Overclock.net banner

[VC] GALAX overclocks GTX 1080 to 2.2 GHz on air, 2.5 GHz with LN2

12K views 104 replies 64 participants last post by  KarathKasun 
#1 ·
http://videocardz.com/60923/galax-overclocks-gtx-1080-to-2-2-ghz-on-air-2-5-ghz-with-ln2
Quote:
According to Mad Tse, the 8-pin power connector design on reference design is not really a limitation for overclocking. The reference board is using different components than custom designs. MAD points out that reference cards are most likely using locked BIOS. He also mentions that his card was using increased voltage up to 1.3V, which is not possible on reference cards.

While the 2.5 GHz clock he achieved using LN2 cooling is already impressive, it's not really as important as the clock achieved using air-cooling only. GALAX HOF GTX 1080 is supposedly able to overclock up to 2.2 GHz, without any extreme modifications.

However it is uncertain if NVIDIA approved this card design and its unlocked BIOS, so we don't know if retail cards will be able to achieve similar frequencies.
 
#5 ·
now its a big ordeal to just hit 2.2k lmao

pascal is pretty funny

Nvidia casually show 2.1k on a FE saying yeh well we just picked a random card and overclocked it for 10 mins

here you go guys! 2 x faster

this time round has shown Nvidia being very sleazy and deceiving

now people are getting hyped for 2.2k?

- NVIDIA overclocks the card for you to near max

- call reference card founders charge $100 extra

- aftermarket cards start at $599 but Nvidia has already the price @ 699

- bios hardware locked

- most cards not getting waterblocks, more restrictions

- new sli bridge not compatible with EK blocks

- use only a 8 pin on FE forces ppl to buy aftermarket close to the FE price but no waterblock support

- weaker cores, not much increase when overclocking

am I the only one seeing this
 
#7 ·
GALAX OVERCLOCKS TO 2.2GHZ ON AIR !!! WOHOO!!

In before the thermal throttling and thermal shutdowns, artifacts and such.
 
#8 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asus11 View Post

now its a big ordeal to just hit 2.2k lmao

pascal is pretty funny

Nvidia casually show 2.1k on a FE saying yeh well we just picked a random card and overclocked it for 10 mins

here you go guys! 2 x faster

this time round has shown Nvidia being very sleazy and deceiving

now people are getting hyped for 2.2k?

- NVIDIA overclocks the card for you to near max

- call reference card founders charge $100 extra

- aftermarket cards start at $599 but Nvidia has already the price @ 699

- bios hardware locked

- most cards not getting waterblocks, more restrictions

- new sli bridge not compatible with EK blocks

- use only a 8 pin on FE forces ppl to buy aftermarket close to the FE price but no waterblock support

- weaker cores, not much increase when overclocking

am I the only one seeing this
Other people are claiming around around 2.1Ghz on the founders edition card too. Hitting 2.1Ghz doesn't seem to be that rare at least among review samples. What we does seem to be true at the moment however is that people aren't getting much more that ever, regardless of the fancy aftermarket boards being used.
 
#9 ·
You guys have short memories. Before gtx 9 series an 11% overclocks on a GPU was considered very good. I can't remember a radeon graphics card, except perhaps a souped up 4890, that saw much more than 15% overclocking. On the green team, you have to go back to the 8800GTX days to find something comparable to the 980ti. The GTX 4 and 5 series in particular ran hot and didn't see much extra on the top end.

It's a good 25% faster than the 980ti and it is obvious that a TI addition with more cores and faster memory will come out eventually. I would say enthusiasts are doing pretty good so far
thumb.gif
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by mothergoose729 View Post

You guys have short memories. Before gtx 9 series an 11% overclocks on a GPU was considered very good. I can't remember a radeon graphics card, except perhaps a souped up 4890, that saw much more than 15% overclocking. On the green team, you have to go back to the 8800GTX days to find something comparable to the 980ti. The GTX 4 and 5 series in particular ran hot and didn't see much extra on the top end.

It's a good 25% faster than the 980ti and it is obvious that a TI addition with more cores and faster memory will come out eventually. I would say enthusiasts are doing pretty good so far
thumb.gif
Gtx 470 overclocked from 600 to 700+ and gtx 460 could easily go from 600 to 800 Mhz from what i remember, 260 also had some overclocking potential from what i remember.
 
#12 ·
What I want to see is the performance gain
Quote:
Originally Posted by mothergoose729 View Post

You guys have short memories. Before gtx 9 series an 11% overclocks on a GPU was considered very good. I can't remember a radeon graphics card, except perhaps a souped up 4890, that saw much more than 15% overclocking. On the green team, you have to go back to the 8800GTX days to find something comparable to the 980ti. The GTX 4 and 5 series in particular ran hot and didn't see much extra on the top end.

It's a good 25% faster than the 980ti and it is obvious that a TI addition with more cores and faster memory will come out eventually. I would say enthusiasts are doing pretty good so far
thumb.gif
What! The 7970/50 (I think +250-300Mhz) overclocked like a beast, and its why the 7970 ghz edition came out. The 7870/50 was a beast too (I think +300Mhz) and it also had the Ghz edition come out later.

Pascal chips are already fully overclocked and there isn't much left in the tank from every review we saw.. Sure there will be a few (rare) cherry picked golden cards that will overclock to 2.5ghz on LN2. But I think best case is water@2.2ghz at a cost
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelius View Post

Gtx 470 overclocked from 600 to 700+ and gtx 460 could easily go from 600 to 800 Mhz from what i remember, 260 also had some overclocking potential from what i remember.
true but most of the 4xx cards were downclocked due to power and heat use .
560ti yeah that was a great clocker

260 were pretty sucky even the ones with i2c it was more cooling for those beside some custom cards.

anyone to complain about clocks from Pascal is really just grasping at nothing

its like so many cards have been able to hit 2ooo on the core
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by mothergoose729 View Post

You guys have short memories. Before gtx 9 series an 11% overclocks on a GPU was considered very good. I can't remember a radeon graphics card, except perhaps a souped up 4890, that saw much more than 15% overclocking. On the green team, you have to go back to the 8800GTX days to find something comparable to the 980ti. The GTX 4 and 5 series in particular ran hot and didn't see much extra on the top end.

It's a good 25% faster than the 980ti and it is obvious that a TI addition with more cores and faster memory will come out eventually. I would say enthusiasts are doing pretty good so far
thumb.gif
My GTX 560 Ti 448 was clocked @ 900mhz that's a 20% OC i think.

EDIT: i think the point is that Maxwell set a standard for OC and people are let down by the limits on Pascal.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by mothergoose729 View Post

You guys have short memories. Before gtx 9 series an 11% overclocks on a GPU was considered very good. I can't remember a radeon graphics card, except perhaps a souped up 4890, that saw much more than 15% overclocking. On the green team, you have to go back to the 8800GTX days to find something comparable to the 980ti. The GTX 4 and 5 series in particular ran hot and didn't see much extra on the top end.

It's a good 25% faster than the 980ti and it is obvious that a TI addition with more cores and faster memory will come out eventually. I would say enthusiasts are doing pretty good so far
thumb.gif
? .. Who has the short memories again?

The R9 200 series get over 20%, and the 7000 series could get like 60% overclocks..

It's also "only" 10 - 15% faster on average OC to OC above a 980T, don't know where you're getting 25%. The misinformation is strong with your post.
 
#16 ·
Sounds like you all would've been much happier if NVIDIA had sold them at 1600MHz and then you'd all be like, "WOW, a stunning 600MHz overclock! What a winner NVIDIA has on their hands."

NVIDIA made it pretty clear...they're using 16nm FinFETs to help them push their stock clocks very high.
 
#17 ·
Quote:
While the 2.5 GHz clock he achieved using LN2 cooling is already impressive
um...no thats actually really bad on Ln2. it should be like 8ghz on Ln2. that means Pascal is basically maxed OC already and its got a hard heat/frequency wall (not like a normal exponential curved wall).

now, time to see what AMD Polaris clocks like.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

NVIDIA made it pretty clear...they're using 16nm FinFETs to help them push their stock clocks very high.
So ignorant consumers can be swayed by the bigger numbers even though clock for clock Pascal is inferior to Maxwell...
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slomo4shO View Post

So ignorant consumers can be swayed by the bigger numbers even though clock for clock Pascal is inferior to Maxwell...
Clock for clock is irrelevant here. I'd love to see any Maxwell card hit 2GHz on air. Get outta here with that "argument", lol. Clock for clock is only relevant with Intel CPUs because from Sandy Bridge to Skylake, they all can hit the same frequencies.

I have absolutely ZERO idea why "clock for clock" is at all relevant comparing between GPU generations.

--

However, I agree that architecturally, NVIDIA did very little with Pascal. But, I'm buying frames, not architectures, lol.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Ghoxt
#21 ·
Pascal at 2.2 Ghz is not much of a jump from even 2Ghz in performance.
 
#22 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikjadoon View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slomo4shO View Post

So ignorant consumers can be swayed by the bigger numbers even though clock for clock Pascal is inferior to Maxwell...
Clock for clock is irrelevant here. I'd love to see any Maxwell card hit 2GHz on air. Get outta here with that "argument", lol. Clock for clock is only relevant with Intel CPUs because from Sandy Bridge to Skylake, they all can hit the same frequencies.

I have absolutely ZERO idea why "clock for clock" is at all relevant comparing between GPU generations.

--

However, I agree that architecturally, NVIDIA did very little with Pascal. But, I'm buying frames, not architectures, lol.
Case in point
rolleyes.gif
 
#23 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelius View Post

Gtx 470 overclocked from 600 to 700+ and gtx 460 could easily go from 600 to 800 Mhz from what i remember, 260 also had some overclocking potential from what i remember.
Had three 470's and all of them could hit 800MHz with a touch of voltage, one of them stock voltaged 800 which I benched at 850 without too much of a voltage bump. That card could had done 900+ which wasn't really uncommon either. 607 to 900 on the rarer side but 800 was very common.
Not sure what that equates to in percentage but it's beyond 11 percent.
 
#25 ·
Performance gain is percentage based so a lower clock going from 500-700mhz is significantly more of a performance leap than something that leaps from 1.7 to 2.1ghz. In terms of overclocking based on how far you can push something the 1080 is a disappointment.
 
#26 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asus11 View Post

now its a big ordeal to just hit 2.2k lmao

pascal is pretty funny

Nvidia casually show 2.1k on a FE saying yeh well we just picked a random card and overclocked it for 10 mins

here you go guys! 2 x faster

this time round has shown Nvidia being very sleazy and deceiving

now people are getting hyped for 2.2k?

- NVIDIA overclocks the card for you to near max

- call reference card founders charge $100 extra

- aftermarket cards start at $599 but Nvidia has already the price @ 699

- bios hardware locked

- most cards not getting waterblocks, more restrictions

- new sli bridge not compatible with EK blocks

- use only a 8 pin on FE forces ppl to buy aftermarket close to the FE price but no waterblock support

- weaker cores, not much increase when overclocking

am I the only one seeing this
Not sure where you saw most cards not getting blocks

Straight from EK
Quote:
Originally Posted by EK_tiborrr View Post

Guys, relax, all other regular top brands will get their water blocks, like always
smile.gif
thumb.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by traxtech View Post

Will the 1080 ek block line up 100 percent with the titan x ek block? Block arrived today but no card until tomorrow so can't test it lol. Im out of petg lol
100% + 1%
thumb.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogga View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PandaSPUR View Post

I'm hoping to see an announcement from EK soon about making blocks for the ASUS Strix 1080 ;D

There have been EK blocks for all the past Strix cards, so once I see an announcement for sure, I'm getting EK + Strix for sure. Muahaha.
If you try the configurator you'll see that it says "Coming soon"...
smile.gif
EVGA FTW and classy won't due to not selling blocks well in the past and EVGA going elsewhere for blocks for the hydrocopper but all others should have blocks.

EK is also making a SLI bridge that fits with their blocks ( both in fitment and style) you could also use old style bridges.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top