Y500 GT650M Overclock

Discussion in 'Lenovo' started by n1smo, Dec 13, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,146
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,193
    Trophy Points:
    431
    I'd double-check that with an in-game OSD if I were you. If you fire up Crysis 3 you'll probably find that the CPU will stay at 2.4 GHz without ThrottleStop since your GPU's are already being pushed to the edge. Crysis 3 burns up my GPU more than any sythetic test--FurMark/Kombustor, OCCT, etc--does and it's very CPU-hungry to boot. You might find you'll get 5-10 more FPS going from 2.4 GHz to 3.2 GHz.

    Anyway, I'd find some way to get that max CPU temp in 3DMark 11 down to around 90 if I were you. That should give you enough overhead to OC your GPU and not worry about thermal shutdown. I find that the maximum CPU temp in 3DMark is a pretty accurate indicator of the max in a game.
     
  2. klebs89

    klebs89 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    I can't comment on Crysis 3, but the Bioshock: Infinite benchmark gives identical results (Throttlestop off faster by 0.1 fps) whether or not Throttlestop is turned on, indicating that throttling is not occurring in that usage case. I did order an adjustable cooler anyway, I'll see what effect that has on temps in general. Considering it's not noticeably throttling anyway while gaming, I question the wisdom of running Throttlestop, at least without simultaneously monitoring temperatures.
     
  3. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,146
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,193
    Trophy Points:
    431
    BioShock Infinite is a very GPU-bound game unlike Crysis 3. The fact that there's no difference with ThrottleStop could just mean that the system is not disabling Turbo Boost under this particular workload, or it could mean that the 800 MHz CPU increase makes no difference. Logging the data during the benchmark run should tell you which is the case.

    I hate to throw free performance away and as long as my CPU stays around 90 C when gaming I'm perfectly fine with letting it run as fast as it can.
     
  4. klebs89

    klebs89 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    That's a perfectly valid position, but you may be throwing away GPU OC headroom considering chips are generally stabler when cooler (in other words, you may get higher stable clocks when your GPU is at 70C as opposed to 75C). On the other hand, this may not apply if you're limited by the stability of the Ultrabay GPU (as I seem to be).

    The usefulness of Throttlestop is obviously dependent on the specific program. I was able to get a 4fps (56->60) increase in the World in Conflict benchmark, but I chose that game because it
    is particularly CPU-intensive. I'll start using Throttlestop if I can get temps down with a cooler, but with my current airflow setup its's not worth the 0-7% boost it provides at a cost of 15C.
     
  5. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,146
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,193
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Yeah if you match clocks when overclocking, the Ultrabay GPU does seem to be the limiter. According to GPU-Z the ASIC quality of my Ultrabay GPU is a bit lower than the internal one so it likely won't go as high. But you could always decouple the clock speeds using Nvidia Inspector and clock GPU0 higher than GPU1. MSI Afterburner can't seem to overclock the two cards individually.

    That statement about GPU OC headroom would probably be true if the cards were closer to their max operating temperature but they're so far away I don't know if it matters at all. I think the only thing that can make this GPU go higher is more voltage, which not to sound redundant wouldn't bet the best thing for an already too-hot CPU. ;)
     
  6. klebs89

    klebs89 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    I did a quick Google on this topic and the consensus seemed to be that there was no point to running differently clocked cards in SLI since they would both operate at the lower frequency. Do you know if there is a point to OC'ing the two card asynchronously?

    I'm asking essentially out of pure interest, I like to leave a little stability headroom on my OC's anyway.
     
  7. octiceps

    octiceps Nimrod

    Reputations:
    3,146
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    4,193
    Trophy Points:
    431
    Actually as of Kepler the two cards can operate just fine at different frequencies since GPU Boost is designed to scale clock speed according to workload. I was able to run my two cards at different clocks before without problems. Not sure if there is any point though.
     
  8. klebs89

    klebs89 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Makes sense, I think all the stuff I saw referred to previous architectures.
     
  9. bamselinen

    bamselinen Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5

    Can you tell me how to push the OC on both card if i am using SLI is there a line i need to add to the bat file..??
     
  10. Character Zero

    Character Zero Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    41
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Yeah look at this one posted a couple of pages back:
    Notice you have basically repeating lines with the difference being a "1" or a "0" (see bolded numbers). The "0" is the internal card and the "1" is the ultrabay card.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page