How to ‘Increase/ Max/ Optimize/ Boost/ Tuning’ GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G Mining: Overclocking/ Hashrate / Review/ Best MSI Afterburner Settings/ MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X mining: Review and testing of the MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC video card – Technology does not stand still. Moore’s Law, which has already undergone fluctuations in the processor market, for a long time “forces” chip manufacturers to increase the number of transistors per 1 mm2. Transitions to new technical processes, in addition to increasing productivity, contributed to a decrease in consumption, which had a positive effect on the requirements for heat dissipation.
And, if the use of High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) in Fiji generation video cards contributed to the appearance of a compact AMD Radeon R9 NANO, then the transition to 16 nm allowed the emergence of powerful compact video cards without the drawbacks of R9 NANO – too limited consumption and only 4 GB of onboard memory. Our editorial office just got such a video card – MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC… Combining high GPU power and compact size, can it surprise us or, on the contrary, disappoint us?
How to increase GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G Mining: Packaging and equipment
MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC graphics card comes in a miniature cardboard box. Honestly, if we had been told earlier that this box contains a powerful video card, we would not have believed it.
On the front of the box, made in black and green colors, there is the name of the video card. The OC Edition footnote in the lower left corner hints that the frequencies of the video card have been increased compared to the standard version.
The reverse side of the box focuses on the video card cooling system. It also contains the minimum system requirements and technologies that the video card possesses.
All equipment is limited to paper documentation and software disc. Modest, but no longer surprising.
Proprietary software
MSI pays attention not only to the hardware part of the product, but also adds good and very useful software to its products. One of these programs is the MSI Gaming App.
In it, you can select one of the modes of operation of the video card, adjust the backlight, enable different modes of the screen and enable additional information in games. For example, show the number of frames per second, card load or its frequency, as is done by MSI Afterburner, but in a simpler and more convenient form.
Graphics card design
The MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC graphics card is striking at first glance – it is difficult to imagine that under such a miniature cooling system there is a powerful GP104 GPU.
One has only to realize that the length of our model does not exceed 175 mm. This is on average 10 cm less than the usual video cards of this class.
The reverse side of the device is full of electronic components. The size limitation made the layout more complicated, but MSI engineers have dealt with it. On the other hand, the presence of a back plate with thermal spacers under it would have a positive effect on the temperature regime, embellish the appearance and protect the video card from damage during installation. We do not think that this would greatly affect its cost.
There is also a sticker with the video card model and its serial number.
Mini-ITX cases often limit the thickness of video cards. Therefore, MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC has a dual-slot design.
There is an MSI inscription on the casing, there is no backlighting. And who needs it with a miniature layout?
Nickel-plated tubes and thermal pads on memory chips are visible on the reverse side.
The interface panel has two HDMI 2.0 and DisplayPort 1.4 video outputs, as well as one Dual Link DVI-D. The panel itself is well perforated, which is rather a necessity for such a miniature card.
How to Optimize: What’s new?
NVIDIA claims the new architecture is revolutionary, but is it really so? The most striking innovation in the case of PASCAL is the transition to a new 16 nm process technology. This allowed us to achieve a significant increase in the operating frequency of the GPU, which led to a noticeable increase in performance. Another important feature was the use of FinFET (Field Effect Transistor with Fin) – transistors, due to which there was a decrease in power consumption and an increase in efficiency. Despite this, the PASCAL architecture is more an evolution of Maxwell than something fundamentally new.
SLI has also been introduced with interesting innovations. Now the company will pay more attention to the tandem of two accelerators, i.e. will try to optimize performance scaling as much as possible for such a scenario. However, this does not mean that the use of three or even four video cards will now become impossible, by no means, just the emphasis will be shifted towards the most demanded option. It’s no secret that only a few can afford a system of three or four video cards.
For fans of multi-monitor configurations and virtual reality helmets, NVIDIA has prepared a technology for simultaneous multi-projection ( Simultaneous Multi-Projection). In fact, this optimization is designed to simultaneously calculate geometric data for several pre-prepared projections. What is it for? First, to eliminate various distortions when using curved monitors or multi-display configurations. Second, it can improve performance for these kinds of use cases on your system. Few of us had the opportunity to try NVIDIA 3D Vision at one time, but those who happened to have noticed a noticeable lack of performance, since the video card had a double load when drawing images for each eye. With the introduction of SMP, this problem is eliminated.
Also, we cannot fail to mention two more interesting innovations, which are entitled Ansel and Fast Sync .
Ansel is an invaluable tool for creating companion game content that will be useful to streamers and authors of various gaming blogs. During the game, you can pause and adjust the camera to any desired angle to take a screenshot. In addition, you will have access to a number of effects to improve the image, as well as the ability to take a picture with stunning clarity. In addition, there is the possibility of creating 3D images, panoramic screenshots and 360 ° images. True, it should be noted that this will be available only in those games where the corresponding support for this option will be introduced.
Fast Sync is a kind of addition to a feature like VSYNC. In general terms, activating this innovation will allow you to get rid of the delays that occur when you turn on VSYNC. In addition, artifacts in the form of picture tearing are eliminated, which can be noticeable when disabling vertical sync. This scenario is valid only if the FPS value exceeds the screen refresh rate threshold.
Cooling system and PCB
When dismantling the cooling system, you must take into account that a warranty seal is installed on one screw. And, despite the fact that MSI itself does not consider breaking the seal as a reason to void the warranty, and the absence of a back plate makes it possible to unscrew the screw with the seal without breaking the latter without any problems, it is pointless to carry out this operation – the factory thermal interface is applied well, its consistency resembles Arctic MX -4 and its replacement did not bring us a gain in temperature.
In total, you need to unscrew 6 screws: 4 around the GPU and 2 around the power subsystem.
Printed circuit board
MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC PCB is a proprietary MSI design. It is noted that the production uses high-quality element base MILITARY CLASS 4.
The change in format also led to changes in the layout: the graphics processor and memory chips were rotated 90o, and the power subsystem was moved to the interface panel.
At the heart of the graphics card is the GP-104-200-A1 GPU, manufactured in week 47 of 2021 (end of November) in Taiwan. Around are 8 Micron GDDR5 memory chips labeled 6VA47-D9TCB.
The power subsystem is made according to the 5 + 1 system: five phases are responsible for powering the graphics processor, one for the memory microcircuit. The voltage is controlled by the uP9511P PWM controller made by uPISemiconductor. This fact pleases – it provides us with both unlocked voltage control (up to 1.093 V) and compatibility with numerous third-party BIOS. Together with one 8-pin additional power connector, this is a chance to get video cards.
Cooling system
After loosening 6 screws, the cooling system is fastened with only one connector for connecting the fan.
The large, nickel-plated base removes heat from the GPU and memory chips. A plate is soldered to the radiator, which helps to cool the power circuits. The print on the thermal pads shows that the clamp is tight.
A lot of aluminum fins along the card are pierced with three heat pipes, two of which are 8 mm in diameter and one is 6 mm.
The radiator itself has a somewhat specific shape.
According to the manufacturer, Airflow Control technology changes the direction of the air flow as needed, ensuring maximum cooling of the GPU.
An MSI TORX fan with the Power Logic PLD10010S12HH marking (12V, 0.4A) with a diameter of 100 mm is attached to the casing of the video card.
The dispersion fan blades create more airflow without changing the noise level. Another good thing is that similar fans are installed on video cards of the Gaming series, which will improve BIOS compatibility.
Technical characteristics and features of the video card
| Name | Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 | MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC |
| GPU | GP104-200-A1 | GP104-200-A1 |
| Technical process | 16 nm | 16 nm |
| Kernel size | 314 mm2 | 314 mm2 |
| Base clock speed | 1506 MHz | 1531MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1683 MHz | 1721 MHz |
| Number of CUDA cores | 1920 | 1920 |
| Number of texture units | 120 | 120 |
| Number of ROP units | 64 | 64 |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory speed | 8 Gbps | 8 Gbps |
| Memory | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus bandwidth | 256 pages | 256 pages |
| Additional power connectors | 8 | 8 |
| Power consumption | 150 watts | 150 watts |
| Dimensions (LxHxW) | 267x111x40 mm | 175 x 129 x 40 mm |
| Video outputs | Dual Link DVI-D(1 шт), DP 1.4 (3 шт),HDMI 2.0b (1 шт) | Dual Link DVI-D (1 шт),DP 1.4 (2 шт),HDMI 2.0b (2 шт) |
There are practically no differences in technical characteristics from the GeForce GTX 1070 in the reference version of the MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC . With the help of the TechPowerUp GPU-Z 2.2.0 program, we learn about some of them:
In the preinstalled BIOS version 86.04.50.40.0A, the base frequency was increased by 25 MHz from the reference, and the boost frequency was increased by 38 MHz. The memory frequency remained unchanged.
But not without a fly in the ointment. The manufacturer, taking into account the dimensions of the video card and its purpose (installation in compact cases), left the consumption limits modest – 151 W, expandable up to 170 W.
Our experience shows that the GPU GP104-200-A1 in some scenarios will miss such tight limits, which will limit overclocking and performance. On the one hand, for a video card with an additional 8-pin power supply, the consumption limits can be safely increased to 225 W (75 W – PCI-E slot, 150 W – 8-pin), on the other hand, this would increase the consumption and heating of the video card, which in compact body is unacceptable.
Despite the size of the cooling system and the presence of only one fan, the MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC graphics card has the ZERO FROZR function. Up to ~ 50 ° C (in our case, up to 55 ° C), the cooling fan of the video card is in a stopped state.
The frequency of the GPU when idle drops to 139 MHz, memory – to 202 MHz (808 MHz effective).
The frequency and voltage correspondence graph at a temperature of 30-40 ° C is as follows:
As we can see, under normal conditions (without exceeding the consumption limits), the graphics processor can reach 1936 MHz with a subsequent decrease in frequency with increasing temperature. The load in the form of a render in the TechPowerUp GPU-Z 2.2.0 program confirms this – the frequency of the video card reaches 1936 MHz at a voltage of 1.063 V.
When the temperature reaches 55 ° C, the video card fan starts rotating at 900 rpm. If the load is weak or short-term, the temperature starts to decrease, and the fan stops at 42 ° C.
Using MSI Afterburner 4.4.0 Beta 16, we set the fan rotation to the maximum value. At the same time, it spun up to 2300 rpm, and the noise coming from the system unit was moderate.
FPS in games
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla
(2020) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than AMD Radeon R9 295X2.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 43.0 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 37.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 25.2 |
Valorant
(2020) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than AMD Radeon R9 295X2.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 188.7 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 154.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 134.2 |
Death Stranding
(2020) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than AMD Radeon R9 295X2.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 85.5 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 66.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 40.3 |
Cyberpunk 2077
(2020) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than AMD Radeon R9 295X2.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 43.0 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 40.1 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 26.4 |
Apex Legends
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 144 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 127 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 113 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 99.0 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 73.7 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 73.4 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 44.0 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 38.4 |
Metro Exodus
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 148 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 77.9 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 58.1 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 51.6 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 40.1 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 37.6 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 25.2 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 23.4 |
Red Dead Redemption 2
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than AMD Radeon R9 295X2.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 142 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 79.8 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 53 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 44.2 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 36.1 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 27.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 22.9 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 17.5 |
PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds
(2017) Лучше, чем NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile, но хуже NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 154.4 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 135.15 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 121.95 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 80.0 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 61.0 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 35.0 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 35 |
Overwatch
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 300 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 297.2 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 272 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 149.8 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 103.6 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 53.2 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 86.75 |
Grand Theft Auto V
(2015) Better than AMD Radeon RX 480, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060.
| 1024 × 768 / Low / 174.1 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 168.6 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 148 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 92.7 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 63.1 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 29.7 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 62 |
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
(2012) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 275.3 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 229.4 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 206.5 |
League of Legends
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 516.1 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 286.8 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 114.7 |
The Witcher 3
(2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1024 × 768 / Low / 273.3 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 194.4 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 119.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 83.3 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 62.0 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 35.4 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 43 |
Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order
(2019) Better than AMD Radeon RX 5700, but worse than AMD Radeon RX 5700.
| 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 115 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 103 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 93.4 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 69 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 34.1 |
Call of Duty Modern Warfare
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 177 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 113 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 103 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 85.5 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 61.5 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 33.8 |
GRID 2019
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 218 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 134 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 105 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 72.8 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 59.9 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 36.3 |
Borderlands 3
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 141 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 106 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 74.6 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 57.9 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 40 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 21.4 |
Control
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 207 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 74.8 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 55.6 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 35.2 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 17.2 |
Rage 2
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 188 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 93 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 81.1 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 80 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 50.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 24.5 |
Anno 1800
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 112.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 102.05 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 76.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 36 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 26.45 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 15.45 |
The Division 2
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 200 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 122 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 97 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 77 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 53 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 28 |
Dirt Rally 2.0
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 287 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 139 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 113 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 72.6 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 54.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 33.1 |
Far Cry New Dawn
(2019) Better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, but worse than AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 130 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 107 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 101 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 91 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 71 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 38 |
Battlefield V
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 183.65 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 141.3 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 119.25 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 106.7 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 83.6 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 44.9 |
Hitman 2
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 89.3 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 87.2 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 79.8 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 74 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 67.4 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 37 |
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 107 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 88.5 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 76 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 55 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 45 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 26 |
Forza Horizon 4
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 175 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 129 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 120.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 94 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 79 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 52 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 146 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 96 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 88 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 77 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 52 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 26 |
Far Cry 5
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 137.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 105.5 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 99.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 90 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 68 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 35 |
X-Plane 11.11
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 98 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 90 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 74.6 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 66.4 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA Titan X Pascal.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 147.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 87.45 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 61.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 27.55 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1024 × 768 / Low / 271.4 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 195.4 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 119 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 99.7 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 42 |
Need for Speed Heat
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 123 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 104 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 93.9 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 76.4 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 55.4 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 30.8 |
Ghost Recon Breakpoint
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 140 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 91 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 82 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 61 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 43 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 24 |
FIFA 20
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 286 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 285 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 267 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 257 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 216 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 146 |
F1 2019
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 248 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 185 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 152 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 106 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 82 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 48 |
Anthem
(2019) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA Titan X Pascal.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 139 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 99.2 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 85.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 78.4 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 54.4 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 29.4 |
Just Cause 4
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 152 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 110 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 89.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 81.8 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 58.1 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 30.2 |
Darksiders III
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 240 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 149 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 126 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 103 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 67.6 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 33.5 |
Farming Simulator 19
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 313 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 231 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 185 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 144 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 102 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 54 |
Fallout 76
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 60 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 60 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 59.9 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 59.9 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 59.8 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 44.45 |
Call of Duty Black Ops 4
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 194.35 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 163.75 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 156.35 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 146.75 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 71.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 49.5 |
FIFA 19
(2018) Better than AMD Radeon RX 580, but worse than AMD Radeon RX 580.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 299.65 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 284.35 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 261.05 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 258.65 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 248 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 117.4 |
F1 2018
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 230.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 176 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 140.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 95 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 75 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 47 |
Monster Hunter World
(2018) Better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 56, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 137.4 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 100.45 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 93.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 74.05 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 47.8 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 22.85 |
The Crew 2
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, but worse than AMD Radeon VII.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 60 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 60 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 60 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 60 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 60 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 40.25 |
Kingdom Come: Deliverance
(2018) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 141.9 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 108.6 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 87.75 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 66.05 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 47.1 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 22.55 |
Fortnite
(2018) Better than NVIDIA TITAN RTX, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 282 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 256.25 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 175.1 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 126.95 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 78.8 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 38.85 |
Star Wars Battlefront 2
(2017) Better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 200 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 146 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 130 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 114 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 76.2 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 38.1 |
Need for Speed Payback
(2017) Лучше, чем NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, но хуже NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 161 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 141 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 129 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 120 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 85.1 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 44.3 |
Call of Duty WWII
(2017) Better than NVIDIA TITAN RTX, but worse than AMD Radeon RX Vega 56.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 257.9 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 245.5 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 150 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 117.6 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 89 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 58.1 |
Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus
(2017) Better than AMD Radeon RX 580, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 238 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 152 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 119 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 107 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 73.7 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 43 |
Destiny 2
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 174.75 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 159.4 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 147.85 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 126.1 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 65.3 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 39.35 |
ELEX
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 122 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 122 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 106 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 82.6 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 54.1 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 28 |
The Evil Within 2
(2017) Better than AMD Radeon RX 580, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 103 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 59.3 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 59.1 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 58.9 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 27.1 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of War
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 168 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 140 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 112 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 81 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 32 |
Ark Survival Evolved
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 130 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 82.6 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 59.4 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 40.4 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 15.1 |
Team Fortress 2
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080.
| 7680 × 4320 / Ultra / 152 |
Dirt 4
(2017) Better than NVIDIA TITAN RTX, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 323.45 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 225.75 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 166.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 94.4 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 55.65 |
Rocket League
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro T1000.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 246.25 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 248.5 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 200.95 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 95.4 |
Prey
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 144 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 143 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 142 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 141 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 57 |
Mass Effect Andromeda
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 163 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 126 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 89 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 72.9 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 36.6 |
Ghost Recon Wildlands
(2017) Better than NVIDIA Titan X Pascal, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 182.05 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 101.9 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 93.7 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 52.15 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 33.3 |
For Honor
(2017) Better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 56, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 300.3 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 158.85 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 150.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 115 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 47 |
Resident Evil 7
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 517 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 281 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 171 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 141 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 48.7 |
Dishonored 2
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 118.8 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 118.4 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 101.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 91.55 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 41.8 |
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA Titan X Pascal.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 119 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 65.4 |
Titanfall 2
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 122 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 45.8 |
Farming Simulator 17
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 233 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 126 |
Civilization VI
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile.
| 1024 × 768 / Low / 90.1 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 73.7 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 66.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 66.7 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 65.1 |
Battlefield 1
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA Titan X Pascal.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 192.1 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 179.6 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 136.75 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 122.05 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 52.4 |
Mafia 3
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max.
| 1920 × 1080 / High / 50.6 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 22.2 |
Deus Ex Mankind Divided
(2016) Better than NVIDIA TITAN RTX, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 157.85 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 139 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 82.35 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 53.15 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 28.3 |
Doom
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 132 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 50.6 |
Ashes of the Singularity
(2016) Better than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max.
| 1920 × 1080 / High / 77.05 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 34.75 |
Hitman 2016
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 75.35 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 37.7 |
The Division
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 245.9 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 192.1 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 109.3 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 86 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 42.2 |
Far Cry Primal
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 156 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 131 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 116 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 94 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 41 |
Rainbow Six Siege
(2015) Better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080.
| 1024 × 768 / Low / 334 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 279.7 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 207.2 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 181.5 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 70.7 |
Fallout 4
(2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA Titan X Pascal.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 111 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 46.15 |
World of Warships
(2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080, but worse than NVIDIA Titan X Pascal.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 163 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 100 |
Dirt Rally
(2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 134 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 146 |
Dragon Age: Inquisition
(2014) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 104.5 |
Battlefield 4
(2013) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA TITAN RTX.
| 1024 × 768 / Low / 200 | 1366 × 768 / Medium / 200 | 1366 × 768 / High / 200 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 152 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 75 |
Metro: Last Light
(2013) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 123 |
BioShock Infinite
(2013) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 154.5 |
Crysis 3
(2013) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 81.5 |
Assassin’s Creed Origins
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 107 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 92.5 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 86.5 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 72 | 2560 × 1440 / Ultra / 57 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 32 |
F1 2017
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA TITAN RTX.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 231 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 173 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 146 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 104 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 50 |
FIFA 18
(2017) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB, but worse than AMD Radeon RX 580.
| 1280 × 720 / Low / 356 | 1920 × 1080 / Medium / 344 | 1920 × 1080 / High / 312 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 298 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 171 |
Mirror’s Edge Catalyst
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max.
| 1920 × 1080 / High / 114 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 102 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 39 |
XCOM 2
(2016) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 44.2 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 26.3 |
Assassin’s Creed Syndicate
(2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 49.9 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 39.5 |
Star Wars Battlefront
(2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 143 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 54.85 |
Call of Duty: Black Ops 3
(2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 124 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 47.75 |
Anno 2205
(2015) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / High / 140 | 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 47 | 3840 × 2160 / Ultra / 57.5 |
Alien: Isolation
(2014) Better than NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 190.5 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor
(2014) Лучше, чем NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, но хуже NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 129 |
Tomb Raider
(2013) Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti.
| 1920 × 1080 / Ultra / 213 |
Test stand
- Motherboard: ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VI HERO (BIOS 9920);
- Processor: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X overclocked to 3900 MHz at 1.285 V;
- Cooling System: EK-XLC Predator 240 Ryzen Edition
- Thermal interface: Arctic Cooling MX-4;
- RAM: 2 x 8 GB KFA2 HOF Hall Of Fame (HOF4CXLBS4000M19SF162K, 3466 MHz 14-14-14-14-28 CR1, singlerank Samsung B-Die);
- Video card: MSI GeForce GTX 1070 AERO ITX 8G OC / Nvidia GeForce GTX 10708 GB GDDR5;
- Power supply unit: 750 Watt Aerocool HIGGS-750W;
- System drive: SSD Plextor m7v128 GB;
- Case: Thermaltake View 31 TG.
Cooling system testing and overclocking
Cooling tests conducted using the Futuremark 3DMark Fire Strike Resilience Test. The room temperature was in the range of 24-26 ° C, the side cover of the case was closed, there was no additional cooling.
And in this case, we are faced with what we wrote about above – the lack of consumption limits, as a result, the voltage did not exceed 1.031 V, the frequency at its peak reached only 1898 MHz and dropped with increasing temperature and to keep within the Power Limit. The temperature of the GPU under these conditions did not rise above 70 ° C, the fan at its peak was spinning up to 1600 rpm. For such a small video card, the result is excellent, but you should understand that in a cramped case the temperatures will be slightly higher.
These units were tested in popular synthetic tests.
Futuremark 3DMark
3DMark is the most popular benchmark suite used by both overclockers around the world and users looking to find out the graphics and processor performance of their computer.
The test consists of four scenes, two of which reveal the power of the video card (the overall Graphics score), one the processor performance (Physics score), and the last scene determines the combined performance of the system (Combined Score). It is the Graphics score that you need to focus on in the case of video card tests.
The test simulates the gaming load in FHD (Firestrike), QHD (Firestrike Extreme) and 4K (Firestrike Ultra) resolutions. The Time Spy benchmark application allows you to determine the performance of the video card and processor in the DirectX 12 API.
Unigine Superposition Benchmark
Another “young” test application that replaced Unigine Heaven and Unigine Valley (which, by the way, have not lost their popularity yet). As you can see, even at FHD and Extreme settings, the graphics card is under a tremendous load.
Overclocking
Even for such a small video card, overclocking is not excluded. Considering that the graphics processor here is no different from those installed on the most sophisticated video cards, compensation for low factory overclocking (we would even say its almost complete absence) is quite possible with manual overclocking. Limiters in this case will be the low power limits in the BIOS, the cooling system and Micron memory chips.
With the help of the MSI Afterburner 4.4.0 Beta 16 program, we increased the consumption limits to the maximum possible, the voltage did not increase taking into account the limited Power Limit.
In this case, we managed to achieve 2062 MHz at the peak, and eventually the frequency dropped to 1999 MHz. The memory frequency was increased to 2250 MHz (9000 MHz effective) and the voltage did not exceed 1.025 V to keep the card within the power limits. Under these conditions, the temperature of the video card rose to 73 ° C, the fan rotation increased to 1700 rpm.
However, as you know, video cards of the Pascal generation often show the ability to work at high frequencies at low voltage. Using this knowledge, we reduced the operating voltage to 0.993 V. Under these conditions, the GPU frequency was raised to 2038 MHz, the video memory frequency remained unchanged.
The temperature and fan speed did not change, but the moments of exceeding the power limit, as well as decreasing the frequency, began to appear less frequently. As a result, we got an increase in the average operating frequency and an improvement in its stability.
We also ran the Firestrike stability test by setting the fan to maximum speed.
The GPU frequency went up to 2050 MHz, the GPU temperature did not exceed 64 ° C, and the frequency graph became even straighter.
Under these conditions, we got an 11% increase in performance in Firestrike and Time Spy, and 12% in Firestrike Extreme and Firestrike Ultra.
The increase in performance is pleasant, especially when you consider the slight heating and lack of noise. But we have not gotten rid of the main problem – consumption limits. To do this, let’s do some research.
Installing a third-party BIOS
When looking for a third-party BIOS, our choice fell on the MSI GeForce GTX 1070 GAMING Z 8G. This video card has a high factory overclocking and high consumption limits relative to the heroine of our review. There is also a BIOS version on the net with patches for Micron memory.
As a result, the video card was installed BIOS version 86.04.50.00.29
The base frequency is increased to 1633 MHz, the acceleration frequency is increased to 1835 MHz. The frequency of memory microcircuits was also not bypassed and increased to 2025 MHz (8100 MHz effective). Most importantly, consumption limits are 230W, expandable to 291W!
This is what we need. There is even no need to move the Power Limit slider upwards.
Without overclocking, the core frequency reached 2025 MHz even at 46оС! That is, we practically reached the maximum frequencies for the native BIOS version without any overclocking. However, the difference in cooling systems made it possible to push the fan start bar on the MSI GeForce GTX 1070 GAMING Z 8G to ~ 62оС. This is unacceptable for our graphics card, so with MSI Afterburner we changed the fan rpm curve as follows.
Without overclocking, we got the following results in the Firestrike stability test:
The maximum frequency of the video card reached 2012 MHz, the voltage – 1.062 V, and the consumption limits did not exceed 45.5% according to monitoring. As a result, there was no reset of the frequency, as well as the emphasis on Power Limit. What we have been waiting for.
A slight change in the fan rotation operation led to a decrease in the maximum temperature to 69 ° C, but the fan rotated at its peak already at 1900 rpm. We have to admit that the noise from a single fan was acceptable.
But back to the goal of our experiment – finding the maximum overclocking for our video card instance. And he did not disappoint us.
Without increasing the voltage (which gave little, except heating), the frequency of the GPU was increased to 2152 MHz, and the frequency of memory chips – to 2275 MHz (9100 MHz effective).
At 1800 rpm, the GPU warmed up to 72 ° C, which is a good result for full-fledged cards, not to mention the ITX format.
The increase in performance, even relative to the results obtained in overclocking on the native BIOS version, cannot be called imperceptible.
We got a 3% increase in performance in Firestrike and 4% in Firestrike Extreme, Firestrike Ultra and Time Spy.
If the graphics memory had more overclocking potential (Samsung chips would be enough), then the results would be even better. However, in relation to the factory settings, the gain looks much more impressive:
Benchmark tests
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU: 106934
Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060.
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score: 30229.5
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics: 18255
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti.
3DMark Fire Strike Score: 14984
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Max.
3DMark Ice Storm GPU: 463865
Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super Max.
3DMark Time Spy Graphics: 5896
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than AMD Radeon RX 5600M.
3DMark Time Spy Score: 5679
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile.
3DMark Vantage P: 50995
Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max.
3DMark06: 37799.5
Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER.
3DMark11 P: 19449
Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.
3DMark11 P GPU: 24652
Better than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000.
Cinebench R10 32Bit OpenGL: 6835
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max.
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit: 136.03
Better than AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro P1000.
ComputeMark v2.1 Normal, Score: 13488.5
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000.
LuxMark v2.0 64Bit Sala GPUs-only: 4444.5
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER.
Passmark: 13352
Better than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000, but worse than AMD Radeon RX Vega 56.
SPECviewperf 12 — 3ds Max: 169
Better than AMD Radeon VII, but worse than AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT.
SPECviewperf 12 — Maya: 132
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER.
SPECviewperf 12 — Showcase: 82
Better than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000, but worse than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER.
Unigine Heaven 4.0: 2815
Better than NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro P4000.
Unigine Valley 1.0 Extreme HD DirectX: 92.6
Better than NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, but worse than NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max.
Gaming performance
Game tests were carried out in resolutions of 1920 × 1080 and 2560×1440 with maximum graphics settings, only the anti-aliasing settings were changed depending on the resolution. Used only API DirectX 11, testing was carried out in built-in game applications. The graphics card settings were factory default.
As a result, the following results were obtained:
These results are very impressive for such a tiny video card.
Related posts:
AMD Ryzen 5 5600G vs Ryzen 7 5700G: Review | Benchmark | Overclocking | Test (Winner?) 
Intel Core i5-12600K Processor: Review (Special)| Overclocking| Benchmark | Specs 
Intel Core i7-11700K Processor: Review (Special)| Overclocking| Benchmark | Specs 
Intel Core i5-11400F Processor: Review (Special)| Overclocking | Benchmark | Specs 
Intel Core i5-11600K Processor: Review (Special)| Overclocking | Benchmark | Specs 
Intel Core i9-10900 Processor: Review (Special)| Overclocking| Benchmark| Specs
