Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › Any sign of the 560 bios to try on a 460 yet??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Any sign of the 560 bios to try on a 460 yet?? - Page 26  

post #251 of 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post
NVIDIA is not using a GF104 and GF104b. It is the GF114.

I'm sorry, sir, but I beg to differ.



ON THE LEFT: 460 BIOS

ON THE RIGHT: 560 BIOS

Result: 104B
post #252 of 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by trinstac View Post
I'm sorry, sir, but I beg to differ.



ON THE LEFT: 460 BIOS

ON THE RIGHT: 560 BIOS

Result: 104B
That shows GF104 BOARD. I'm thinking that has to do with the PCB, not the GPU chip.
Junkyard
(18 items)
 
NAStradamous
(12 items)
 
HTPC01
(16 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 2320 @ 3.1GHz MSI B75MA-E33 HIS HD7970 3GB @ 1050 / 1700, 1.17v Patriot 2x4GB DDR3-1066 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial MX100 256GB WD Green 2TB DVDRW Corsair H50 Push / Pull 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
NZXT 120mm fans strapped to stock 7970 cooler Windows 10 Pro Dell 3007WFP Dell 2007FP 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell 2007FP Cheap Toshiba (R.I.P. Ducky) PC Power & Cooling Silencer MKIII 950w Cheap Garbage (free) 
MouseAudio
Logitech G602 Yardsale Special 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3330 Asus H61 MSI GTX 750Ti Low Profile 2x4GB Hynix DDR3-1333 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
60GB Kingston SSD 1TB Seagate Samsung DVDRW CoolerMaster Gemin II 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 + Steam Big Picture / Plex HT 50" Insignia LED 1080p Logitech Rosewill Green 530w 
CaseMouseAudioOther
Silverstone HTPC Logitech Pioneer 2.0 tower speakers + 135w RMS Rosewill MCE Remote 
  hide details  
Junkyard
(18 items)
 
NAStradamous
(12 items)
 
HTPC01
(16 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 2320 @ 3.1GHz MSI B75MA-E33 HIS HD7970 3GB @ 1050 / 1700, 1.17v Patriot 2x4GB DDR3-1066 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial MX100 256GB WD Green 2TB DVDRW Corsair H50 Push / Pull 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
NZXT 120mm fans strapped to stock 7970 cooler Windows 10 Pro Dell 3007WFP Dell 2007FP 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell 2007FP Cheap Toshiba (R.I.P. Ducky) PC Power & Cooling Silencer MKIII 950w Cheap Garbage (free) 
MouseAudio
Logitech G602 Yardsale Special 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3330 Asus H61 MSI GTX 750Ti Low Profile 2x4GB Hynix DDR3-1333 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
60GB Kingston SSD 1TB Seagate Samsung DVDRW CoolerMaster Gemin II 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 + Steam Big Picture / Plex HT 50" Insignia LED 1080p Logitech Rosewill Green 530w 
CaseMouseAudioOther
Silverstone HTPC Logitech Pioneer 2.0 tower speakers + 135w RMS Rosewill MCE Remote 
  hide details  
post #253 of 331
I know this has all been through a lot of discussion thus far, but i'm going to throw my hat into the ring here.

Comparing nvidia's GPU manufacturing and naming conventions to AMD/Intel CPU histories of unlockability (made that word up) is absurd. Nvidia is a compeltely different company, and to say "well my phenom x2 nom nom nom unlocked to a phenom x3/4 nom nom" is completely asinine.

I can only think of ONE instance where nvidia users have been able to successfully "unlock" a card (correct me if I'm wrong here). Don't even bring up "rebrands". This conversation isn't even about rebrands, so don't bring it up.

MSI made (note: a PCB manufacturer, not nvidia the chip manufacturer) a certain GE GTX465 I'm sure everyone here is aware of. I have one in my rig. I unlocked it to a 470 using a different BIOS. You know why that worked? Because MSI (NOT nvidia) started placing 470 chips on to their PCBs with a 465 BIOS.

Nvidia does NOT have a history of locking chips themselves for whatever reason, or otherwise creating chips with that intention. The only reason people were even able to "unlock" their cards is the result of MSI marketing... NOT nvidia chip manufacturing.

... and you guys are talking about two completely different chips! Even bringing up the fact that "AMD did it once" isn't even worth a fleeting thought because AMD is not nvidia. There is ZERO history to even base this theory on, is there?

None of this even makes sense to me. Sure, you're giving it a go for the heck of it. Fine. But the logical end game here is... well... only logical.
Cavi's Cube
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6600K Gigabyte GA-Z170MX Gaming 5 PowerColor R9 390 G.Skill Ripjaws V  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial M500 480GB Samsung SpinPoint 1TB Silverstone TD02-E Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
Dell U2412M EVGA Supernova P2 650W Fractal Design Node 804 
  hide details  
Cavi's Cube
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6600K Gigabyte GA-Z170MX Gaming 5 PowerColor R9 390 G.Skill Ripjaws V  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial M500 480GB Samsung SpinPoint 1TB Silverstone TD02-E Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
Dell U2412M EVGA Supernova P2 650W Fractal Design Node 804 
  hide details  
post #254 of 331
So we have discovered that it is Unsuccessful.

That's okay, what a fun thread this has been lol
Bender
(18 items)
 
  
Bender
(18 items)
 
  
post #255 of 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by onoz View Post
While I do agree that flashing 560 BIOS onto a 460 should not be done, I'm actually here to point out the fallacy in your logic.

Think back to your other example of the 8800GT to the 9800GT. That is proof that Nvidia would, in fact, do something as low as rebranding and selling. You asked (above) "You think nvidia was going to just enable 1 core and sell it?" Well... yes, I think they would because they have done it already. In fact, in the case of the 8800GT to the 9800GT, they didn't even enable 1 core! It's the exact same chip!! (Say wha?!)

Now, I'm not saying that they've done it in this particular case (GTX460 vs GTX560). All I'm saying is that I wouldn't put it past them.
There was no performace dif between the 9800 and 8800, they actually shrunk the die, do in fact it wasnt a "rebrand" but a very similar chip
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 3570k 4.8 Ghz ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77 atx MSI 660ti SLI Corsair Vengeance 1866mHz 16Gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Mx200 250 GB, 1TB WD Black Corsair H80  Win7 Home Premium Corsair 850HX 
Case
Carbide 400R 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 3570k 4.8 Ghz ASUS SABERTOOTH Z77 atx MSI 660ti SLI Corsair Vengeance 1866mHz 16Gb 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Mx200 250 GB, 1TB WD Black Corsair H80  Win7 Home Premium Corsair 850HX 
Case
Carbide 400R 
  hide details  
post #256 of 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavi View Post
I know this has all been through a lot of discussion thus far, but i'm going to throw my hat into the ring here.

Comparing nvidia's GPU manufacturing and naming conventions to AMD/Intel CPU histories of unlockability (made that word up) is absurd. Nvidia is a compeltely different company, and to say "well my phenom x2 nom nom nom unlocked to a phenom x3/4 nom nom" is completely asinine.

I can only think of ONE instance where nvidia users have been able to successfully "unlock" a card (correct me if I'm wrong here). Don't even bring up "rebrands". This conversation isn't even about rebrands, so don't bring it up.

MSI made (note: a PCB manufacturer, not nvidia the chip manufacturer) a certain GE GTX465 I'm sure everyone here is aware of. I have one in my rig. I unlocked it to a 470 using a different BIOS. You know why that worked? Because MSI (NOT nvidia) started placing 470 chips on to their PCBs with a 465 BIOS.

Nvidia does NOT have a history of locking chips themselves for whatever reason, or otherwise creating chips with that intention. The only reason people were even able to "unlock" their cards is the result of MSI marketing... NOT nvidia chip manufacturing.

... and you guys are talking about two completely different chips! Even bringing up the fact that "AMD did it once" isn't even worth a fleeting thought because AMD is not nvidia. There is ZERO history to even base this theory on, is there?

None of this even makes sense to me. Sure, you're giving it a go for the heck of it. Fine. But the logical end game here is... well... only logical.
Hm, do most of the guys here at overclock.net work for MSI?
post #257 of 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleg33k85 View Post
So my question being - since I don't have time to read through 20 pages of nonsense - how does the 460 know if it is a 460 if they are the same as a 560? If it were in the programming then, flashing the chips bios with the updated programming, it would think it was a 560...

My 465 wasn't confused at all when I flashed it with 470 software because it is the same chip, people who have non reference 465's with a different chip, well, the 470 software doesn't work because they are different chips
Because the first order of determination for GPU-Z is it's internal database, which looks at the cards physical attributes like shader count, rops, etc, and matches them up to a GPU, and displays the name based on this lookup.

In order to get GPU-Z to change the GPU name, you have to change physical characteristics such that 'sees' these characteristics as being a different card. A 465 flashed to 470 will do exactly this, by unlocking cores and a memory controller and ROPs, etc, you will make GPU-Z see the card as a 470. Because it IS a 470, in reality.

If you could truly unlock a 460 to 560, GPU-Z would say it's a 560 because it'd see the 384 cores as being there and enabled.

I'm w/Duckie, and I believe the extra cluster is laser-cut, or whatever you call it ... just like (two of them are) on the 470.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavi View Post
I know this has all been through a lot of discussion thus far, but i'm going to throw my hat into the ring here.

Comparing nvidia's GPU manufacturing and naming conventions to AMD/Intel CPU histories of unlockability (made that word up) is absurd. Nvidia is a compeltely different company, and to say "well my phenom x2 nom nom nom unlocked to a phenom x3/4 nom nom" is completely asinine.

I can only think of ONE instance where nvidia users have been able to successfully "unlock" a card (correct me if I'm wrong here). Don't even bring up "rebrands". This conversation isn't even about rebrands, so don't bring it up.

MSI made (note: a PCB manufacturer, not nvidia the chip manufacturer) a certain GE GTX465 I'm sure everyone here is aware of. I have one in my rig. I unlocked it to a 470 using a different BIOS. You know why that worked? Because MSI (NOT nvidia) started placing 470 chips on to their PCBs with a 465 BIOS.

Nvidia does NOT have a history of locking chips themselves for whatever reason, or otherwise creating chips with that intention. The only reason people were even able to "unlock" their cards is the result of MSI marketing... NOT nvidia chip manufacturing.

... and you guys are talking about two completely different chips! Even bringing up the fact that "AMD did it once" isn't even worth a fleeting thought because AMD is not nvidia. There is ZERO history to even base this theory on, is there?

None of this even makes sense to me. Sure, you're giving it a go for the heck of it. Fine. But the logical end game here is... well... only logical.
PoV, PNY, Asus, and now evga have had 465's that unlock to 470's actually.

And since you asked for a correction actually the old 6800 cards had vertex and pixel pipelines that could be 'unlocked'. I know cause I had one, and did just that. Interestingly, you did it with Rivatuner, not a bios flash. That's the only nV card I remember being unlockable before the GTX465 thing happened.

I'm not disagreeing (of course) that 460's can't be unlocked, just ... clarifying
Edited by brettjv - 1/27/11 at 5:04pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
post #258 of 331
funny how people speak about things that they have no idea about either way... its all speculation... no one but nvidia knows the answers to these questions.

no one knows what these chips look like inside or where transistors are or anything else for that matter other than the numbers on top of the die

for all we know they are all the same chip. probably not but just saying
Edited by ~kRon1k~ - 1/27/11 at 5:09pm
*censored*
(15 items)
 
vision
(4 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X4 910e GA-880GM-UD2H PowerColor AX6750 OCZ DDR2 PC2-8500  
  hide details  
*censored*
(15 items)
 
vision
(4 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X4 910e GA-880GM-UD2H PowerColor AX6750 OCZ DDR2 PC2-8500  
  hide details  
post #259 of 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~kRon1k~ View Post
funny how people speak about things that they have no idea about either way... its all speculation... no one but nvidia knows the answers to these questions.

no one knows what these chips look like inside or where transistors are or anything else for that matter other than the numbers on top of the die

for all we know they are all the same chip. probably not but just saying
It *is* speculation to a certain degree.

HOWEVER, there's almost no chance that if the 460 had it's last SM locked via firmware that ALL THIS TIME would've gone by w/o some smart person hacking a 460 bios to unlock it. It's not rocket science we're talking about here, and it's been known since day 1 that there was a locked SM on gf104.

The notion we'd have had to wait all this time til the 560 came out before anyone could've unlocked it is frankly preposterous, afaic. Particularly given that a 'template' that could used ... i.e. comparing a 465 bios to a 470 bios ... has existed all this time as well.

Put it this way ... I'd lay 50-1 odds that it would've already been done ... if it could be done.
Edited by brettjv - 1/27/11 at 5:30pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
xeon X5675 6-core @ 4.1ghz (1.29v, 20x205 +ht ) rampage iii extreme msi rx470 gaming X (the $159 budget king) 3 x 2gb corsair xms3 pc12800 (9-9-9-24-1T@1600MHz) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
hynix 250gb ssd (boot), 2tb deskstar (apps),1tb... plextor px-712sa - still the best optical drive... corsair h8o v2 aio W10 home 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
asus vw266h 25.5" (1920x1200) abs sl (enermax revolution) * single 70A rail 850w silverstone rv-03 XFi Titanium 
  hide details  
post #260 of 331
I was able to flash my 460 SOC with 560 SOC

p.r.a.s nVo7_SB
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k Asus P8P67 WS Revolution eVGA GTX 560Ti FPB G.SKILL F3-17000CL9 4GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
common ones common ones Windows 7 ULt x64 BenQ E2200HD 
PowerCase
Seasonic M12D 850 CM Storm Scout 
  hide details  
p.r.a.s nVo7_SB
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k Asus P8P67 WS Revolution eVGA GTX 560Ti FPB G.SKILL F3-17000CL9 4GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
common ones common ones Windows 7 ULt x64 BenQ E2200HD 
PowerCase
Seasonic M12D 850 CM Storm Scout 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: NVIDIA
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › Any sign of the 560 bios to try on a 460 yet??