Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › [Online] 600 Series Firmware Modifier - Version: 0.7
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Online] 600 Series Firmware Modifier - Version: 0.7 - Page 21

post #201 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by iRandomize View Post

Basically, you can set the limit as high as you want to. But at some point you will be limited by the amount of power physically being delivered to the board. Try upping the limit to 200% and see what happens.

145% seems a bit high though. It equals about 250watt (especially when the 670 cards only get 225watts delivered in total)

When that is said, the boost is not only based on TDP and Temperatures, the GPU monitors several other things around the board. I believe nVidia said 8 things, but don't quote me on that :S

thanks!

ouch, so that would mean that card starts throttling not only because of closing to set TDP limit, but also too avoid going above 225W ... let me guess ... ~135% TDP = 225W??
yeah, it is kinda strange the card even goes that high while the primary card does only 117% ... strange ... I start suspecting that both cards are not of exactly same hardware design (possible revised design of second card?).

I may try re-flashing it with 200% TDP limit and see how that goes in testing, at least that would rule out one possibility. thermal is no problem (max 55C ever under highest load) ... that leaves about 6 other unknown conditions to look into LOL ...

... also wondering if perhaps nvidia driver has anything to do with it ... maybe 313 WHQL could fix a few things, but it's not out yet.

also those cards behave differently in SLI while running on stock OEM firmware, not sure why, but surely they are not identical in overclockability ... maybe changes go deeper.
post #202 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by feniks View Post

thanks!

ouch, so that would mean that card starts throttling not only because of closing to set TDP limit, but also too avoid going above 225W ... let me guess ... ~135% TDP = 225W??
yeah, it is kinda strange the card even goes that high while the primary card does only 117% ... strange ... I start suspecting that both cards are not of exactly same hardware design (possible revised design of second card?).

I may try re-flashing it with 200% TDP limit and see how that goes in testing, at least that would rule out one possibility. thermal is no problem (max 55C ever under highest load) ... that leaves about 6 other unknown conditions to look into LOL ...

... also wondering if perhaps nvidia driver has anything to do with it ... maybe 313 WHQL could fix a few things, but it's not out yet.

also those cards behave differently in SLI while running on stock OEM firmware, not sure why, but surely they are not identical in overclockability ... maybe changes go deeper.

Judging by your signature, they are both reference cards, hence, they should be exactly the same. The 313 drivers does nothing for me in terms of power usage or overclock.

Are you flashing the same BIOS to each card? if not, then try flashing the BIOS of the working card, to the "malfunctioning" card (by malfunction, i mean weird...)
post #203 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by iRandomize View Post

Judging by your signature, they are both reference cards, hence, they should be exactly the same. The 313 drivers does nothing for me in terms of power usage or overclock.

Are you flashing the same BIOS to each card? if not, then try flashing the BIOS of the working card, to the "malfunctioning" card (by malfunction, i mean weird...)

"judging by your signature they are both same"? smile.gif LOL, c'mon, I own them and can tell you they are both reference design of PCB, but since they were bought 6 months apart I suspect a revision (or some kind of malfunction on secondary card), because both cards behave in a slightly different manner on same stock BIOS, and I'm not talking about offset required to reach the same clock. I'm talking about TDP requirement going along with effective clock under load and the way each of cards power throttles (it's different) at same clock under load.

even though both cards reach similar maximum stable effective overclocks (not same of course), then even at lower common clock they run on different TDP (tested separately).
similar thing happens if both cards are flashed with same vmodded BIOS... I believe there is so many variables coming into play with Keplers that it's making it near impossible to have 2 identical 600 series cards behaving the same way unfortunately ... that being said, it's also possible that one of cards could be somewhat malfunctioning at higher clocks (TDP getting too high without logical reason) while still being stable under stress.

I tested 313 beta drivers and they were horrible for SLI. I was talking about 313 WHQL, which is not out yet.
post #204 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by feniks View Post

thanks!

ouch, so that would mean that card starts throttling not only because of closing to set TDP limit, but also too avoid going above 225W ... let me guess ... ~135% TDP = 225W??
yeah, it is kinda strange the card even goes that high while the primary card does only 117% ... strange ... I start suspecting that both cards are not of exactly same hardware design (possible revised design of second card?).

also those cards behave differently in SLI while running on stock OEM firmware, not sure why, but surely they are not identical in overclockability ... maybe changes go deeper.

Stock (reference) 100 = ~143W. If you use the tools to change it then 142 = ~200W. That's your card limit anyhow, different value that I don't think is changed by the tools and like iRandomize says you're still restricted to 225W even if you did set both values beyond that 200W limit in the first place .. put 200 there and let us know if it helps, I'm going to guess nope unfortunately - you're still going to start seeing throttling when you hit above 142.

For my card (SC+ 4GB) which are reference based, I believe there's been at least 3 PCB revisions, you can see a value on the card that says APCB and then numbers and I think the last one is year-week. I asked EVGA about this but I never heard back - reason I was interested was because in the early days they were exchanging these cards to FTW for free. Of course if you didn't ask / know, you didn't get it and no specific detail about PCB revision numbers was around (still isn't). There's a thread here about the FTW having had PCB revision occur on it too. So like you assume, I'm going to bet you have 2 different PCBs (though this alone shouldn't be a problem).

Like you (both my cards are same PBC revision - if that number is infact that), I see a TDP difference but we're talking few percentages which sort of works with the GPU-Z ASIC value (useless but sort of implies this) .. that you're seeing around 30% difference under the same condititions sounds 'wrong'. You running the newest vBIOS on them (or modded one of this)?

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1703680

So .. after that wall of text, sorry no real fix but hopefully you can find a reason at least.
Just a 'puter
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 6700K ASUS Maximus VIII Hero iGPU thanks to Nvidia 970 3.5GB Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK8GX4M2B3200C16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 950 PRO 512GB Crucial M4 256GB RX360 V3 Koolance CPU-380I 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Koolance RP-452X2 Reservoir Koolance PMP-450 12V Variable Speed Pump Windows 10 Pro x64 benq XL2411Z 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
logitech G510 Seasonic X-760 Corsair 800D Mionix Castor 
AudioAudio
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD DT 990 Premium 250Ohm 
  hide details  
Reply
Just a 'puter
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 6700K ASUS Maximus VIII Hero iGPU thanks to Nvidia 970 3.5GB Corsair Vengeance LPX CMK8GX4M2B3200C16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 950 PRO 512GB Crucial M4 256GB RX360 V3 Koolance CPU-380I 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Koolance RP-452X2 Reservoir Koolance PMP-450 12V Variable Speed Pump Windows 10 Pro x64 benq XL2411Z 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
logitech G510 Seasonic X-760 Corsair 800D Mionix Castor 
AudioAudio
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD DT 990 Premium 250Ohm 
  hide details  
Reply
post #205 of 256
thanks for the numbers or sort of confirmation that what I was suspecting is possible and justified (on different model I know). will need to contact EVGA and let them confirm (by serial numbers) if different PCB designs are in fact the case here.

on my part I will also test the cards separately again at same offsets (just like they run in SLI), even tho water cooled I can easily do that by turning of unwanted PCIe slot (kill switches on board) and unplugging power from card on each card in turn.

running my own stock BIOS (4B UEFI enabled), currently vmodded, same on both cards.

will also try raising TDP limit to 200%, but as you I doubt it changes anything since card can be limiting voltage/power once it tries going above 200W regardless of software/BIOS limit on TDP.

will be back with findings in a few days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by error-id10t View Post

Stock (reference) 100 = ~143W. If you use the tools to change it then 142 = ~200W. That's your card limit anyhow, different value that I don't think is changed by the tools and like iRandomize says you're still restricted to 225W even if you did set both values beyond that 200W limit in the first place .. put 200 there and let us know if it helps, I'm going to guess nope unfortunately - you're still going to start seeing throttling when you hit above 142.

For my card (SC+ 4GB) which are reference based, I believe there's been at least 3 PCB revisions, you can see a value on the card that says APCB and then numbers and I think the last one is year-week. I asked EVGA about this but I never heard back - reason I was interested was because in the early days they were exchanging these cards to FTW for free. Of course if you didn't ask / know, you didn't get it and no specific detail about PCB revision numbers was around (still isn't). There's a thread here about the FTW having had PCB revision occur on it too. So like you assume, I'm going to bet you have 2 different PCBs (though this alone shouldn't be a problem).

Like you (both my cards are same PBC revision - if that number is infact that), I see a TDP difference but we're talking few percentages which sort of works with the GPU-Z ASIC value (useless but sort of implies this) .. that you're seeing around 30% difference under the same condititions sounds 'wrong'. You running the newest vBIOS on them (or modded one of this)?

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1703680

So .. after that wall of text, sorry no real fix but hopefully you can find a reason at least.
post #206 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by error-id10t View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Stock (reference) 100 = ~143W. If you use the tools to change it then 142 = ~200W. That's your card limit anyhow, different value that I don't think is changed by the tools and like iRandomize says you're still restricted to 225W even if you did set both values beyond that 200W limit in the first place .. put 200 there and let us know if it helps, I'm going to guess nope unfortunately - you're still going to start seeing throttling when you hit above 142.

For my card (SC+ 4GB) which are reference based, I believe there's been at least 3 PCB revisions, you can see a value on the card that says APCB and then numbers and I think the last one is year-week. I asked EVGA about this but I never heard back - reason I was interested was because in the early days they were exchanging these cards to FTW for free. Of course if you didn't ask / know, you didn't get it and no specific detail about PCB revision numbers was around (still isn't). There's a thread here about the FTW having had PCB revision occur on it too. So like you assume, I'm going to bet you have 2 different PCBs (though this alone shouldn't be a problem).

Like you (both my cards are same PBC revision - if that number is infact that), I see a TDP difference but we're talking few percentages which sort of works with the GPU-Z ASIC value (useless but sort of implies this) .. that you're seeing around 30% difference under the same condititions sounds 'wrong'. You running the newest vBIOS on them (or modded one of this)?

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1703680

So .. after that wall of text, sorry no real fix but hopefully you can find a reason at least.

Has anyone actually seen any hardware changes on the reference PCB yet? Usually it is all over the forums, when a single component on the PCB is changed (eg. when EVGA removed 8 capacitors from their FTW card, people found out in a matter of days). Also, does the default TDP vary from reference card to reference card, depending on the manufacturer? MSI's reference card has a default TDP of 100%=175w, and i though that would match all cards, but obviously not :S.

Also, people often claims that although the power designs are only specified to run 75watt from each 6-pin power connector, the board can actually draw more power? Is there any truth to this?
post #207 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by V3DT View Post


Images of version: 0.3

Some cards might have firmware that is to different and can't work with this site currently and in that case it should should let you know something is wrong or not found in the firmware you uploaded.

Warnings! (Click to show)
Modifying your firmware may void your warranty.
I am not responsible for any damages that may occur.
Use at your own risk. If something looks off do not use it.

I recommend not flashing your video card unless you have a back up GPU on hand so you can reflash back to stock if something goes wrong.

If you do use this site to modify your firmware, please leave feedback here.

Card model:
Firmware version:
Comments:

Change Log (Click to show)
Version: 0.1
1. First public version online for testing.

Update: Version: 0.2
1. Now shows default clock, boost clock, and max clock.
2. Cleaned up the code a bit and fixed some server side warnings.

Update: Version: 0.3
1. Fixed checksum issue with negative values.
2. Added file naming box next to download button.

Update: version: 0.4
1. Added support for 660 non ti "power target" values.
2. Added support for 680 "power target" values.
3. Fixed "Replace Max Clock" description.

Update: version: 0.5
1. Added option to change the default boost clock by up to 52MHz.
2. Added support for 690 "power target" values.
3. Fixed "power target" showing on unsupported firmware and corrupting the firmware with invalid data.
4. You can now remodify firmware that has been modified by this tool.
5. Added default clock, boost clock, and max clock read out of the modified firmware on the review and download page.

Update: version: 0.6
1. Replaced "Replace Max Clock and "Boost Clock" with "Max Clock" (Allows up to change the max boost clock by up to 52MHz)
2. Fixed reading voltage table with 680 firmware.

Update: version: 0.7
1. Fixed checksum fix - (Corrected wrong variable that was messed up since version 0.3)
2. Added string length check. (Checks the original firmware with the modified version to make sure the size is the same, if not you will get a error message and will not be able to download the modified firmware)
3. Added modified firmware check. (If you attempt to use firmware modified with the tool once before you will get a error message telling you to use the original)
Known Issues (Click to show)
Version: 0.6
...


http://www.v3dt.com/nvidia/600/


Could you add a description of what each setting does either to the site or the first post on this thread?

I am not sure what voltage table 1 and table 2 mean.
Silence
(20 items)
 
Secondary Rig
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7-5820k  ASRock x99 extreme 4 AMD R9 290X AMD R9 290X 
RAMHard DriveCoolingCooling
ballistix ddr4 dual channel Samsung 850 EVO 500GB DT 5noz CPU Waterblock XSPC Razor Full Cover GPU Block 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Razor Full Cover GPU Block 4x120 Black Ice Xtreme GTX480 Swiftech MCP655 Danger Den Monsoon Pump/Reservoir 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair Link Fan Controller Windows 8.1 Nixeus 2560x1440 Logitech G15 
PowerMouseMouse PadAudio
Kingwin PF-850 Ttesports Level10M Razer Vespula Sennheiser HD590 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500k gigabyte z68xp-ud4 Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 Gaming DDR3 1600 4x2GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Velociraptor 300GB w/ Intel RST... Corsair H100 Windows 8.1 1920x1200 HP 
Power
PC P+C 1000w 
  hide details  
Reply
Silence
(20 items)
 
Secondary Rig
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7-5820k  ASRock x99 extreme 4 AMD R9 290X AMD R9 290X 
RAMHard DriveCoolingCooling
ballistix ddr4 dual channel Samsung 850 EVO 500GB DT 5noz CPU Waterblock XSPC Razor Full Cover GPU Block 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
XSPC Razor Full Cover GPU Block 4x120 Black Ice Xtreme GTX480 Swiftech MCP655 Danger Den Monsoon Pump/Reservoir 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair Link Fan Controller Windows 8.1 Nixeus 2560x1440 Logitech G15 
PowerMouseMouse PadAudio
Kingwin PF-850 Ttesports Level10M Razer Vespula Sennheiser HD590 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500k gigabyte z68xp-ud4 Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 Gaming DDR3 1600 4x2GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Velociraptor 300GB w/ Intel RST... Corsair H100 Windows 8.1 1920x1200 HP 
Power
PC P+C 1000w 
  hide details  
Reply
post #208 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by iRandomize View Post

Has anyone actually seen any hardware changes on the reference PCB yet? Usually it is all over the forums, when a single component on the PCB is changed (eg. when EVGA removed 8 capacitors from their FTW card, people found out in a matter of days). Also, does the default TDP vary from reference card to reference card, depending on the manufacturer? MSI's reference card has a default TDP of 100%=175w, and i though that would match all cards, but obviously not :S.

Also, people often claims that although the power designs are only specified to run 75watt from each 6-pin power connector, the board can actually draw more power? Is there any truth to this?

I did some testing in SLI at both 0 offset and common stable offset (+120), on stock 4B BIOS. always the secondary card has a tendency of touching the TDP limit and getting power throttled even with Power Target 100%, the more frequent throttling the higher offset is dialed in. I don't get it.
haven't contacted EVGA about it yet, will do later on.

here's my thread in EVGA forums with screen shots from Heaven 3.0 and Precision X OSD:
http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?high=&m=1854844&mpage=1#1854844

those screen shots basically show the same thing as on vmodded BIOS, just the scale and magnitude of problem is smaller.
post #209 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by feniks View Post

I did some testing in SLI at both 0 offset and common stable offset (+120), on stock 4B BIOS. always the secondary card has a tendency of touching the TDP limit and getting power throttled even with Power Target 100%, the more frequent throttling the higher offset is dialed in. I don't get it.
haven't contacted EVGA about it yet, will do later on.

here's my thread in EVGA forums with screen shots from Heaven 3.0 and Precision X OSD:
http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?high=&m=1854844&mpage=1#1854844

those screen shots basically show the same thing as on vmodded BIOS, just the scale and magnitude of problem is smaller.

It is both odd and very interesting indeed. There sure is something wrong with the card. But the card is only promised to run at a certain clock speed, hence EVGA doesen't "need" to take it back and/or do something about it. But who knows, EVGA is THE most awesome GPU manufacturer!
post #210 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by iRandomize View Post

It is both odd and very interesting indeed. There sure is something wrong with the card. But the card is only promised to run at a certain clock speed, hence EVGA doesen't "need" to take it back and/or do something about it. But who knows, EVGA is THE most awesome GPU manufacturer!

yeah, it's odd, however it does that at stock clock too on stock BIOS when tested alone ... exactly same behavior, TDP going over board and power throttling (down to 1058MHz from "normal" 1097MHz ... and sometimes jumping up to 1124MHz which is odd) causing that card to effectively run at like 1.125v voltage, rarely goes up (because TDP limits it). trying to arrange for RMA with EVGA.
also sometimes I see rare sort of artifacts coming from this card, sort of a quick flash of a dark grey sqaure (or other geometrical shape) ... never happens with other card which also holds a solid clock, TDP and voltage at stock settings ...
Edited by feniks - 2/9/13 at 2:41pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: NVIDIA
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › [Online] 600 Series Firmware Modifier - Version: 0.7