Not bad but the EVGA GTX classified with ACX cooler is clocked at 993MHZ base clock. This asus card is equal to an EVGA superclocked card....maybe
Has anyone noticed the majority of these overclocked s[censored] are doing the same thing?
Say a chip like 760 which is 980/1033/1130-1150 for base, average, and max...where max is in reality the median under load.
The base clock really means nothing...the clock you use really is the median (it's the highest clock in this example where on a 760 980/1033 are advertised). It's a clever trick to make the chips at stock faster than they appear on paper.
The grand majority of overclocked s[censored] simply use the median clock as the second number...marketed as the boost clock (the more honest 'average' on a stock sku) and step up the median clock proportionally to the original quoted ratios...not unlike upping a multiplier on a cpu.
In effect, the real performance gain is far less than what it would appear, and probably gives insight into how the gpus are binned when taking boost into account.
I would love to be able to afford something in this range of performance. Ah I can still dream of the good old bachelor days when I could spend money on pc parts!