EVGA

Helpful ReplyLower clock at 372.xx comparing to 368.xx drivers

Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
wsarahan
New Member
  • Total Posts : 81
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2009/09/30 11:15:55
  • Status: offline
  • Ribbons : 0
2016/09/25 19:46:54 (permalink)
Hi guys how are you?
Are you with lower core after 368.xx drivers? all 3 372.xx drivers give something about 13mhz less when you start a game or even playing a gem, it`s clear that the core is lower comparing to 368.xx, anyone with thi issue?This happens still with the overclock
Just to know i use here a EVGA 1080 SC SLI ACX 3.0
Thanks
#1
List Solutions Only

5 Replies Related Threads
    Sean1976
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 222
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2016/07/03 07:44:58
    • Location: Does it matter?
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: Lower clock at 372.xx comparing to 368.xx drivers 2016/09/26 12:03:40 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby wsarahan 2016/09/26 14:27:39
    I noticed this too.......My OC registers lower clocks in general with 372.90 driver.......this happens on driver to driver updates in the past. I just had to turn up my OC, to get the core clock I wanted, there are other issues with the newest .90 driver, check the Nvidia site page 17 pages of issues. They are spending too much time/focus on this G-Sync stability BS....... they NEED to focus on stable game optimizations.....
    I will never bother with a G-Sync panel, so many problems!  I never play with V- Sync enabled I guess I don't understand why anyone would want to limit their frame rates!
    post edited by Sean1976 - 2016/09/26 12:12:21

    Intel i5 8600k @5.3ghz with 1.450 Vcore
    Asus ROG Strix-E GamingZ370 deck
    Hyper 212 Evo Air After-Cooler
    Evga 1080 GTX Founder's Edition@ 1987mhz core/5400mhz memory
    G-Skill TridentX 3600mhz XMP4000mhz (2x8GB RGB)
    1x Intel 540 series SSD 480GB
    2x Intel 520 series SSD 240GB each(480GB)
    2x Intel 535 series SSD 240GB each(480GB)
    Corsair HX850 Watt Gold Psu
    Antec Eleven Hundred v2 Carbon Fiber case w/ 9x 120mm fans
    BenQ XL2420TE 144hz 1ms Lightboost/MotionBlur/ Gaming panel(1080p)TN
    G15/G9 Logitech gear
     [URL=http://s1273.photobucket.com/user/SeanJ76/media/8600k%20new%20pics_zps2k125brl.jpg.html][/URL]
     
     
     
    #2
    Nozler
    CLASSIFIED Member
    • Total Posts : 2043
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2009/10/28 10:51:49
    • Location: Ottertail county,Minnesota,USA
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 1
    Re: Lower clock at 372.xx comparing to 368.xx drivers 2016/09/26 12:59:57 (permalink)
     I thought I read mention somewhere in the forum that the new driver increased their temps on the gpu. Could be a possible correlation between the two?

    heatware
     
    #3
    wsarahan
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 81
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2009/09/30 11:15:55
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: Lower clock at 372.xx comparing to 368.xx drivers 2016/09/26 14:28:04 (permalink)
    Nozler
     I thought I read mention somewhere in the forum that the new driver increased their temps on the gpu. Could be a possible correlation between the two?




    Nope, i testes with 368.xx and 372.xx at same game temps and the clocks are different, the 372 branck gives less mhz than older drivers
    #4
    wsarahan
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 81
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2009/09/30 11:15:55
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: Lower clock at 372.xx comparing to 368.xx drivers 2016/09/26 14:30:27 (permalink)
    Sean1976
    I noticed this too.......My OC registers lower clocks in general with 372.90 driver.......this happens on driver to driver updates in the past. I just had to turn up my OC, to get the core clock I wanted, there are other issues with the newest .90 driver, check the Nvidia site page 17 pages of issues. They are spending too much time/focus on this G-Sync stability BS....... they NEED to focus on stable game optimizations.....
    I will never bother with a G-Sync panel, so many problems!  I never play with V- Sync enabled I guess I don't understand why anyone would want to limit their frame rates!




    Just like here, already posted 100000 times at geforce foruns about this issue and the afterburner memory bug but they just ignore
    #5
    Bobmitch
    Omnipotent Enthusiast
    • Total Posts : 8328
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/05/07 09:36:29
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 47
    Re: Lower clock at 372.xx comparing to 368.xx drivers 2016/09/26 15:04:22 (permalink)
    I tested what you had said, and noticed a slight decrease in my overclock on my reference GTX 1080 ACX 3.0.  With the 372.70 drivers I was able to achieve +250 on the core clock.  With the 372.90, I got +240 before the driver blanked.  I don't see a lot of performance difference, but the decrease seems real.

    MSI MAG X670-E Tomahawk;  Ryzen 7 7800X3D; Asus TUF RTX 4070 TI OC; Seasonic Vertex GX-1000 PSU; 32 GB  Corsair Vengeance DDR5-6000 RGB; Corsair iCue Link H150i RGB 360MM AIO; 2-Western Digital Black 4 TB SN850X NVMe; Creative SoundBlaster Z;  ;  Lian Li Lancool III;  EVGA Z15; Razer Viper 8K Mouse


    Heatware:  http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=72402    Affiliate code: 1L2RV0BNQ6                                          
    Associate Code:  UD82LJP3Y1FIQPR
     


    #6
    Jump to:
  • Back to Mobile