ati and nvidia speed changes before release??

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Bad_Boy, Apr 16, 2004.

  1. jimmyjames123

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    810
    Likes Received:
    3
    The 50 series drivers allowed you to change core and memory frequency? I have a Ti4200, and have not even touched the 50 series "FX" drivers. Didn't want to risk it :D
     
  2. AlphaWolf

    AlphaWolf Specious Misanthrope
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    9,470
    Likes Received:
    1,686
    Location:
    Treading Water
    Hardocp has a screenshot of it in the 60.xx drivers.
     
  3. Bad_Boy

    Bad_Boy god of war.
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,355
    Likes Received:
    25
  4. Sandman

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix
    Check out the Aopen card, it only has 1 molex :shock: It's also the only one that deviates from the reference design. The pic looks legit too (as legit as any other on that page). Very interesting.



    btw, long time lurker, finally registered to point that out :D
     
  5. Diplo

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,474
    Likes Received:
    64
    Location:
    UK
    It was around in the Detonators when I had a GeForce 256 (you just needed to use the 'coolbits' registry tweak).
     
  6. DarN

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Norway
    Yes, I remember. They took out the need for coolbits with the FX5800 though.
     
  7. jolle

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is a off chance that its acctually a Non Ultra board perhaps..
    even tho they pass if off as a ultra when displaying it..
    Dunno, but if 2 molexes wasnt sortof important for stability, perhaps
    Nvidia wouldnt have bothered with it in the first place..
    or maybe you rarely acctually HAVE to use them both, they perhaps
    just put 2 there cause there is a risk it CAN get unstable if you rely
    on only 1.. hmmmmm, dunno...
     
  8. Psikotiko

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    errrr......Old prototype?
    Thats the same board that is in the MaximumPC preview.
     
  9. Bry

    Bry
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Found this over at Fururemark..Someone attended a leadteck public display of their 6800 nu card and had some 3dmark scores to back it..the posrt can be read here
    http://discuss.futuremark.com/forum...p;view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=1

    Here is what it says
    10285 is quite a bit lower than the scores we were seeing on the 400 MHz 6800U scores..also notice the core and mem clocks..Maybe this will put the rest the 6800NU being reviewed instead of the 8600U theories
     
  10. AlphaWolf

    AlphaWolf Specious Misanthrope
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    9,470
    Likes Received:
    1,686
    Location:
    Treading Water
    Well it is a bit, but better than I would expect for a part with 25% less less core clock and 4 less pipes. I guess maybe the fx53 would help some, but still.

    Edit: also odd that the pic in the link shows a card with dual molex connectors. I suppose it may not be the actual tested card.
     
  11. Bry

    Bry
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah I noticed that..Wonder if that means the Non Ultras are going to have two molex connectors too?? I do not think very many will be happy with that.
     
  12. Sandman

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix
    Yeah, it's on an Ultra's box, which really hints that it's an ultra. Maybe the redesign of the PCB was just enough to eliminate the need for the 2nd one?
     
  13. jolle

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    0
    That Futuremark link just above has a card with 2 molexes claiming to be
    a Non Ultra.. which might just be a clocked down Ultra to "emulate" the
    peformance of the Non Ultra, could be flashed with a NU BIOS to hide
    the extra pipelines or something, which would be cool cause then you
    can perhaps unlock them on a real Non Ultra..

    just as that card with 1 molex might be a Non Ultra in reality, they just
    put it next to a Ultra box while displaying it..
    maybe they screwed up, or didnt have a Non Ultra version ready at the
    time.. dunno.. but like you said, its also possible the fiddled around a bit
    and found a way to run it stable on 1 molex..
     
  14. Geeforcer

    Geeforcer Harmlessly Evil
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    525
    10000+ 3Dmark03 for NU? That seems rather impossible, considering that the card should have 56% fillrate of Ultra and Ultra scores ~12000. Unless 3dmark is CPU limited at default resolution, a 300MHz NU card should be scoring around 7000 based on fillrate drop alone.
     
  15. Tim Murray

    Tim Murray the Windom Earle of mobile SOCs
    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 25, 2003
    Messages:
    3,278
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Mountain View, CA
    Unless the NU clockspeeds are wrong and are actually higher than the Ultra.

    Uttar, you and I need to talk, by the way.
     
  16. jolle

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    0
    what if its a clocked down Ultra, still running 16 pipes..?
    Is fillrate really that much of a factor in 1024x786?
    the 4x AA is 7400, and with FSAA fillrate becomes more critical..

    EDIT
    this is a spicy meatball...
    http://www.albatron.com.tw/english/news/news_detail.asp?news_id=77
    600Mhz core.. that is a tad higher then 400Mhz on the review samples..
     
  17. DoS

    DoS
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2004
    Messages:
    152
    Likes Received:
    0
    3dmark gets the final score from the four game tests. Tests 2,3 and 4 are not only fill rate limited but shader limited too. It could be that at default resolution (1024x768) the increased shader throughput is more important than fill rate and therefore the relatively high score. Still if the non-ultra part scores with a similar speced CPU around 12000 i find it kind of difficult the NU part to score 10000 with 4 pipes and 100 mhz less on the core...
    Unless of course the Ultra is held back a lot by the lack of memory bandwidth in these tests :!:
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...