NVIDIA Shuts Down RTX 5000 Power Limit Control OC in Latest Driver Update - TechPowerUp

요약

We recently reported on the open-source overclocking tool, mVolt+, unlocking power limit control on NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5000-series GPUs, allowing certain GPUs, like the RTX 5090, to draw up to 125 W of additional power and enabling significantly higher core c…

본문

Monday, August 31st 2026

NVIDIA Shuts Down RTX 5000 Power Limit Control OC in Latest Driver Update by Cpt.Jank Yesterday, 06:16 Discuss (50 Comments) We recently reported on the open-source overclocking tool, mVolt+, unlocking power limit control on NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5000-series GPUs, allowing certain GPUs, like the RTX 5090, to draw up to 125 W of additional power and enabling significantly higher core clock speeds as a result. With the latest driver update 616.56, however, it seems as though NVIDIA has blocked the core power control functionality.

Based on reports from the Overclock.net forums, via Uniko's Hardware on X, any attempt to input any extra current results in a black screen, reminiscent of a driver crash. Reportedly, a beta build of Hydra 2.3 is still able to access its core power overrides on NVIDIA GPUs, even after the driver update. It's unclear if NVIDIA has intentionally blocked mVolt+ or if it's simply an untested combination of mVolt+ and the new NVIDIA driver causing an incompatibility.

Sources: Overclock.net, via Uniko's Hardware

50 Comments on NVIDIA Shuts Down RTX 5000 Power Limit Control OC in Latest Driver Update

#1 Not surprised.
With the melting connector, 125 W + is just an increased risk for faster melting, I guess they know that.
They designed/approved of that underperforming connector even on 500 Watt draw. #2 Welp, someone got afraid of a spike in RMAs. There'd certainly be an increase in melting connectors. #3 Of course they did, that be the TI.

But seriously i cannot blame them really. #4 Makes sense. Best thing to do with all of RTX 50 series is undervolt anyway. Limit the peak voltage to 950-1000 mV (depending on bin) with a slight overclock. They end up drawing 50-100W less with no loss in performance. #5 Every front page post on TPU has mistyped 616.56 as 615.56 #6

phintsMakes sense. Best thing to do with all of RTX 50 series is undervolt anyway. Limit the peak voltage to 950-1000 mV (depending on bin) with a slight overclock. They end up drawing 50-100W less with no loss in performance.

Yup, did that with my 5070. Capped at 950mV with a 200Mhz OC which is around ~3Ghz under load. Performance is a few frames better while consuming 40W less. #7

rusty caterpillarNot surprised.
With the melting connector, 125 W + is just an increased risk for faster melting, I guess they know that.

JyubeiWelp, someone got afraid of a spike in RMAs. There'd certainly be an increase in melting connectors.

I am surprised.
I thought they wanted their cards back. :laugh: #8 They are terrified of the increased RMAs they must be seeing due to more 12vhpwr connectors melting, lol. #9

BigshrimpThey are terrified of the increased RMAs they must be seeing due to more 12vhpwr connectors melting, lol.

This will fix it....

www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/modders-solder-power-cables-directly-to-rtx-5090-pcb-to-eliminate-notorious-melting-16-pin-connector-bare-board-galax-hof-card-pulls-600w-under-chiller-cooling #10

zenlessyankThis will fix it....

www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/modders-solder-power-cables-directly-to-rtx-5090-pcb-to-eliminate-notorious-melting-16-pin-connector-bare-board-galax-hof-card-pulls-600w-under-chiller-cooling

Yeah I saw that to.
Why didn’t ENvidia just go with triple or quad 8 pins like a sane company? Also, wouldn’t overclocking it and a melting pin not be covered by RMA as you are running it outside of spec? #11

Let3rYeah I saw that to.
Why didn’t ENvidia just go with triple or quad 8 pins like a sane company? Also, wouldn’t overclocking it and a melting pin not be covered by RMA as you are running it outside of spec?

Proprietary-ness. Every corp has a backend concept that they want to control others to the point of extinction. If you can create a standard then you can charge for it and control how it is made. #12

Let3rYeah I saw that to.
Why didn’t ENvidia just go with triple or quad 8 pins like a sane company? Also, wouldn’t overclocking it and a melting pin not be covered by RMA as you are running it outside of spec?

Or maybe they should ship the cards with hardwired cables. Just plug them straight into your PSU and be done with it. Each OEM could do their own wizbang treatment with coordinated cable colors or RGB or whatever. #13 Does this include people like me who do power limit of 90 on my 5080 to conserve energy? if so, i am never upgrading my drivers lol #14

Darmok N JaladOr maybe they should ship the cards with hardwired cables. Just plug them straight into your PSU and be done with it. Each OEM could do their own wizbang treatment with coordinated cable colors or RGB or whatever.

Kinda surprised no one has done this before tbh, sounds like an honestly great idea. The thing is though, what's saying that fill-in-the-blank standard of hardwire cable couldn't be poorly designed, as the current melt-prone connectors are? Sure it's splitting hairs, but it's something to keep in mind perhaps. Still, great idea! #15

xorbeEvery front page post on TPU has mistyped 616.56 as 615.56

For some reason this happened to me too while adding the driver.. must be something about that number combination .. searching site-wide to fix

Edit: 2 news posts fixed #16 Melonvolt powah!! even my soon to be historic 4080 super came to life with that tool.. #17

SiliconSeraphKinda surprised no one has done this before tbh, sounds like an honestly great idea. The thing is though, what's saying that fill-in-the-blank standard of hardwire cable couldn't be poorly designed, as the current melt-prone connectors are? Sure it's splitting hairs, but it's something to keep in mind perhaps. Still, great idea!

I'm guessing the idea would be to use thicker cables.... they do look thicker.... hard to say how much of it is insulation though. #18

RootinTootinPootinMelonvolt powah!! even my soon to be historic 4080 super came to life with that tool..

That doesn't let you bypass the power limit either, doesn't it? #19

iameatingjamI'm guessing the idea would be to use thicker cables.... they do look thicker.... hard to say how much of it is insulation though.

More like the card has no more the anemic pins and crimple connection so is nothing left to heat up and melt.

Sol_BadguyI am surprised.
I thought they wanted their cards back. :laugh:

Do they pay? Got a 7600 GT :pimp: #20 I don't understand how they developed such a dumb connector. We had graphic cards that pulled 600W in the past and they were powered by 3x 8pin connectors. Which each per specs only supports 150W. I've been overclocking Radeon HD7950 hard back in the day pulling way more power than its power connectors were rated for. Zero issues. This dumbass connector is melting like Milka chocolate in a mildly warm room... #21

RejZoRI don't understand how they developed such a dumb connector. We had graphic cards that pulled 600W in the past and they were powered by 3x 8pin connectors. Which each per specs only supports 150W. I've been overclocking Radeon HD7950 hard back in the day pulling way more power than its power connectors were rated for. Zero issues. This dumbass connector is melting like Milka chocolate in a mildly warm room...

Its not just that its a bad connector, there's not even any kind of load balancing or any other kind of protection on the card itself like there should be for something with so much power running through such small cables and questionable mating mechanisms. Why do the connectors have to be so small? Even if it was a little bigger, with thicker cables, one reliable mating mechanism, and the right measures built into the card to help avoid problems (if necessary, like it is now) and or with some more safety margin built in. I am 100% certain nvidia is capable of producing a single, simple cable that can deliver 600w without any problem.

I can kind of understand if they wanted to stop the need for 2 or 3 cables for a gpu, but I cannot understand how a company that designs such advanced silicon and software, can be so incompetent with something as simple as power delivery when it comes to the replacement.... Something that was already well established and reliable before, like you say.

Instead its the PSU companies and the board partners that are trying to find ways to fix the problem. All so nvidia can what? Save face? #22 This is the new normal. NVIDIA is treating overclocking as a security risk — or at least a warranty risk. Expect future drivers to lock down even more. The era of "free performance" through software tweaks on NVIDIA cards may be coming to an end. #23

iameatingjamWhy do the connectors have to be so small?

To save PCB space. Cheaper for the card makers but not for the one who buys the card -> more profit.

Also to have greater thermal density and smaller contacts with less conductivity, it fails sooner, therefore one way or another the user is forced to upgrade sooner -> more profit.

iameatingjamEven if it was a little bigger, with thicker cables, one reliable mating mechanism, and the right measures built into the card to help avoid problems (if necessary, like it is now) and or with some more safety margin built in.

A single beefy connector and subsequent cable (say 14AWG wires) would be more difficult to bend and to route.

iameatingjamI am 100% certain nvidia is capable of producing a single, simple cable that can deliver 600w without any problem.

They are but that was never the intent.

Because zero effort was required.
The 8 pin EPS was already invented. Two of those (using 16AWG wires just like the current PCIe and 12V-2x6 cables) can safely supply 600 W.

iameatingjamI can kind of understand if they wanted to stop the need for 2 or 3 cables for a gpu

That was some clever manipulation, a trojan horse. They had all the pushers and influencers implant this into the mind of the populace and many fell for it, then they started parroting it to others.
It was so the perception regarding the connector was positive.
When in fact it was never about "solving the cable mess" because the official nVidia and its AIBs recommendation is to use the octopus adapter which keeps the same cable mess, the only difference is the mess doesn't start right at the edge of a GPU with a longer PCB, instead some cm further from the edge of a GPU with a shorter PCB.

iameatingjambut I cannot understand how a company that designs such advanced silicon and software, can be so incompetent with something as simple as power delivery when it comes to the replacement....

On the contrary only some very competent but nefarious individuals can come up with such a perfect time bomb connector. #24 It is great nvidia created the 12VHPWR connector so you only need one connetor on a card,
But we already arrived to the point where we need 12VHPWR connectors for the high end cards.

#25

Sol_BadguyTo save PCB space. Cheaper for the card makers but not for the one who buys the card -> more profit.

Also to have greater thermal density and smaller contacts with less conductivity, it fails sooner, therefore one way or another the user is forced to upgrade sooner -> more profit.

A single beefy connector and subsequent cable (say 14AWG wires) would be more difficult to bend and to route.

They are but that was never the intent.

Because zero effort was required.
The 8 pin EPS was already invented. Two of those (using 16AWG wires just like the current PCIe and 12V-2x6 cables) can safely supply 600 W.

That was some clever manipulation, a trojan horse. They had all the pushers and influencers implant this into the mind of the populace and many fell for it, then they started parroting it to others.
It was so the perception regarding the connector was positive.
When in fact it was never about "solving the cable mess" because the official nVidia and its AIBs recommendation is to use the octopus adapter which keeps the same cable mess, the only difference is the mess doesn't start right at the edge of a GPU with a longer PCB, instead some cm further from the edge of a GPU with a shorter PCB.

On the contrary only some very competent but nefarious individuals can come up with such a perfect time bomb connector.

I wasn't saying it was a good idea, or that there was any need on the customer side, just that what they claimed to be accomplishing, could have been accomplished in a much better way.

EDIT: PCB space is a good point, but yeah, the current solution is just unacceptable if you ask me. Add your own comment

출처: Techpowerup.com

원문 게시일: 2026-08-30T21:16:02Z

이 글은 NewsAPI를 통해 자동으로 수집된 콘텐츠입니다. 원문은 위 링크를 통해 확인하세요.

NVIDIA Shuts Down RTX 5000 Power Limit Control OC in Latest Driver Update - TechPowerUp

요약

본문

Related News

50 Comments on NVIDIA Shuts Down RTX 5000 Power Limit Control OC in Latest Driver Update