Monday, March 6th 2017

GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Overclocked Beyond 2 GHz Put Through 3DMark

by
btarunr
 Discuss (72 Comments)
An NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti reference-design graphics card was overclocked to 2062 MHz core, and 11404 MHz (GDDR5X-effective) memory, and put through the 3DMark suite. The card was able to sustain its overclock without breaking a sweat, with its core temperature hovering around 63°C. Apparently, the card's power-limit was manually set to 122%, to sustain the overclock. In the standard FireStrike benchmark (1080p), the card churned up graphics scores of 31,135 points, followed by 15,093 points in FireStrike Extreme (1440p), and 7,362 points in the 4K Ultra HD version of the benchmark, FireStrike Ultra. The card also scored 10,825 points in the TimeSpy DirectX 12 benchmark. Overall, the card falls within 30-40% performance of an overclocked GTX 1080.
Sources: ChipHell, VideoCardz

Related News

Add your own comment

72 Comments on GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Overclocked Beyond 2 GHz Put Through 3DMark

#26
XiGMAKiD
Nice, maybe with Volta we can get to 3GHz?
Posted on Reply
#27
PowerPC
Vega is quite a bit far away right now. But if you're not especially in need of a new graphics card right now, I would definitely wait. I think Vega will outclass this pretty easily, even if it's just HDMI 2.1 possibly being on there as a big new feature.
Posted on Reply
#28
P4-630
PowerPCI would definitely wait.
Posted on Reply
#29
RejZoR
Well, RX480 did deliver what they promised. Ryzen did deliver what they promised. What makes you think RX Vega won't?
Posted on Reply
#30
P4-630
RejZoRWell, RX480 did deliver what they promised. Ryzen did deliver what they promised. What makes you think RX Vega won't?
It's just the waiting.....
And:
RejZoRI don't think it'll dominate GTX 1080Ti
Posted on Reply
#31
peche
Thermaltake fanboy
BasardAMD should have never bought ATI......
wise comment my friend, wise comment, :toast:

Regards,
Posted on Reply
#32
RejZoR
Ryzen doesn't dominate 6900k. But it costs half as much. Hint hint. Besides, dominating it would mean being what, 10-20% faster. If it's as fast as 1080Ti, and costs less, people will buy it en mass.
Posted on Reply
#33
P4-630
Who knows, they may charge the consumer a huge premium for that HBM2...

But again....
Waiting............
Posted on Reply
#34
efikkan
zo0lykaswait few months :) HBM2 is coming
No HBM in the world can make the Vega 10 beat GP102.
RejZoRWell, RX480 did deliver what they promised. Ryzen did deliver what they promised. What makes you think RX Vega won't?
Polaris never delivered on 2.5× energy efficiency, not even close…
Posted on Reply
#35
RejZoR
Why are you clinching at power efficiency only? They delivered a cheap and powerful graphic card for the masses. No one cares about power efficiency at that point. You can't call it power hungry either, regardless of it not achieving your 2.5x efficiency...
Posted on Reply
#36
efikkan
RejZoRWhy are you clinching at power efficiency only? They delivered a cheap and powerful graphic card for the masses. No one cares about power efficiency at that point. You can't call it power hungry either, regardless of it not achieving your 2.5x efficiency...
Well, it's just marginally more efficient than Fiji, even with a node shrink. Right now GP106 is ~55% more efficient, GP104 ~80% more efficient and GP102 ~85% more efficient than Polaris, so it will be no small feat for AMD to cover that gap.
It's kind of sad when AMD's new generation only covers the lower mid-range and downwards, since their architecture didn't scale.
Posted on Reply
#37
MxPhenom 216
ASIC Engineer
RejZoRRyzen doesn't dominate 6900k. But it costs half as much. Hint hint. Besides, dominating it would mean being what, 10-20% faster. If it's as fast as 1080Ti, and costs less, people will buy it en mass.
Ryzen also has problems so meh. Until those BIOS updates come to fix SOME of the memory problems, Ryzen isnt interesting to me anymore.
Posted on Reply
#38
Captain_Tom
efikkanNo HBM in the world can make the Vega 10 beat GP102
So just zero chance?

Even though it will have 10%+ more TFLOPS and 5% more bandwidth than GP102?

Keep in mind that Polaris closed most of the TFLOPS/performance gap that used to exist, and Vega is improving on that even more.
Posted on Reply
#39
Captain_Tom
pechewise comment my friend, wise comment, :toast:

Regards,
The history books still aren't done being written on that acquisition. Let's see in 5 years what everyone thinks.
Posted on Reply
#40
efikkan
Captain_TomSo just zero chance?

Even though it will have 10%+ more TFLOPS and 5% more bandwidth than GP102?

Keep in mind that Polaris closed most of the TFLOPS/performance gap that used to exist, and Vega is improving on that even more.
When did people learn how to do math?
RX 480 (5161 GFlop/s) is beaten by the GTX 1060 (3855 GFlop/s), even though RX 480 has 34% more computational power.
Posted on Reply
#41
erixx
I just say, and it makes me somehow sad because I want to be open to Vega and whatnot: I recently have build a lower specs PC with a Ati-Amd 470 and look... first time in many years or even a decade that I have grafix problems (a microsecond flickering screen in Windows 10 and in "Steep" game). Maybe it is not the gpu... I still have to check. Something I never had to do with nV, if the specs were low, game was slow, but "oddities"? Never!.
Posted on Reply
#42
kruk
efikkanWhen did people learn how to do math?
RX 480 (5161 GFlop/s) is beaten by the GTX 1060 (3855 GFlop/s), even though RX 480 has 34% more computational power.
It's hard to do math with too many unknown variables present. We don't know what Vega architecture changes will bring and thus any comparisons with previous gen cards cannot be made ...
Posted on Reply
#43
sweet
efikkanWhen did people learn how to do math?
RX 480 (5161 GFlop/s) is beaten by the GTX 1060 (3855 GFlop/s), even though RX 480 has 34% more computational power.
GTX 1060 was faster than RX 480 when released but now you can see RX 480 caught up and pulled ahead.

If AMD can pull a Fury die sink which is able to clock at 1500 MHz, and of coz add more fking ROPs, they can match 1080Ti for real.
Posted on Reply
#44
mark84
NicklasAPJhere is my TItan X Pascal overclocked.

hwbot.org/submission/3478669_nicklas0912_3dmark___time_spy_titan_x_pascal_10984_marks

Almost same clocks, so clock for clock Titan X Pascal bring out a little more fps.
Look GPU score, he use 6950x, I use 6900K.
Yeah my Titan X can basically match core clocks too. Fluctuates between 1950MHz and 2060MHz. Memory was 5760MHz.
My 6850K was only clocked at 4.1Ghz. Just daily OC.
7678 in Firestrike Ultra www.3dmark.com/fs/11892277
9832 in Time Spy www.3dmark.com/spy/1317096

1080Ti = Titan X

Annoying for Titan X owners who shelled out far more for effectively the same product.
I was quite surprised with the Ti announcement, the first Ti to not have shaders culled from the halo product.
Posted on Reply
#47
Prima.Vera
GhostRyderStill cool, I may still swap mine out just because of how cheaper it is.
Cheaper?? You're joking right? Or you grow money on the trees?
Posted on Reply
#48
Captain_Tom
efikkanWhen did people learn how to do math?
RX 480 (5161 GFlop/s) is beaten by the GTX 1060 (3855 GFlop/s), even though RX 480 has 34% more computational power.
Wow you just flat out can't read. Compare what it used to be to now. I said the 480 closed most of the gap, and Vega adds substantial Architectural enhancements. In fact the difference between Vega and Polaris seems to be FAR larger than that between Fiji and Polaris.


Let's see how this pans out ;)
Posted on Reply
#49
Captain_Tom
krukIt's hard to do math with too many unknown variables present. We don't know what Vega architecture changes will bring and thus any comparisons with previous gen cards cannot be made ...
What we do know is that Vega 10 is over double the stats of the 480 ACROSS THE BOARD (Which would put it on par with the 1080 TI / Titan X with just that). Then add:

-2x the Geometry IPC
-Half as much VRAM needed as before (Which could mean more effective bandwidth)
-Better memory compression
-Many more things like vastly lower latency, re-organized ROP's, etc.

Only a drooling idiot would think Vega wouldn't be at least twice as strong as the 480.


But let's be clear: I don't have a crystal ball, and I am not saying Vega will 100% beat Pascal. But if Vega 10 can't at least MATCH the 1080 Ti, it will be a Bulldozer-level failure in my opinion.
Posted on Reply
#50
Caring1
sweetGTX 1060 was faster than RX 480 when released but now you can see RX 480 caught up and pulled ahead.
Maybe in gaming, but in benchmarks the 1060 is still ahead.
These are similar platforms showing Ryzen CPU's and the two GPU's mentioned, if you look at the graphics score it shows the 1060 ahead despite being paired with the slower CPU.
www.3dmark.com/spy/1325916?_ga=1.266540942.181503479.1487944691
www.3dmark.com/spy/1325911?_ga=1.207237779.181503479.1487944691
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 25th, 2024 03:42 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts