Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Stunning Asus 4770 overclocks.

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
April 28, 2009 12:26:02 PM

971 core / 4600 memory

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

That sort of increase must put the card pretty close to 260/4870 stock performance.
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 4:37:28 AM

Is it just me, or are the numbers you mentioned only theoretical in that link? It just seems like they're saying it's possible, not that they did it... /shrug
April 29, 2009 4:48:47 AM

^ correct.

Its alleging the card can do that on said voltages, ASUS is saying it can because it fits into whatever voltage requirements their are.

If somebody wants to be stupid enough to OC that thing that far, if it even can, then be my guest....please. I want a picture of the burnt chip afterwards because that pathetic stock cooler cant handle it.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 5:00:05 AM

Score one for me! And I have to agree, spathotan. Unless you're liquid cooling that thing, which seems like an awful expense on a ~$100 video card, it'll likely burn in a hurry. However, with the references to ATI's stance at the top of the article, I can't help but wonder if the 4770s over-volt and over-clock potential is the reason behind that stance...
April 29, 2009 5:06:12 AM

spathotan said:
^ correct.

Its alleging the card can do that on said voltages, ASUS is saying it can because it fits into whatever voltage requirements their are.

If somebody wants to be stupid enough to OC that thing that far, if it even can, then be my guest....please. I want a picture of the burnt chip afterwards because that pathetic stock cooler cant handle it.



STOP KILLING MY DREAMS!
a c 359 U Graphics card
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b } Memory
April 29, 2009 5:15:35 AM

So far the highest OC I've seen in a review is 860MHz Core and 975MHz Memory over at Xbitlabs.com:




Link:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-h...

Quote:
Unfortunately, the official Radeon HD 4770 overclocking tools - Catalyst Control Center control panel – has very limited functionality: the maximum GPU frequency is only 830MHz, and maximum memory frequency 850 (3400) MHz.

The card worked stably at these speeds, but the 40nm GPU could definitely do better than that. And we did find a way of overcoming the unfounded limitation by slightly modifying the latest RivaTuner version. In order to teach this popular utility to work with RV740, you need to open Rivatuner.cfg file, get to [GPU_1002] section and locate the “RV770 = 9440h-9443h,944Ch” line. Then you have to add “94B3h” descriptor to it.




Here's some performance charts from their review of stock and OC'ed HD 4770:



































Here's a relative performance chart @ 1920 x 1200 resolution of the HD 4770 at stock speed:






I'll probably replace my nearly 3 yr old X1900XT with this card as an inexpensive upgrade, then buy a high end DX11 card next year.


Edit: I added the quote since it describe how Xbitlab was able to overcome CCC's overclocking limitations.
a c 359 U Graphics card
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b } Memory
April 29, 2009 5:21:56 AM

Hmmm....

The last three images doesn't seem to be displayed properly. Oh well... Let's try again...









Relative performance:





It seems at stock speed the HD 4770 doesn't draw much more than a HD 4670:





Link to 1st page of Xbitlab's review:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-h...
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 5:40:58 AM

Jaguar. You need to use the "bracket img bracket" and "bracket /img bracket" BB codes. Just edit and insert them.

NM, you got it.
a c 359 U Graphics card
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b } Memory
April 29, 2009 5:51:14 AM

RazberyBandit said:
Jaguar. You need to use the "bracket img bracket" and "bracket /img bracket" BB codes.


No, the "img brackets" are there in my post when it go to edit it. I triple checked before making another post. Might be due to the fact I am posting too many images at once.
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 7:48:43 AM

Sorry jaguar. At first, none of them were showing up at all. I think you're right about the first post simply having too many pics in it to show the last 3, though.
April 29, 2009 7:49:05 AM

Wait till you see HIS ICEQ cooling on this thing, then we will have something to talk about.
Till then forget this 970/1150mhz dream overclocks.
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 9:39:58 AM

Look at the voltage difference. 0.95v to 1.2v is pretty huge right?

Thing is, the stock 4870 voltage is 1.203v (some are 1.263v). The 4770 has the same stock clock speed as the 4870, except it is at a much lower voltage.

If you are wondering why it has 80w TDP, that should go a long way to explaining it. It looks like ATI have had to drop the voltages on this in order to prevent overclocks from going too high with normal software.

As for the cooling, this is what Hexus said :-

"A double-height cooler is overkill for the underlying GPU. It does perform well however, keeping under-load temps near GeForce 9800 GT levels."

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=18202&page=1...

Max load of 63C is really good. My 4870 is idling at 56C right now and it's not unusual for it to hit 80C+ under load.
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 9:44:15 AM

We shouldn't really be surprised either. This is a 40nm part and we've seen what ATI have done with the 4890 overclocking compared to the 4870. Smaller tech allow for much higher clocks, that is just plain to see in gpu history.

Jaguar's last graph there shows the 4770 drawing a very small amount of power more compared to the 4670. Why is this card at 80w TDP with a pci-connector requuired? It must be because it will overvolt and overclock to huge levels.
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 10:29:56 AM

jennyh said:
Jaguar's last graph there shows the 4770 drawing a very small amount of power more compared to the 4670. Why is this card at 80w TDP with a pci-connector requuired? It must be because it will overvolt and overclock to huge levels.


That may be true, but it's mainly because the PCIe slot on the motherboard can only supply a maximum 75W. If a video card needs a single Watt of additional power to function under load, it has to have a 6-pin PCIe power cable connected to it. Since this card draws 80W under load, the additional 5W have to come from somewhere, hence the 6-pin PCIe power connection.
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 11:12:08 AM

RazberyBandit said:
That may be true, but it's mainly because the PCIe slot on the motherboard can only supply a maximum 75W. If a video card needs a single Watt of additional power to function under load, it has to have a 6-pin PCIe power cable connected to it. Since this card draws 80W under load, the additional 5W have to come from somewhere, hence the 6-pin PCIe power connection.


Yes but the 80w TDP is supposed to be the total maximum the card would realistically be able to draw, including extreme watercooled overclocks and voltage increases. That graph shows it drawing under 50w at full load so there has to be a huge amount of headroom left over for some reason. It takes an awful lot for a card to draw 30 more watts than it does under normal circumstances.

There might well be another reason but I think the obvious one would be a quick switch to 1.2v and big increases on clock and memory speeds might just take it above 75w. At normal stock levels there is no way this card would need more than the pci-e slot power.
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 11:47:14 AM

Have you figured out that problem with being unable to oc them in CCC? Nice numbers btw lol. :D 
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 11:52:56 AM

Yeah, I'll admit it's still under the 80W claim from AMD/ATI, but the Hexus and XbitLabs results are different, yet both seem to show the 4770 staying well under the 75W barrier of the board slot under load.
a b U Graphics card
April 29, 2009 4:39:20 PM

Problem with that is, maybe at bootup, possibly in certain games under certain conditions, even temporarily, it could climb to its TDP, and by not supplying available power for its listed TDP is inviting lawsuits, discredation as well
a c 359 U Graphics card
a b Ĉ ASUS
a b } Memory
April 30, 2009 2:23:14 AM

RazberyBandit said:
Since this card draws 80W under load, the additional 5W have to come from somewhere, hence the 6-pin PCIe power connection.



The HD 4770 is rated to have a TDP of 80w, but that is simply an estimate, not an actual amount. I would say the power connection is insurance in case there would be a sudden spike in consumption, especially when OC'ed.

May 6, 2009 4:53:09 PM

spathotan said:
^ correct.

If somebody wants to be stupid enough to OC that thing that far, if it even can, then be my guest....please. I want a picture of the burnt chip afterwards because that pathetic stock cooler cant handle it.


I made it. 100% stable: 970 mhz core with 1.2v / 1000mhz ram (very hot, max clock 1150mhz)
Max. temps are 70º for core and 80º for ram, need better refrigeration...

Remember, it is 40nm!! So temps are MUCH lower.

Happy o/c :D 
a b U Graphics card
May 6, 2009 5:21:26 PM

What did you use to increase the voltage?
May 6, 2009 5:50:48 PM

Aren't the ASUS 4770's the ones with the super high tech caps? I think there was an article on this somewhere...
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2009 6:06:31 AM

cbupdd said:
I made it. 100% stable: 970 mhz core with 1.2v / 1000mhz ram (very hot, max clock 1150mhz)
Max. temps are 70º for core and 80º for ram, need better refrigeration...

Remember, it is 40nm!! So temps are MUCH lower.

Happy o/c :D 


Impressive. But... Will it run a fullscreen FurMark Stability Test in Xtreme Burning Mode at your native res for more than a minute? :) 
May 9, 2009 6:46:40 PM

RazberyBandit said:
Impressive. But... Will it run a fullscreen FurMark Stability Test in Xtreme Burning Mode at your native res for more than a minute? :) 


I have tried only 45 seconds, because temps are soo high (core 86ºc !!). I need some water cooling.. or she will die xD
I read it is 43mm mounting holes, right? Anyone know a compatible water block?
May 9, 2009 6:53:59 PM

Also, I flashed asus top bios, then I used smartdoctor to increase the voltage ( I think it can only go at max. 1,2v. I say that because at +1,2v it doesn't help on o/c).
May 10, 2009 1:54:21 PM

cbupdd said:
I made it. 100% stable: 970 mhz core with 1.2v / 1000mhz ram (very hot, max clock 1150mhz)
Max. temps are 70º for core and 80º for ram, need better refrigeration...

Remember, it is 40nm!! So temps are MUCH lower.

Happy o/c :D 


Nice! I think i will grab one of those XFX HD4770 cosmetic edition cards when they are out and give it a try. This card rocks!
October 8, 2009 5:19:49 PM

I have the Sapphire 4770 (non-HDMI model), originally just one card, but now in Crossfire, and this card ROCKS!

I was able to OC to 900MHz core and 1000MHz memory.

The memory on nearly all of the 4770 cards is actually rated to and stable at 1000MHz, so there is no need to tip-toe up the scale of OCing the memory. It is good at 1000MHz.

As for the core I was able to OC it 900MHz safely and stable using RivaTuner. After 900MHz I started getting artifacts in FurMark.

Here is a screen of the GPU-Z, and a 3DMarkVantage Score on Entry:





Blows past a 4850 and is hot on the heals of a 4870!
a b U Graphics card
October 8, 2009 5:30:39 PM

Hehe, this is quite an old thread. :p 

I got my 2 sapphires to 859 core 1059 memory and they were rock solid except for one oddity - sometimes on booting up I'd get blue lines and a crash. They worked perfectly in all apps, just didn't boot into windows sometimes, and randomly (using rivatuner for oc'ing).
October 8, 2009 7:26:12 PM

lets see some 5770s now! :) 
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
December 10, 2009 1:07:54 PM

so guys, this 4770 is worth the bucks ?? thinking of replacing my 4670 tx
December 10, 2009 2:07:20 PM

Quote:
so guys, this 4770 is worth the bucks ?? thinking of replacing my 4670 tx



You can find an AWESOME one here:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150369

With free shipping too it's not bad. I was actually going to suggest getting a 4870, but for some really stranger reason they are way more expensive than last I checked a couple months ago. Either way I'm happy because I got mine for about $121 earlier this year. (Really good deal for limited time)

a b U Graphics card
January 3, 2010 6:17:38 PM

My experience.
I've had great luck with my 4770. I can game at 925/1050 and its still cool.
58 63c memory. If I turn the fan up instead of normal , 100% 42/51c LOL.
In various benchmarks its good for a real 20% fps increase. In Dirt 2, dx9 settings it got the fps that the 5770 did in THG review. I'm not saying the card is THAT good, because in a comparison the other card is not o/c at all. I'm just relaying my thoughts on this card.
I used to game with a 8600 gt. This is 3x as fast. Two years ago I paid 140.00 for the 8600GT, I paid 110.00 for the 4770. I might crossfire someday, if I ever can justify a 1920x monitor from my 20inch 1650x resolution.
a b U Graphics card
January 3, 2010 6:26:13 PM

jennyh said:
Yes but the 80w TDP is supposed to be the total maximum the card would realistically be able to draw, including extreme watercooled overclocks and voltage increases. That graph shows it drawing under 50w at full load so there has to be a huge amount of headroom left over for some reason. It takes an awful lot for a card to draw 30 more watts than it does under normal circumstances.

There might well be another reason but I think the obvious one would be a quick switch to 1.2v and big increases on clock and memory speeds might just take it above 75w. At normal stock levels there is no way this card would need more than the pci-e slot power.


What are you smoking? The TDP is the most the unit will draw under REALISTIC conditions, not extreme watercooled overclocks.
Ever heard of OCCT/FurMark pushing the 4800 GPU's way over their TDP's? That's at stock voltage & clocks.

The 4770 gets to the same clocks as the 4870 using less voltage because it is a 40nm part.

A 4770 will need easily 300MHz over a 4870's core & 300MHz on the memory (before pumping) to get to a 4870's level as there is a difference in the number of SP's, ROP's, TMU's, etc.

At stock its TDP is 80W, I would expect on an extreme OC it can reach 120W of power consumption at load.
!