Wow now talk about downclocking a card...

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Chone, Sep 16, 2006.

  1. Chone macrumors 65816

    Chone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    #1
    I just realized that the X1600 mobility on the MacBook Pro has 313/300 (600) clocks down from the 470/470 (940) its supposed to have... I don't know if Apple needs to have those clocks for the MacBook or they just did that for whatever reason (better yields?) but I'm going to see how high I can overclock it before I hit a non stable clock and see if it runs too hot...

    Man, a 160/170 difference in clocks is HUGE, so far I've gotten to 560 on the memory without any "instant" problems but I doubt there will be stablity and proper temperatures when running actual demanding applications at that clockspeed.
     
  2. sierra oscar macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    South Australia, Australia
    #2
    I recall reading somewhere that the MBP (and maybe the MB as well - not sure about my memory there) but ... the reason it was under-clocked was to try and keep the heat down.
     
  3. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #3
    Use the search function, we have been discussing this for ages now ;)

    So I am going to put the usual thing I post in threads like these:

    AIBs or OEMs decides the final clockspeeds on every notebook after their thermal design. Even though several notebooks all have, let's say, an Mobility X1600 does not mean that they all fit within the same thermal design.

    Hence, the clock difference either from model to model or from brand to brand.

    In other words, the Mobility X1600 is not underclocked but rather clocked to fit within the thermal design of the MacBook Pro.


    In other words, there are no official clockspeeds for a given part when it is used in a notebook. The reason, all notebooks have a different Thermal Design Power and, perhaps, not targeted at the same segment.
     
  4. generik macrumors 601

    generik

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    Minitrue
    #4
    That's stupid design man, what's next?

    Core 2 Duo 2.33Ghz processor[1]

    [1] Clocked at 1.66Ghz due to thermal limitations

    We paid good money for the components in that machine, we can't even enjoy the maximum performance out of it because Johnny Impractical Ives decided that a smooth profile with no vents trumps performance anyday?

    Might as well just put a X1300 inside and advertise it as such thanks. Oh, and charge us less for it too.
     
  5. thebeephaha macrumors 6502

    thebeephaha

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle WA
    #5
    If your running windows and play games just download ATI Tool 0.25 Beta and rank the speed back up. I can do 400/400 no issues, any faster and my framerates actually plummet. I have an external cooler for my machine and it doesn't seem to have any issues at all with heat, power yes, if I'm on battery it maybe lasts 45min before its dead.

    I don't know how to overclock in OS X, if thats even possible.
     
  6. HecubusPro macrumors 6502a

    HecubusPro

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #6
    Agreed. If the card they put in it burns the system out because I want to clock it up to the speed it's designed to run at, then Apple would have some explaining to do. I can understand if the card was overclocked and it fried the computer, but set at it's normal speed? Why not just put a lesser card in there, and clock it up to the speed the x1600 is clocked down to--charge us less for the lower end card? Seems like a method to make us think we're getting something better than we actually are, and charging us more in the process.
     
  7. Chone thread starter macrumors 65816

    Chone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    #7
    Well I meant to say that the reference X1600 mobile have a clockspeed of 470/470, ATI gives out the chips at those rates, sure a manufacturer can choose to tweak the clockspeeds but a 170/170 difference is MASSIVE, they are not called reference for anything.

    Well, yeah, I overclocked to 430/430 and was completely stable, and that 130/130 difference was VERY noticeable in games, in fact, Half Life 2 alone let me enable 4X AA and 8X AF just from the clockspeed increase AND framerate went up even then with the extra eye candy.

    I'll let the X1600 run at stock speed in OSX and will bump it to 430+/430+ when in WinXP, I'm not as confident OCing a card in a laptop as in a desktop for obvious reasons.

    All things said and done, 300/300 will probably be enough for most users, but Apple is chopping off a huge slice of performance out of the card and charging us for the ~470/~470, no big deal I guess if you can overclock yourself.
     
  8. BrianSalts macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2006
    #8
    i tink my macbook has toooo much power and the card is never used to its full potential. or, apple doesn't alllow me to.
     
  9. HecubusPro macrumors 6502a

    HecubusPro

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #9
    Are you a gamer? If not, then I can understand your statement. For gamers though, a 130 clockspeed difference is a lot.
     
  10. ZoomZoomZoom macrumors 6502a

    ZoomZoomZoom

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    #10
    Saying that the x1600 is too much power is like saying that... well I don't know really. It's like sticking a lawnmower engine into a Camero.

    Apple does have a problem with cooling. At very minimum, even if every machine came out factory underclocked, I would like a built-in overclock tool. Something like "We've underclocked your GPU to 300/300. Overclocking may result in increased heat; your warranty covers software overclocking to 400/00. You may use this tool to overclock beyond 400/400 but damage resulting will not be covered by your warranty." Not as good as a solution in making a better case, but it'd be a start.
     
  11. generik macrumors 601

    generik

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    Minitrue
    #11
    I don't care what their warranty is said to cover.

    1. x1600s are speced to run at 470/470
    2. Apple's x1600s do not run at spec
    3. I choose to run it at spec

    If it breaks it is THEIR fault and noone else's. Apple really needs to pull their heads out of their collective arses.
     
  12. thebeephaha macrumors 6502

    thebeephaha

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle WA
    #12
    Hes actually only got a Macbook [says his signature] so hes with the intel integrated graphics... lol

    For gamera you NEED as much power as you can get.
     
  13. Chone thread starter macrumors 65816

    Chone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    #13
    Yeah you can never have enough power for games cause even if you can max out in every game and still hit 100fps, in a few months there will be a game that will put your comp to its knees...

    But thats not the point.

    Well right now I'm running 450/450 and Prey runs pretty good, I've been stressing the computer at this clockspeeds for a long time now and there not been a single artifact however I think I'm going to leave it at 450/450, I think it can go higher, but the comp is boiling, the top part above the keys is so hot in fact, water (okay saliva :eek: ) will immediately evaporate, I think 400-430 might actually be a safer number but still, if there is one thing I've learned, if its not crashing or showings signs of unstablity then nothing is in danger (well at least not the GPU).
     
  14. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #14
    We have been over this plenty of times and I can only respond with what have already been said before.

    ATI does not decide what the chips they sell to OEM/AIBs are supposed to be running at. It depends on the Thermal Design Power of the notebook manufacturer and again, not ATI.

    In this case Apple has purchased a rather high volume order of Mobility X1600 chips that only needs to meet a reduced clock speed (of what the product really can) but for various reasons (these are my guesses);
    1) Cheaper price (as rejected chips that cannot meet the 470Mhz clock speed can still be sold to Apple with a 300Mhz guaranteed 'stamp' on it);
    2) Makes it an overall lower TDP part;
    3) The total Thermal Design Power of the MacBook Pro can then fit inside the new 1" thick design
     
  15. tomacintosh macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2005
    #15
    I'm sure I read on a site yesterday that when they tested a MBP and when it was just been used in OSX is was clocked down but as soon as it started playing a game the clock speeds got bumped up automatically, not sure how true this is though
     
  16. miles01110 macrumors Core

    miles01110

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Location:
    The Ivory Tower (I'm not coming down)
    #16
    If you don't like it, then don't pay for it and stop complaining.
     
  17. BlizzardBomb macrumors 68030

    BlizzardBomb

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    England
    #17
    An X1300 would never be able to keep up with an X1600 even if the clocks were against the X1600.
     
  18. bluetorch18 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    #18
    Apple shouldn't falsely be advertising they have X1600s in MBPs. First of all, when they put out the MBPs early this year, they were a mid-end card, now they're a low-end card. They downclocked the card, and they don't even care to tell you. I hope when Merom MBPs come out they completely redesign the MBP to make it much cooler so they can put a much better card in there at factory clocks. If they put a card in there and underclock it again, I'm going to call Apple and have my MBP returned(even if its BTO) or I will threaten to sue. For what? False advertisment...this is absolutely ridiculous.
     
  19. Chone thread starter macrumors 65816

    Chone

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    #19
    Well I'm not complaining but they shouldn't be offering a X1600 to begin with, nvidia has better offerings with their 7600 Go cards that are better in terms of speed and thermal properties at the same price, thats my only quarrel with Apple, going with the X1600, a "midrange" card so lousy its now a low end card and performs similarly to the last gen midrange cards...
     
  20. BlizzardBomb macrumors 68030

    BlizzardBomb

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    England
    #20
    1) No false advertising going on here. Mobility X1600 can be clocked to whatever they want (within reason).
    2) Yes, it is now officially a low-end card. The X1650 Pro and X1650 XT are the new mid-range cards.
     
  21. thebeephaha macrumors 6502

    thebeephaha

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle WA
    #21
    How is the X1600 lousy? I get pretty nice decent with maxed out settings on F.E.A.R. , HL2, Source, Farcry, and several others. The only game I have issues with is Oblivion.

    But come on lets face it, who really if your a gamer buys a laptop for just gaming?

    Heres a clip from F.E.A.R. I captured, you'll notice sometimes it lags but I've found its not the graphics card but the hard drive loading and me not having enough memory [ie 2gigs]. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZewRdUQhd44
     
  22. 4np macrumors 6502a

    4np

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #22
    well... actually... I was thinking of getting a MacBook Pro with Merom processor when they arrive and kick my desktop pc out. I currently only use that pc for a game (HL2,CS,CoD,UT,etc) every-now-and-then and use my PB 15" most of the time; I'd rather be able to do everything on a MBP instead :) The MBP even has a better video card than my pc (Radeon 9700 Pro / Intel 2.8 Ghz) and it's faster so as far as games are concerned it should beat my desktop PC by far I guess ;)

    Concluding; I'd rather put my money in a MBP that runs everything I want perfectly well and I can bring it wherever I want to :) Also quite convenient for a LAN party ;)
     
  23. HecubusPro macrumors 6502a

    HecubusPro

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #23
    The only problem with that is upgrading the gfx cards in notebooks is particularly difficult. Desktops you can upgrade to the next best thing usually without having to buy a new motherboard, processor, or even a whole new computer.

    My desktop, now heading toward four years old, has had three different gfx cards. While I can't wait to get my MBP, it does scare me a little to know that I'll be stuck with whatever card they give me for pretty much as long as I keep the computer. But that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make. The desktop I have now will continue to play games well for a long time to come (except for maybe Crysis :)) and my MBP, whenever I actually get it (come on C2D!) will take care of everything else--a good trade off I think.
     
  24. generik macrumors 601

    generik

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    Minitrue
    #24
    Fanboism at its finest

    Ok, tell me, what reason? By your rationale they are perfectly entitled to clock it at 1Mhz and call it a x1600 no?
     
  25. generik macrumors 601

    generik

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    Minitrue
    #25
    Please surrender your gaming card =)
     

Share This Page