I would like to see what people are getting their overclocks at. Bonus points for SLI. This is what I currently have going stable.
 
 

EVGATech_MDecker
I have not yet pushed mine as I've been too busy to sit down and start tweaking and benchmarking but when I do I will let you all know 

Sounds good, thank you!

zswickliffe
This is all I could do. Any further and she crashes:

Here was my quick OC... Stable running benchmarks, games and folding (currently folding in the screenshot)
 
Benchmarks:
Fire Strike (20,678) - www. 3dmark.com/fs/12049183
Fire Strike Extreme (13,271): www. 3dmark.com/fs/12049225
Fire Strike Ultra (7,291): www. 3dmark.com/fs/12047084
Time Spy (8,845): www. 3dmark.com/spy/1403812

Nice! Good scores.

karmadecoy
Are you underclock g the memory? Whys your precision x look different?

Not underclocking the memory... Not sure why it looks different. Haven't changed anything on it...
 
I'm new to this tool and don't fully understand a few things. Might go back to afterburner because I'm at least used to it. The main problem is that it looks like the GPU is being starved of voltage, even at low temps. I wish I could up the voltage and watch the temps myself (unless it was pegging the thermal limit). That way I would just have it dialed in to my clock and temps that the cooler will allow. 

karmadecoy

zswickliffe
This is all I could do. Any further and she crashes:

Here was my quick OC... Stable running benchmarks, games and folding (currently folding in the screenshot)

 
Benchmarks:
Fire Strike (20,678) - www. 3dmark.com/fs/12049183
Fire Strike Extreme (13,271): www. 3dmark.com/fs/12049225
Fire Strike Ultra (7,291): www. 3dmark.com/fs/12047084
Time Spy (8,845): www. 3dmark.com/spy/1403812

Are you underclock g the memory? Whys your precision x look different?

Folding does that. The memory runs slightly slower. CUDA apps do the same thing.

I'm lost... Isn't that the memory base clock? 
 
DUH, I just noticed it was 5,000 not 5,500. Oops. Yeah I think it's because the higher the memory clock, the more chance for errors. They'd rather a slower but accurate calculation.

rh0ne
I just installed my two yesterday, just toying around leak checking without serious effort and I stopped @ +150, +500. I think I'm probably close to max'd on memory side, but I think I have a bit more in the tank on the core side to go. I may just stick where I'm at as they are stable and they are boosting at 2038 (sometimes 2050)/6000 ... which I'm pretty happy with for how little effort it took.
 
FS Extreme: 20236
FS Ultra: 12918
 

Your FS score should be higher. Your physics score kills mine. What PSU do you have?

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18713656

zswickliffe

karmadecoy

rh0ne
I just installed my two yesterday, just toying around leak checking without serious effort and I stopped @ +150, +500. I think I'm probably close to max'd on memory side, but I think I have a bit more in the tank on the core side to go. I may just stick where I'm at as they are stable and they are boosting at 2038 (sometimes 2050)/6000 ... which I'm pretty happy with for how little effort it took.

FS Extreme: 20236
FS Ultra: 12918

Your FS score should be higher. Your physics score kills mine. What PSU do you have?

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18713656

His is FS Extreme and Ultra... You linked to just FS. 

Ohhhh that makes more sense.

karmadecoy

zswickliffe

karmadecoy

rh0ne
I just installed my two yesterday, just toying around leak checking without serious effort and I stopped @ +150, +500. I think I'm probably close to max'd on memory side, but I think I have a bit more in the tank on the core side to go. I may just stick where I'm at as they are stable and they are boosting at 2038 (sometimes 2050)/6000 ... which I'm pretty happy with for how little effort it took.
FS Extreme: 20236
FS Ultra: 12918

Your FS score should be higher. Your physics score kills mine. What PSU do you have?
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18713656

His is FS Extreme and Ultra... You linked to just FS. 

Ohhhh that makes more sense.

I just ran a normal FS here: 27120
But - you still beat my GFX scores pretty good in regular FS also. Hmmm. I'm running an AX1200i for PSU. My CPU is clocked to 4.3. I just did this latest run +150, +400. I'm perplexed...

zswickliffe

rh0ne
I just ran a normal FS here: 27120
But - you still beat my GFX scores pretty good in regular FS also. Hmmm. I'm running an AX1200i for PSU. My CPU is clocked to 4.3. I just did this latest run +150, +400. I'm perplexed...

Higher memory clocks doesn't always mean better scores, FYI. I've pretty much only noticed a degradation.

 
I have read that, but a 10% hit seems pretty rough for only +400. I'll try a run with memory backed off.
 
I remembered something - I'm not running the HB bridge, won't fit with my EK blocks unless I get the dremel out. I've only got one NV LED hard bridge. So that might explain some of it (related article), but still 10% hit for that seems high too.
 
edit: Why did I never consider EVGA HB bridge? It looks like it has a more rational shape than the NV one.

HeavyHemi
What he is trying to point out is that  if you run the GPU memory clocks too high, you start getting errors. The memory has internal error correction, but it drastically decreases the memory throughput.  You've got 11ghz memory already. plus 400 is adding another 800mhz or 11.8ghz. effective.

Yeah I understand, it was a good suggestion to check. I did a run with memory backed down to +0 and lost a couple hundred points. I'm going to dig up another bridge and see what that does.

rh0ne

karmadecoy

zswickliffe

karmadecoy

rh0ne
I just installed my two yesterday, just toying around leak checking without serious effort and I stopped @ +150, +500. I think I'm probably close to max'd on memory side, but I think I have a bit more in the tank on the core side to go. I may just stick where I'm at as they are stable and they are boosting at 2038 (sometimes 2050)/6000 ... which I'm pretty happy with for how little effort it took.
FS Extreme: 20236
FS Ultra: 12918

Your FS score should be higher. Your physics score kills mine. What PSU do you have?
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/18713656

His is FS Extreme and Ultra... You linked to just FS. 

Ohhhh that makes more sense.

I just ran a normal FS here: 27120
But - you still beat my GFX scores pretty good in regular FS also. Hmmm. I'm running an AX1200i for PSU. My CPU is clocked to 4.3. I just did this latest run +150, +400. I'm perplexed...

I did that with +185 and +500 so that is probably why I got a little extra graphics score.

zswickliffe

HeavyHemi

Time Spy Score 9829
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/1404438

Fire Strike Score 23032
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12034129
 
Fire Strike Extreme Score 13965
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12049532
 
 Fire Strike Ultra Score  7455
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12049438
 
 

Your CPU decimates my 4790k

Yea I kinda want to upgrade CPU also but I would have to upgrade Mobo and memory also and that gets expensive.

Hi everyone,
I have a question please help.
My GTX 1080Ti runs at 1404mhz on idel all the time.
Is that normal?
is my first pascal card, my last card was a 780 Classi
Thanks

Kaapstad

karmadecoy

HeavyHemi

Time Spy Score 9829
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/1404438

Fire Strike Score 23032
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12034129
 
Fire Strike Extreme Score 13965
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12049532
 
 Fire Strike Ultra Score  7455
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/12049438
 
 

Great scores for single card

They are actually about par. 

Well sure, unless the bench is flawed, someone running a 6850K at 4.5ghz and a 1080 Ti @2ghz will have a similar results. So, it is 'par' for the settings I'm using. That is the whole point right?