Here's my experience, it's not extensive, this is from a standard user just playing around with the XOC BIOS on the card. 

I seem to have dropped in performance from the "OC" switch BIOS(original one) when going to the XOC Beta BIOS, from this forum thread. Let me try to explain it. 

I am using an in game benchmark and from actual playing experience to determine my early findings. The game is The Division 2. I made changes to the graphics to full ultra, DX11(12 kept crashing), Vsync off, 1440p. My FPS avg with the original OC Switch BIOS was 127 within the benchmark and in game actual gameplay, around 120 to 125. My X1 settings are as follows: 500 VRAM offset(10k mhz), 100 core clock(maxes to 2070 in benchmarks and in game), 100 on the voltage, and temp and power target sliders in-sync all the way to the right. 

With the XOC Beta Bios, no changes to the in game graphics and settings, is now 88 FPS inside the benchmark and around 85 in game actual gameplay. My X1 overclock settings are the same as above. 

For sh and giggles, I did an almost default run(0 mem offset, 0 core clock, 0 voltage, 118%/91*C pwr target and temp slider all the way up. My results were exactly the same as mentioned above. Umm, what? 

Here is the rest of my specs of the gaming PC: 

8700k OC to 5.1ghz(AIO)
32gb G.Skill Trident RGB RAM @ 3200mhz
3080 FTW3 Ultra(mentioned above)
Game is loaded on a WD Black NVMe 500gb SSD
MB: Z370 Asus Rog Strix E-gaming
PSU: 850w EVGA Nova G+ 80+ gold cert

I don't think this beta BIOS is for me. I am losing performance in a game that I play often. I haven't tested any other games but I can't imagine the results to be that different. 

My million dollar question is: How can I flash the Stock BIOS back to the GPU so I can re-adjust my OC settings on the OC bios switch to where it was BEFORE I loaded the Beta XOC BIOS? 

I appreciate anyone reading and dropping their feedback on my comments above. 

Edit 1: I'm leaning towards my PSU isn't beefy enough for this BETA BIOS. I think with the voltage slider all the way up to 100, it's taxing it to it's brink. I'm guessing here. Please don't roast me. I can't think of any other reason as to why performance would go down with the same OC settings as I had prior to loading up the XOC BETA BIOS. I'm perplexed. Ok, I think I'm done...

Thanks for this BIOS, nice to get some power headroom.
 
Oddly I found a memory overclock above 200 actually *reduced* my speeds, at least in 3dmark. Guessing it steals some power from the core the higher it goes, and Time Spy isn't memory bandwidth limited at all anyway. I'm only stable up to about +90/200, +100 core freezes 3dmark even with no temp/power issues at all. Haven't tried overvolting, but given the most common thing limiting my boost clock is power cap even with this BIOS, I feel like overvolt may be detrimental like higher mem clock is.
 
My total speeds are well below other similar systems on 3dmark though (about 1000 points low), so I'm still investigating why that is. May need a fresh W10 install, this one's old and definitely feeling sluggish.

Dabadger84
So now instead of PwrLmt on GPUz the limited factor I'm getting is VRel, I'm new to using GPUz to figure out why my GPU is being limited, what does that one mean? Voltage Regulation? or what?
It also only got up to 400W power draw during Port Royal on the OC BIOS which used to get up to 420W on the same settings.  I understand it's a beta, just giving my initial experience feedback.
Should I reinstall Drivers after the BIOS update just to be on the safe side?

vRel = Voltage reliability --> is the cards performance limiting issue

Hello,
 
I just finally got my hands on the RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra and flashed the BIOS to the beta one. No matter what I do, my clock speed won't go above 2055 without it being unstable.
 
I feel that things don't have any effects on the clock speed:
-Changing the power limit to 118% or leaving it at 100% won't make a difference.
-Changing voltage to +100 won't make any difference or any more stable even +20 on the core clock won't make it stable.
 
I ran Furmark just to see if it's my PSU but it worked fine and GPU-Z reported 463W board usage.
 
My PSU is EVGA G2 1000W. I tried different benchmarks and even the Port Royal 3D mark test and my score is 11600 compared to 12500 that others have. My CPU is I9 9900K OC'ed @5Ghz.
 
My brother has the cheaper XC3 and GPU runs the same as my frequency and I just find it unfair to pay that extra money and get the same exact performance as cheaper cards. I would have gotten the XC3 if I knew that.
 
I know it lottery and luck and that +50Mhz won't make a difference but just want to know if I am doing something wrong or missing something.
 
Any ideas or help would be appreciated!
 
 

I've been gaming with mine at +130 on the core clock, and +800 on the memory with no issues. Been playing mainly Baldur's Gate 3 and Control, so far. It ran Timespy at +177 without issue IIRC.

Dabadger84

jamexr
Jesus, I must have gotten a dud FTW Ultra. I see all these core ocs of 130+, mine can barely do 100 mhz stable, and that's only on 3dmark. If I play a game I get crashes (even with voltage slider to the max). Apart from 3d mark, are you guys testing with several games other than 3Dmark? 
 
Mine will pass 3Dmark fine with 100mhz oc on core, but games, nah, full on crashes.

I haven't actually tested +130 extensively in games, I've been experimenting with undervolting to try & lower temps & power draw, so far seems pretty good, getting 2010-2025MHz boost clocks with 950mv reading out as the voltage draw & only about 340W maximum draw, with temps peaking at 58-60C...
 
How mad would y'all be if you received a REPLACEMENT AIO from EK and it arrived looking like this:
 

 
The outer box from UPS is completely undamaged. Which means someone seriously PACKAGED IT and SHIPPED IT like that.
 
EK is very close to getting on my "never again" list.  That hole is deeper than it looks BTW, I'm not even going to open it unless they respond to my request for a paid label because I'm not paying return shipping again, telling me to open & check if it's damaged.  At this point I think I'm just gonna get a refund.

I'm with you on this, the undervolting on this card is amazing.  I am getting better, more stable clocks at .900 mV @ 1950 and .950 mV at 2010 than on stock.  the prior my temps never get to 60 C with a 45% fan, the latter they get to 65 with the same curve.  On stock, my frequency would jump all around between 1890-2010 which is annoying as heck, gives me lower 1%'s in FPS, where as with the undervolt I am stable and constant on frequency.  I think my average FPS is slightly lower, 3-5 FPS, but my bottom 1%'s are way higher, it's my top 1%'s that are lower, and that gives a smoother experience with cooler temps. 

chorl
Thanks again, I'll stick to that once I grab one of these (difficult task, at least here in EU).
 
PS: Newbie to the forum aswell, is there any kind of "Thanks" button or something?

There is, but I'm not sure how to do it lol
 

schmak01
 
I'm with you on this, the undervolting on this card is amazing.  I am getting better, more stable clocks at .900 mV @ 1950 and .950 mV at 2010 than on stock.  the prior my temps never get to 60 C with a 45% fan, the latter they get to 65 with the same curve.  On stock, my frequency would jump all around between 1890-2010 which is annoying as heck, gives me lower 1%'s in FPS, where as with the undervolt I am stable and constant on frequency.  I think my average FPS is slightly lower, 3-5 FPS, but my bottom 1%'s are way higher, it's my top 1%'s that are lower, and that gives a smoother experience with cooler temps. 

I've been gaming at 900mv @ 2010MHz & not having any issues, did some GTA V single player, bit of Watch Dogs 1 & Port Royal, also did about an hour of Mafia 1's remake.  The overall performance does seem much smoother & the frequency is definitely jumping around less, I'm essentially at 1995-2010 constantly.

How much do the thermals improve when undervolting ?

You can't undervolt with Precision X1 right ?

How can I flash the old BIOS? The original OC, please?

Hi,
 
Finally I could grab one FTW3 Ultra, but I had bad luck, I've found a "lazy" GPU. It performs well in synthetic testing (0,875v, 1950MHz ->  15000+ 3DMardk, 15000+ Superposition), but in real world games, it performs not so well. Horizon Zero Dawn benchmark, i.e., only got 67 average FPS. People with same card and similar undervolt can reach 74+ FPS.
 
I tried pure OC (+130, +1000 Memory) but results are similar, and beyond that, benchmark crashes. If someone could post their HZD benchmark result for this card, I'd really appreciate it.
 
At least, with undervolt, card runs silent and fresh (under 63º) while benchmarking.
 
My rig:

Asus Strix Z-490H
2x8 Gb Hyperx 3600 with XMP-I profile
CoolerMaster AV1200 Platinum PSU