I do believe you, since I am quite...I don't know if "disappointed" is the word (maybe it is). We have all heard the rumors that they are clocked very high as it is, due to being mid-range originally. But this means that power usage went down and performance went way up compared to the 580. I think after more drivers are released and maybe another version of Precision with more customization/control, we will start seeing more stable/frequent overclocks. Even though it's the end user that gets the short end of the stick, Nvidia seemingly chose a low temp as a limit. The power usage on these overclocks is hitting about 110-112%, and the user-defined limit can be set to 132%. I don't see why this limit is so high, yet the temp limits overclocks to only 112% power usage Wierd indeed, and again I hope it's addressed soon, because there is still a TON of overclock room when you see most so far hit no where near that 132% limit. But yeah this "660" was ~700mhz core originally (seemingly so, as evidenced by these below-average overclocks), and was released at 1000mhz. That right there, on top of the 100-150mhz OCs people are getting, and this chip is already running technically over 400mhz past its originally intended clock. There's definitely ups and downs to this card- a lot of good ups, and a few more downs than was hoped for. Again I think stock performance is an A+ improvement over the 580 and an A+ for keeping this new efficient architecture flagship at $500, though OC headroom diminished apparently with the bump up in the line-up of this chip. Damn AMD for setting the bar too low!! Totally kidding, don't look into that at all, really just a joke
I'm a bit disappointed as you are though, but there's a few good OCs on this thread, and I'm sure there will be more to come as drivers/software/work-arounds progress.
I have a different opinion. I believe Nvidia was going for a huge automatic overclock to really push thermals and electric usage down in many games that didn't need more power and in lower resolution setups,but decided that they need to clock it above the 7970 to begin with to beat it out of the box.
They never pushed up the core to sell it as top dog, etc. ( all FUD )
They calculated releasing it at ~700 core speed with +400 dynamic overclock would give the buying public the wrong impression losing the PR war.
We don't see a lot of 150+ OC higher end cores over the years as a rule of thumb, and you have to add in the 58+ auto-up turbo so @133 OC you're really at 198+ boosted.
So there's a few factors.
In other worlds, 700Mhz+ number for stock core with 400+ dynamic clock +boost wound up being the wrong thing to do.
Edited by SeanA - 3/31/12 at 1:01pm