6800GT oc'ing.... better

[DKlein]

Just got my 6800GT OC today, and it's doing fine. It came from BFG with the core already bumped to 370. I've managed to get the memory to 1.1GHz without any problems (and that's in a quite hot room mind you). This is with the 6.1.7.1 beta drivers. Unfortunately the only really demanding game I have right now is BFV and I'm in the process of downloading 3DMark (new computer) so I can't give you guys a very thorough picture of what it's like.

In BFV I've managed to get ~35-40FPS avg. (~20-5FPS low) with graphics high, 1280x1024x32, AA4x AF8x, High Quality, optimizations off. With AA8xS, AF16x I can get maybe ~24FPS avg. Also there are slight slowdowns (12FPS for ~.1s) when turning fast, but that might be some other part of my system or the game itself. The optimizations seem to make a significant difference in FPS. Although I can't turn them on with the new drivers, with the orignals the Tri opt made about a 6FPS difference, maybe more (and I didn't really notice the tri change). Oh yes, and the graphics look amazing, but then again I'm upgrading from a GeForce3 Ti 200, so just about anything made in the last two years would have the same effect

The specs:
Abit NF7-S r2
AMD XP-M 2600+ 2.53GHz (will be 2.55 when I get my NB cooler)
OCZ 1GB DDR422 (2.5-3-3-7)
BFG 6800GT OC

So how's everyone else doing with their GT's - any more oc results? I'll post my 3DMark score when I get it dl'd.

 

[nitromullet]

Not bad, have you gotten the core above 370?

So how's everyone else doing with their GT's

...I think most people are still waiting for theirs', I know my BFG 6800 Ultra just got delayed about 14 more days. <sigh>

 

[Evdawg]

congrats, i bet youre having fun =)

I want one bad... i checked gameve.com and it said shipping tomorrow (30th). Do you think this is going to be delayed as well?

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: DKlein
In BFV I've managed to get ~35-40FPS avg. (~20-5FPS low)

5fps? ugh. well i am glad you are happy anyway.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: DKlein
In BFV I've managed to get ~35-40FPS avg. (~20-5FPS low)

5fps? ugh. well i am glad you are happy anyway.

Who wouldn't be happy with that?

 

[Acanthus]

Thats 1280x1024 4x8x though on bfv, a very intensive game.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: DKlein
In BFV I've managed to get ~35-40FPS avg. (~20-5FPS low)

5fps? ugh. well i am glad you are happy anyway.

Who wouldn't be happy with that?

Many people. There is NO WAY I would play a game getting 5fps in heavy battle. You cant move, and you get killed. There is no chance I would play at that speed.

 

[TStep]

I could be wrong, but I think he meant:

~20-25FPS low

 

[magratton]

Originally posted by: TStep
I could be wrong, but I think he meant:

~20-25FPS low

 

[LTC8K6]

Yeah, but where's the good overclock?

 

[caz67]

Nice card.!!!

Im still waiting for my 6800 Utra keeps getting delayed.

 

[Marsumane]

So you have a good memory oc. How about core? Keep us updated on the core oc. Im very interested in this card seeing how i also have a GF3TI200 (@ 204/481)

 

[Dman877]

IS BFV a demanding game with high quality graphics (like Farcry) or is it just poorly coded? The screenshots I've seen don't look that special and I've never played any of the BF series (I do have BF1942 though, just never installed /shrug).

 

[Evdawg]

Originally posted by: Marsumane
So you have a good memory oc. How about core? Keep us updated on the core oc. Im very interested in this card seeing how i also have a GF3TI200 (@ 204/481)

hahaha what??

He has a 6800, totally different gpu architechture and.. wow, thats not even near your gf3

 

[GeneralGrievous]

50 mhz on the memory is not very impressive. Are the chips 2.0 ns?

 

[DKlein]

Well I've gotten it up to 1.12GHz now, but am holding off any more overclocking until my 90 degree room cools down. I'm going to start with the core after I'm done overclocking the memory, so I guess you'll just have to wait for those results.

Evdawg, I'm pretty sure he was referring to the GF3 I had before this

So is BFV a demanding game? I'd say so, but then again I've been playing it on a GF3. The game did cripple that card though - I'd say about 20FPS avg, 7FPS low, @1024x768x16, all settings lowest. The game also looks much nicer with AF enabled (has to be forced). AA really takes it out of this card on this game though. The only game I can really compare it to right now is America's Army, which this card does pretty well in - about 60FPS avg ultra high, 1280x768x32, AA8xS, AF16x, opt off on the newest levels.

I have been having some BFV crahes lately, but that started before I get the GT (and has continued now that I have it). I'm not sure what's causing it - my other oc'd parts or the game itself. I torture tested my system before playing, and it passed 55 hours P95 and SETI, plus Memtest86 tests, and I've clocked it down a bit since the crashes started, so I'm not sure what's the problem. I'm getting a new HS for the NB, and hoping that will clear the problem up.

So here are some quite large screen shots from BFV, judge for yourselves how demanding this game would be:

Here's an AA 4x vs 8xS comparison: AA
Here's a couple shots of the game at AA8xS, AF18x SS1
Here's a shot at AA4x, AF8x SS2

 

[Acanthus]

It sounds like you have to format to resolve software issues... your machine could quite literally be crippled.

 

[DKlein]

I have been considering that and if the NB solution doesn't work, that's my next step.

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: Dman877
IS BFV a demanding game with high quality graphics (like Farcry) or is it just poorly coded? The screenshots I've seen don't look that special and I've never played any of the BF series (I do have BF1942 though, just never installed /shrug).

BFV is demanding, but also poorly coded. I've done a series of benchmarks with BFV on my 5900XT which another person was nice enough to HTML-ify and host for me:

http://home.insightbb.com/~dgramlin/wsb/html/battlefield_vietnam_benchmarks.htm

If you run with graphics highest (full DX9 + shaders) then the framerates fluctuate a LOT. With the 5900XT at 1024x768 I as averaging close to 50 FPS, but would dip into the LOW TEENS under certain conditions. Pretty unacceptable.

The in-game video options are totally cryptic too. For instance, there is no setting for the distance at which people are drawn ("view distance" or "person view distance") Instead the very generic sounding "Geometry" setting controls this, along with who knows what else.

The gameplay is great, but there are a lot of issues with the coding that are a problem. The sound mixing is way off (you can hear a tank driving further away than you can hear a gunshot.), the netcode appears to have some issues, there is qite a bit of fluctuation in the framerate, the game balance is still being tweaked, etc...

Even with the issues though, BFV is a GREAT game. I've been playing FPS games since Castle Wolfenstein (original, not RTCW) and Doom, and I haven't been as addicted to a FPS game since Q2CTF. The team aspect and diversity in terms of player kits and vehicles really brings a level of strategy and complexity that simply does not exist in any other game.

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: DKlein

I have been having some BFV crahes lately, but that started before I get the GT (and has continued now that I have it). I'm not sure what's causing it - my other oc'd parts or the game itself. I torture tested my system before playing, and it passed 55 hours P95 and SETI, plus Memtest86 tests, and I've clocked it down a bit since the crashes started, so I'm not sure what's the problem. I'm getting a new HS for the NB, and hoping that will clear the problem up.

My AXP 2500+ would run fine over 2300MHz for all the traditional torture tests, but would cause BFV to CTD (crash to desktop). Turning down to the 2250 range solved all my CTD issues.

BFV is probably one of the least CPU intensive games of the newer games out right now, so I wouldn't feel bad about backing down the MHz on your CPU if it solves your crashing issues.

 

[CraigRT]

just recently got my 9800 Pro, thanks very much!

I like these new NV cards, tough call between ATI and NV for my next upgrade in the future...

 

[DKlein]

If you run with graphics highest (full DX9 + shaders) then the framerates fluctuate a LOT. With the 5900XT at 1024x768 I as averaging close to 50 FPS, but would dip into the LOW TEENS under certain conditions. Pretty unacceptable.

I get about the same thing happening (but not as bad), I was wondering if it was just me... I guess not.

The problem is that the only two games I really play right now are BFV and AA, both of which are just buggy as hell. I guess I'll hold off on reformatting since I'm not the only one having problems. I just wish the EA forum for this had a search function so I could find out about this. Any demos you guys suggest for trying out OC settings on - I want to make sure that the software isn't what's messing things up.

 

[Concillian]

You actually use the EA forums.... I feel sorry for you.
The EA forums are not only incredibly difficult to navigate effectively, they are also low on good content.

try the
www.planetbattlefield.com
forums instead
http://www.forumplanet.com/planetbattlefield/index.asp

Content is better, and the formatting is WAY better.

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: DKlein

Any demos you guys suggest for trying out OC settings on - I want to make sure that the software isn't what's messing things up.

For a VERY quick first pass at what is possible I use this program:

DX9 Real-Time High-Dynamic Range Image-Based Lighting Version 1.2
http://www.daionet.gr.jp/~masa/rthdribl/

You can run it in a window and use the coolbits tool to increase speeds. As settings get too high, you'll start seeing artifacts right away. Then you start looping 3Dmark2003 or game demos to test stability over time... I think UT2004 demo has benchmarking capability built in, but I don't know about looping.

That program really helps to take small steps, and still get into the ballpark of your capability pretty quick.

 

[SickBeast]

I would consider 400mhz on the core of that chip to be a "good" overclock, and anything beyond that would be stellar. 370mhz is just ok, nothing special.