AIW Radeon 8500DV OC

[No_Tone]

I was wondering if anyone found a reasonable and stable setting. I can never seem to find a decent memory or core speed. Anyone have any success with OC this card? Thanks.

 

[chuck232]

Do you have the 128MB version (are those out yet? :tongue: ) cause those ones are rated at the same thing as the retail 8500s. So whatever those things can get to, I'm sure they'll reach too. As for the 8500DV 64MB, It's rated at 240 core and 380 mem. So that is considerably lower than the 8500. Maybe try to get it to 275 core and 425-450 mem.

 

[Quetzacoatl]

Heck, you could probably go as far as 300/300 (600DDR)

"When there's a will, there's a way."

 

[No_Tone]

Actually I I have the 64mb version, which kinda pisses me off considering that it isn't the same core and memory as the retail Radeon 8500 even though they use the same exact chip. Anyways I was first suprised that it was so low compared to the Radeon 8500 (230/190 * 2 DDR). Anytime I up the memory, I always seem to get artifacts, but as for the core, it seems to do pretty well around 275 white keeping the memory at 190.

Is that bad to have a high core and not increase the memory so it can keep up as well? Everytime I add like 5-10 mhz to memory I always get artifacts in 3DMark 2001.

 

[Quetzacoatl]

This is exactly why Ati can save money, they use crappier memory in the "same" chip. Memory has a much larger impact on performance than the core speed. In fact, the core is often starved of fast enough memory, thus you can't get much of a performance increase if your memory can't feed info fast enough to the core.

I'm pretty sure that the AIW Radeon has only 5ns memory, which can barely get by at 200Mhz DDR, or 400 effective. Some of the radeons even have 5.5ns ram which can hardly score 180Mhz, or 360 effective!

In other words, it isn't bad to have a higher core and lower memory, but you won't see much a difference between an R8500 at 230/380 and 275/380. There is a huge difference if it were 230/380 and then 230/550. Memory is paramount in video card performance.

"When there's a will, there's a way."

 

[AMD_Man]

In other words, it isn't bad to have a higher core and lower memory, but you won't see much a difference between an R8500 at 230/380 and 275/380. There is a huge difference if it were 230/380 and then 230/550. Memory is paramount in video card performance.

Actually, I somewhat disagree. With memory bandwidth saving technologies like HyperZ (II) and LMA (II) in modern graphics cards, the core speed does make a difference in games when texture are smaller in size and there's a lot of overdraw. The R8500 does significantly improve in performance in games like Quake III when you raise the core. In more modern games, the speed boost to the core will be less evident.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

 

[Quetzacoatl]

Yeah I know what you mean. I was just making an overall asessment summary of video cards in general. Usually though, when you increase the memory, it has a better impact on performance than a core increase. If only Nvidia used Hyper-Z memory buffering....

"When there's a will, there's a way."