
!