Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kevhuynh
To take it a step further, back in the day people were a LOT more stringent on what was considered an Overclocking success. A single pass through a 3dmark hardly qualifies as a true test of overcloking reliability. Usually, letting it loop for a few hours stably should do the trick. Why do I mention this? I hit X mark with my Dell 8600 (can't remember the score exactlY). ran through without artifacts fine. I played about an hour on UT2k4 and it auto reset with a heat related error message. Point is, going through one run is really not a valid indicator of a TRUE overclocking success...although it is fun for E-bragging rights..
|
Exactly! One loop is meaningless, especially in a laptop where heat build up is a big concern. At the very least, I would do a 30 minute to 1 hour test under high stress conditions (high resolution, AA and AF turned on) in order to qualify an overclock as being stable.
Oh, and another thing, Omega drivers are unofficial modified drivers, so I doubt they will ever be approved by Futuremark. Technically, they are not even fully WHQL tested (although the binary code should be the same as the WHQL tested Catalysts). For reference, here's a page that lists Futuremark approved drivers:
http://www.futuremark.com/community/drivers/?approved
