• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 Reviews and Discussion Thread ***

biuro74 said:
Yes, I'm quite unhappy that my thread was closed :=] I thought 2 hours before NDA ends should be appropriate time to open new topic for GTX 590, but it seems like someone else wanted to do it first ;-)
Click to expand...

No it's because in the past when the review thread opens before any reviews actually turn up you have to then wade through pages of garbage.
 
biuro74 said:
Yes, I'm quite unhappy that my thread was closed :=] I thought 2 hours before NDA ends should be appropriate time to open new topic for GTX 590, but it seems like someone else wanted to do it first ;-)
Click to expand...

I'm not in the slightest bit interested in being the first to create threads. When ever a new graphics card is soon to be released, any early 'review' threads which I spot, I will close immediately. Otherwise by the time the reputable review web sites publish their reviews, the thread already contains several pages of rather uninteresting information. Anyway, the thread is now yours. Have fun. :)
 
rjkoneill said:
benchmarks and overclocking progress from me here.
using the drivers the card ships with.

BENCHMARKS...

overclocking the card using the drivers in the box.

we have a beta version of afterburner also which can be found on guru3d. this allows for voltage control.
i am so impressed with the capability of this card. same kind of noise levels as the 580. most impressive.
even when heavily clocked at the max i could get out of it, it wasnt going above 85'c
i cant wait to get one and slap a waterblock on it. at 2560X1600, there is no other option in my opinion.

testing conducted on a 2500K @ 4.4GHz with 4gb of 1600MHz memory using a Gigabyte P67 UD4 B3 motherboard.

my benchmarks for heaven/stbility testing were conducted using the Asus GTX 590. this was a full retail example that Gibbo was given to test on.
the thread with the full benchmark resulsts from a nice cross section of our users can be found here.

this will allow you to compare the scores easily.

only the most heavily overclocked 580/480 setups are pulling away on it.

I think the results speak for themselves.
clocking progress included:
Click to expand...


Amazing. This is the kind of review I've been wanting to see. So you actually do get to pretty high clocks on GTX 590. Would be interesting to compare this with 6990/580 SLI performance figures, because that's the real comparison. If it can exceed the 6990 by a fair margin (of about 15% at least) and match 580 SLI clock for clock then it's totally worth the price. If it can't then 6990 is the clear winner.

EDIT: there's also the fact that these GPUs have been binned so well taht they are reaching pretty high clocks at pretty low voltages. Would be interesting to see how high volts/clocks it will be stable at - as long as the cooling is managed with 3rd party watercooling even.
 
Fire Wizard said:
I'm not in the slightest bit interested in being the first to create threads. When ever a new graphics card is soon to be released, any early 'review' threads which I spot, I will close immediately. Otherwise by the time the reputable review web sites publish their reviews, the thread already contains several pages of rather uninteresting information. Anyway, the thread is now yours. Have fun. :)
Click to expand...

well handled i must say :p
 
Mr Paul said:
So it's slightly slower on average then a 6990 and it's £100 more lol

nVidia you have a winner!
Click to expand...

Do a bit more research

As it turns out it's only a little pricer than the 6990 on average (about £20 difference on average). The exception is the extra cheap 6990s from OCUK which are about £40-£50 less than the cheapest GTX 590 you can get.

Given that the 590 matches the 6990 on ultra low clocks (at which it also is a lot more power efficient at load - saving you the difference in power bills i bet), and that it overclocks way better 6990 does have a winner, but without sarcasm
 
xsistor said:
Do a bit more research

As it turns out it's only a little pricer than the 6990 on average (about £20 difference on average). The exception is the extra cheap 6990s from OCUK which are about £40-£50 less than the cheapest GTX 590 you can get.

Given that the 590 matches the 6990 on ultra low clocks (at which it also is a lot more power efficient), and that it overclocks way better NVIDIA does have a winner, but without sarcasm
Click to expand...

"I tried 1.2 V to see how much could be gained here, at default clocks and with NVIDIA's power limiter enabled. I went to heat up the card and then *boom*, a sound like popcorn cracking, the system turned off and a burnt electronics smell started to fill up the room. Card dead! Even with NVIDIA power limiter enabled. Now the pretty looking, backlit GeForce logo was blinking helplessly and the fan did not spin, both indicate an error with the card's 12V supply.
After talking to several other reviewers, this does not seem to be an isolated case, and many of them have killed their cards with similar testing, which is far from being an extreme test."

Explosive overclocking you could say.
 
xsistor said:
Do a bit more research

As it turns out it's only a little pricer than the 6990 on average (about £20 difference on average). The exception is the extra cheap 6990s from OCUK which are about £40-£50 less than the cheapest GTX 590 you can get.

Given that the 590 matches the 6990 on ultra low clocks (at which it also is a lot more power efficient at load - saving you the difference in power bills i bet), and that it overclocks way better 6990 does have a winner, but without sarcasm
Click to expand...

The only thing nvidia win on here is there better cooler. This won't be the case when vendors bring out better coolers for the 6990 and these 6990's will probably still be cheaper than the gtx590. Would you overclock your brand new gtx590 after hearing it could possibly blow up? Lets face facts it was always going to be hard for nvidia to match amd on the dual gpu front and they came up a little short. I am not sure why people are so surprised as amd do have the better rato at watt/performance.
 
Marine-RX179 said:
People that own Core2Quad/Phenom II X4 or x6 that want to upgrading their gaming to 2560 res or 3 screens, but don't have a SLI/Crossfire capable motherboard?
Click to expand...

fair enough :) Just from a few reviews it seems all the top end single cards (480, 6****'s) when in sli and crossfire beat both the 6990/590 yet they are priced so high!
 
xsistor said:
Given that the 590 matches the 6990 on ultra low clocks (at which it also is a lot more power efficient at load - saving you the difference in power bills i bet),
Click to expand...

Eh ?

Nearly every review shows the 590 using around 70w more in total system load compared to the 6990.

How exactly does that equal ' a lot more power efficient at load ' ?
 
Hmm, the problem is less cooling of two fermis on one board, the biggest issue is VRM's and power delivery, when overvolting to try to get 580gtx + speeds the cards blow, its a shame really, why, seriously why AMD, blower fans are just horrible for noise, CFM, everything, they win slightly in pressure IIRC but in this situation thats completely and utterly not an issue.

IF AMD went and replaced every 6990 with a bigger hole and a proper fan, frankly it would spank the 590gtx in every situation, not least because power usage goes down a little under cooler a decent drop in temps.

THe only way I wouldn't have an issue with the rubbish fan is AIB's getting their Twin FrozR/Direct CU and all the other daftly named 3rd party cooling versions within a few days of launch. AMD and Nvidia need to work WAY more closely with AIB's to get better cooling done quicker, but theres still no reason AMD has to use the same rubbish blower fans.


The other slight issue is guys like Anandtech using powertune + 20% settings, while leaving Nvidia high end cards with their Furmark limiter intact, yes Furmark the noise gets silly but I've not seen a single other review show 70dba+ noise levels, even in furmark but in gaming its no where near as bad.

If Nvidia/AMD went with triple slot cooling as standard, both could even be really good cards. I didn't realise the suppose PCI-E spec allows for triple slot cooling anyway, even then the PCI-E guys say they are merely "guidelines", same with the overall power draw, as long as it works, its okay, they are just there to stop truly bad designs becoming the norm or unsafe.
 
MoodyB said:
Eh ?

Nearly every review shows the 590 using around 70w more in total system load compared to the 6990.

How exactly does that equal ' a lot more power efficient at load ' ?
Click to expand...

Certain fanboys will see only Furmark on a few very poor sites using AMD's maxed powertune setting vs Nvidia's Furmark heavily limited results and decide its far more power efficient, in games the 590gtx seems to use anything from 10-50W more while offering same/less performance, depends more on the game code than the cards if you ask me, some favour AMD, some favour Nvidia, usually though Nvidia have a powerful single core that even in games that don't heavily favour Nvidia the performance lead is just cut as opposed to overturned.

If Anandtech published an equally unfair test like AMD with powertune to -20% and Furmark limiter turned off for the 590gtx, it would look horrifically bad for Nvidia and Nvidia guys would be all over the place calling Anandtech biased and stupid. In reality Anandtech just showed they are horribly out of touch with the 6970 review, they drew conclusions, misrepresented power draw and made conclusions from their own results that completely contradict what their own results show, they don't seem to "get" powertune. For instance they decided max power draw of 250W for the 6970 was the "normal" powerdraw, and started to call powertune +20% as 300W at various stages. The fact its 250W WITH the +20% powertune and just under 200W without it didn't seem to matter, nor that those numbers were listed in all the AMD information and most other sites managed to get it right.

Because the 590gtx doesn't have its usual lead as the 580gtx had its good games are only matching the 6990 and its bad ones are behind. Its not a bad card, but it clearly shows(as all the 68xx/69xx/58xx vs 4xx/5xx cards already did) that AMD have the more efficient architecture, however with dual GPU's they are limited by power/components on a single card, with the same overall power usage, AMD win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom