MSI 4090 Suprim X Boost clock is lower to what's been observed in TPU's review.

[Eco10101]

Card basically boosts to advertised 2625 MHz. Well almost, I usually get to the 2655Mhz and this is without doing anything. Regardless if Silent or Gaming BIOS. Monitoring with GPU-Z and MSI Afterburner/RTSS.
Card bought in March. Stock BIOS: 95.02.3C.00.3D Silent / 95.02.3C.00.3C Gaming.
860W PSU using dedicated PCI5.0 power cable from Corsair.

Looking around the internet many 4090s boosts actually higher compared to what's advertised on the box whether it's MSI or Gigabyte. It has been confirmed by TechPowerUp and other Tech portals on multiple tests. Like this part from TPUs own 4090 Suprim X review:

The MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim X is a factory overclocked variant of the RTX 4090 that's rated for 2625 MHz Boost, vs 2520 MHz on the FE, or 4.1%. Averaged over our benchmarks at 4K the card is 3% faster, which isn't much, and impossible to notice subjectively. The average clock frequency across all our tests at 4K was 2850 MHz, the FE did 2701 MHz (5.5% difference).

I was wondering if this is a BIOS thing? Is there anyone with the same card and BIOS and can confirm please? I am kind of loosing my mind trying to figure this out. Where is the limit coming from.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Variances in GPU chip quality (especially relevant in lower quality bin ASICs with lots of disabled units like the 4090 - yes, despite being the fastest graphics card around, its not a fully enabled, low leakage AD102), and depends on temperature, power consumption and workload.

Undervolting your GPU should increase its boost clocks. I don't have the exact values to give you here but try MSI Afterburner for the curve editor, press Ctrl+F and link the voltage with the maximum frequency target you desire. Other 4090 owners may be able to help with the values you need, I still use the 3090.

 

[ir_cow]

This is why boost is "up to". Everything above the base clocks is gravy.

 

[The Von Matrices]

Increase the power limit if you want higher boost clocks.

 

[kiddagoat]

Each video card is different. Anything over the rated boost clock is a bonus as noted by @ir_cow. Also, each vendor 4090 has a different power limit. Most seem to be at a base of 450W with adjustments varying between 5% (472.5W)-30% (600W). Yours can go up to 8%. Keep in mind when you raise the power limit, you are also increasing temperatures. I would also adjust your fan curve.

You have to remember that boosting relies on a combination of three variables: temperature, power, and voltage. The card will dynamically adjust itself within the limits of those variables regardless of what you set in Afterburner. I have never messed with undervolting so I can't speak to it.

My own 4090 only allows for up to 6% adjustment. It boosts and holds between 2900Mhz-3100Mhz while gaming. YMMV

 

[ir_cow]

@kiddagoat also Nvidia boost changes based on the workload. RT vs raster. Also if you run games at a lower resolution it will boost higher.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Ambient temps, case used. silicon quality all can effect the cards boosting behavior.


How my 4090 behaves for the most part at bone stock typically in the mid 2700 range. I could buy 10 identical cards and get different readings. After overclocking my card stays over 2900 but less than 5% performance difference and like 550w so not worth it.

 

[Calmmo]

Dynamic boost, gpus don't operate at only fixed clocks any more.
voltage v power limit v clock target v temp

 

[Dragam1337]

Card basically boosts to advertised 2625 MHz. Well almost, I usually get to the 2655Mhz and this is without doing anything. Regardless if Silent or Gaming BIOS. Monitoring with GPU-Z and MSI Afterburner/RTSS.
Card bought in March. Stock BIOS: 95.02.3C.00.3D Silent / 95.02.3C.00.3C Gaming.
860W PSU using dedicated PCI5.0 power cable from Corsair.

Looking around the internet many 4090s boosts actually higher compared to what's advertised on the box whether it's MSI or Gigabyte. It has been confirmed by TechPowerUp and other Tech portals on multiple tests. Like this part from TPUs own 4090 Suprim X review:

I was wondering if this is a BIOS thing? Is there anyone with the same card and BIOS and can confirm please? I am kind of loosing my mind trying to figure this out. Where is the limit coming from.

No offense, but why do you even care about stock boost behaviour? Cause you don't wanna use stock boost behaviour regardless...

Set it to 2700 mhz @ 950 mv and call it a day...

Dynamic boost, gpus don't operate at only fixed clocks any more.
voltage v power limit v clock target v temp

You can easily change that though, and you want to change it...

 

[Eco10101]

I didn't take the silicon lottery into account so I appreciate everyone pointing this out to me. I am not trying to complain, I just try to educate myself on the topic and nothing really adds up from what I see on the internet. I found the topic of overclocking and undervolting interesting but it itches me that my baseline is different to what others are showing with their 4090s. Makes it that bit more irritating and difficult for someone unexperienced.
So I was interested what others experience is with this MSI model. Seeing that TPU review of the very same card showed different VBios version I thought this could be it.
I can't figure out whether my card's VBios is up to date. Actually "MSI Live Update" doesn't show any updates for my GPU so maybe it is. It picks up Bios update for my MSI motherboard though, so it would indicate it's at least working. https://www.msi.com/page/live-update-5-manual/

I switched BIOS from Silent to Gaming. Btw, had to restart PC twice for MSI Afterburner to properly pick up power limit from 115% (Silent BIOS) to 108% (Gaming BIOS - which has higher power limit by default). Set it to 108% and Fan speed to 100%. Usually watching results while playing Witcher3 but for consistency I ran 3D Mark Time Spy Extreme:

The voltage was 1049mV max. There were few blips where clock went to 2670Mhz and that's about it. I will try to continue my journey to achieve slightly higher clocks at the lower voltage.

 

[Dragam1337]

I didn't take the silicon lottery into account so I appreciate everyone pointing this out to me. I am not trying to complain, I just try to educate myself on the topic and nothing really adds up from what I see on the internet. I found the topic of overclocking and undervolting interesting but it itches me that my baseline is different to what others are showing with their 4090s. Makes it that bit more irritating and difficult for someone unexperienced.
So I was interested what others experience is with this MSI model. Seeing that TPU review of the very same card showed different VBios version I thought this could be it.
I can't figure out whether my card's VBios is up to date. Actually "MSI Live Update" doesn't show any updates for my GPU so maybe it is. It picks up Bios update for my MSI motherboard though, so it would indicate it's at least working. https://www.msi.com/page/live-update-5-manual/

I switched BIOS from Silent to Gaming. Btw, had to restart PC twice for MSI Afterburner to properly pick up power limit from 115% (Silent BIOS) to 108% (Gaming BIOS - which has higher power limit by default). Set it to 108% and Fan speed to 100%. Usually watching results while playing Witcher3 but for consistency I ran 3D Mark Time Spy Extreme:
View attachment 293683
The voltage was 1049mV max. There were few blips where clock went to 2670Mhz and that's about it. I will try to continue my journey to achieve slightly higher clocks at the lower voltage.

Fair enough that you are unexperienced, but it's pretty simple. With the stock profile, the higher the load, the lower the clocks. And even more so when you are bouncing against the power limit, as you are on your screenshot. Im willing to bet that it isn't an apples to apples comparison that you are doing, with identical ingame settings and test conditions.

But as i said, stock profile doesn't matter... AT ALL... cause you don't want to use stock profile. You want to undervolt as that gives you the same or better performance at much lower power draw... 2700 mhz @ 950 mv would be faster and draw 80-100 watts less...

 

[Eco10101]

I want to thank everyone who took the time to engage and reply to my post. I know this thread is old by now and some consensus here was met.
However... for anyone doing a similar research. I stumbled upon another MSI GeForce RTX 4090 SUPRIM X review on a portal called TheFpsReview and I think I struck gold. The article is from May and the card has exactly the same BIOS 95.02.3C.00.3C. Everything stock, default etc. and I quote:

The MSI GeForce RTX 4090 SUPRIM X comes with a Boost of 2625MHz right out of the box. (green line on the graph). In our benchmark run the default Boost settled in at a laser line 2820MHz, a 7.2% increase.

This is something my card is never able to achieve. While I absolutely agree that stock settings do not really matter and are indeed sub-optimal there's one thing still bothers me enough and it's that my card never changes its boost clock. There is plenty of evidence and has been mentioned here in this thread that you can expect a variance in boost clock based on your voltage limits, temperatures therefore fun curves and the type of software you test it on (more vs less demanding).
I have now ran multiple consistent tests using 3DMark Time Spy Extreme and added couple of games into the equation. Compared all tests with fans set to 100% vs stock, power limit 108% vs stock and again never seen clock going passed 2655Mhz and actually also very, very rarely going below it. Like if the card did not have a nV Boost working, like it is fixed. It just boosts from its lowest 200+Mhz to the max 2655Mhz and that's it...
I cannot conclude whether this is normal or not, matters or not, but I am yet to see another 4090 behave the same way. If anyone is in the same place as me, do yourself a favor and replace the card if you care about comparing any results or behavior of your card to what's available on the internet.

 

[P4-630]

Keep in mind W1zz's room temp for testing GPU's is around 21 Degrees Celsius.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Each video card is different. Anything over the rated boost clock is a bonus as noted by @ir_cow. Also, each vendor 4090 has a different power limit. Most seem to be at a base of 450W with adjustments varying between 5% (472.5W)-30% (600W). Yours can go up to 8%. Keep in mind when you raise the power limit, you are also increasing temperatures. I would also adjust your fan curve.

You have to remember that boosting relies on a combination of three variables: temperature, power, and voltage. The card will dynamically adjust itself within the limits of those variables regardless of what you set in Afterburner. I have never messed with undervolting so I can't speak to it.

My own 4090 only allows for up to 6% adjustment. It boosts and holds between 2900Mhz-3100Mhz while gaming. YMMV

View attachment 293658

This clock graph makes my brain malfunction. I'd a million times have a lower-clocking, stable card like OP's. In fact, I intentionally limited my RTX 3090's maximum boost bin to avoid that exact same wild variance in clock speeds. Nope, not for me!

I want to thank everyone who took the time to engage and reply to my post. I know this thread is old by now and some consensus here was met.
However... for anyone doing a similar research. I stumbled upon another MSI GeForce RTX 4090 SUPRIM X review on a portal called TheFpsReview and I think I struck gold. The article is from May and the card has exactly the same BIOS 95.02.3C.00.3C. Everything stock, default etc. and I quote:

This is something my card is never able to achieve. While I absolutely agree that stock settings do not really matter and are indeed sub-optimal there's one thing still bothers me enough and it's that my card never changes its boost clock. There is plenty of evidence and has been mentioned here in this thread that you can expect a variance in boost clock based on your voltage limits, temperatures therefore fun curves and the type of software you test it on (more vs less demanding).
I have now ran multiple consistent tests using 3DMark Time Spy Extreme and added couple of games into the equation. Compared all tests with fans set to 100% vs stock, power limit 108% vs stock and again never seen clock going passed 2655Mhz and actually also very, very rarely going below it. Like if the card did not have a nV Boost working, like it is fixed. It just boosts from its lowest 200+Mhz to the max 2655Mhz and that's it...
I cannot conclude whether this is normal or not, matters or not, but I am yet to see another 4090 behave the same way. If anyone is in the same place as me, do yourself a favor and replace the card if you care about comparing any results or behavior of your card to what's available on the internet.

I just looked at the time spy screenshot you posted a few weeks ago, I think I get the picture here, that's a 483 W power draw at 2655 MHz... I think you just got a very leaky sample. Should be great on cold.

Moreover, I'm going to make a case that those extra few MHz aren't that important. You may lose a few points in a benchmark, but your card should have stable, consistent and above all, predictable performance. For actually using the card for gaming and whatnot, I prefer a GPU like yours a megaton over another that will keep jumping between 2600 and 3000 erratically. But that's me.

 

[mattsrs]

Just wanted to revive this thread. I got a brand new 4090 Suprim X last week and I am surprised that it doesn't boost more than my FE. At stock, even with voltage unlocked to 100% in Afterburner, it doesn't go higher than 2745mhz. It can be OC-ed to 3000mhz but that is not the point. Almost all reviewers I have seen said this card should boost to 2800mhz+. It makes me wonder there is something wrong about the bios. I am still going to keep it because it runs cooler and quieter than my 4090 FE and it has less coil whine but still disappointing to see that the factory OC doesn't mean anything compared to FE

 

[ir_cow]

What resolution are you playing at? Or more over what is the load. In the past like 20 and 30 series, the clocks went down the higher the load even if the temps were below 60c. A good example is if you load up something like MSI Kombuster you'll find higher clocks at 1080 vs 4k.

 

[mattsrs]

What resolution are you playing at? Or more over what is the load. In the past like 20 and 30 series, the clocks went down the higher the load even if the temps were below 60c. A good example is if you load up something like MSI Kombuster you'll find higher clocks at 1080 vs 4k.

This is on a 4k 240hz monitor. My observation of the clock is in different benchmark/apps I have tried (Heaven benchmark, speed way, CS2, RDR2). I understand the point you are making but I am saying in stock setting, the same app/game, I expected the Suprim X to boost higher than my FE because of the 105mhz factory overclock but it doesnt and clocks match my FE at around 2745mhz at around 68c temp.

 

[Eco10101]

Welcome to the club my friend. I was 99% sure this was the BIOS issue until I found the article where the same BIOS was used and the boost result was much better. You are a little bit luckier than me if that makes you happy. My card boosts 2655 stock no matter what I try. There are no clock fluctuations regardless of power and temp. It stays there - solid. There are some posts on the internet mentioning NVIDIA boost being broken and not working correctly which might be the case. Though, reports are usually associated with different card models. Like someone mentioned, it could be just shitty die. Bad lottery I guess. If you ever try to flash the BIOS anyway please share your results.

 

[mattsrs]

Welcome to the club my friend. I was 99% sure this was the BIOS issue until I found the article where the same BIOS was used and the boost result was much better. You are a little bit luckier than me if that makes you happy. My card boosts 2655 stock no matter what I try. There are no clock fluctuations regardless of power and temp. It stays there - solid. There are some posts on the internet mentioning NVIDIA boost being broken and not working correctly which might be the case. Though, reports are usually associated with different card models. Like someone mentioned, it could be just shitty die. Bad lottery I guess. If you ever try to flash the BIOS anyway please share your results.

Have you tried a different bios on your card and see if it changes anything? I wonder if Strix bios can be flashed on Suprim X

 

[Eco10101]

No, I have not. I didn't bother seeing an evidence of the same card with the same BIOS performing much better. That said it is a pretty rare BIOS version to be honest. You may want to grab a BIOS here from TPU collection for SuprimX, just different version. Should be safe enough and if it really is a BIOS issue you should see some better results without going for Strix BIOS.

 

[mattsrs]

No, I have not. I didn't bother seeing an evidence of the same card with the same BIOS performing much better. That said it is a pretty rare BIOS version to be honest. You may want to grab a BIOS here from TPU collection for SuprimX, just different version. Should be safe enough and if it really is a BIOS issue you should see some better results without going for Strix BIOS.

I bought my card last week so I assume it has the latest bios. Version is 95.02.3C.40.E9 (silent bios) so I don't think flashing anything I saw on TPU bios DB would change anything. I tried gaming mode too but same issue. I may call MSI and basically say wth! I paid for a factory OC-ed card but getting the same clocks as FE and see what they say

 

[Onasi]

I bought my card last week so I assume it has the latest bios. Version is 95.02.3C.40.E9 (silent bios) so I don't think flashing anything I saw on TPU bios DB would change anything. I tried gaming mode too but same issue. I may call MSI and basically say wth! I paid for a factory OC-ed card but getting the same clocks as FE and see what they say

They will tell you what’s already has been established in this thread - you get the advertised 2625. Everything above that is silicon lottery. Despite what you might think, buying a premium model doesn’t guarantee best binned chips. In fact, I doubt there is any serious binning at all. And as for comparisons to FE - it’s actually been well known since FE became a thing that they often have surprisingly high quality chips on them, cooler performance aside, and they boost quite well.

 

[mattsrs]

They will tell you what’s already has been established in this thread - you get the advertised 2625. Everything above that is silicon lottery. Despite what you might think, buying a premium model doesn’t guarantee best binned chips. In fact, I doubt there is any serious binning at all. And as for comparisons to FE - it’s actually been well known since FE became a thing that they often have surprisingly high quality chips on them, cooler performance aside, and they boost quite well.

Yea I hear you. Got lucky that I bought this Suprim X for only $100 more than FE so may keep it because of how quiet it runs in comparison to FE and also has less coil whine but I would be pissed if I spent $400 more than FE on it like how it is priced on most retailers.

 

[Onasi]

Yea I hear you. Got lucky that I bought this Suprim X for only $100 more than FE so may keep it because of how quiet it runs in comparison to FE and also has less coil whine but I would be pissed if I spent $400 more than FE on it like how it is priced on most retailers.

Off the top of my head, the only time recently when I heard even a hint of rumblings related to getting better chips in a premium model was with the Asus 4090 Matrix Platinum. Which might very well have been the case since it did smash OC records on several different occasions. But, uh, that thing is 3200 bucks, so… you know.

 

[Vya Domus]

Differences of +/- ~200mhz cannot be explained by "silicon lottery" and these cards don't really work that way anyway. Nividia cards follow a frequency curve, the clocks climb up and down on that curve depending on the limits reached, something is causing the card to not boost past 2625mhz.