• 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 RTX 3090 SERIES STOCK SITUATION - NO COMPETITOR DISCUSSION ***

Nvidia dropped a massive bollock if they didn’t limit the number per person tbh.

40 cards... :(
 
Frubeling said:
And do you think a bot would have difficulty firing off 5 orders in quick succession, or even concurrently given the right setup?
Click to expand...

Of course not. I guess my first position is to assume a member of an enthusiast forum would not be the person to be a scalper. That is probably incredibly naive of me however.
 
snips86x said:
Throw the cap issue in the mix as well, this is absolute carnage.
Click to expand...
Is it an issue though? I think Jayztwocents caused a lot of trouble by jumping the gun.

Debauer had a good video where he replaced the expensive MLCCs with the cheap alternative and the cards performed the same. Now, shunt-modding appears to be the best gains.

Not many people talking about that though.
 
Quare Crack said:
Of course not. I guess my first position is to assume a member of an enthusiast forum would not be the person to be a scalper. That is probably incredibly naive of me however.
Click to expand...
I'm sure he's not a scalper
One of the more popular bots that was used, BounceAlerts, claims to be designed for people who absolutely don't want to miss out on launch day purchases. Some people just used it to buy bulk to scalp. I think the fellow here simply used software in the way that company claims it's intended to be used


EVH said:
Nvidia dropped a massive bollock if they didn’t limit the number per person tbh.

40 cards... :(
Click to expand...
I think it was already in place on the 3090 launch, but the 3080 FE definitely launched with no limit to the quantity you could put in your cart and only had that implemented after it had already sold out the first time
 
EVH said:
Is it an issue though? I think Jayztwocents caused a lot of trouble by jumping the gun.

Debauer had a good video where he replaced the expensive MLCCs with the cheap alternative and the cards performed the same. Now, shunt-modding appears to be the best gains.

Not many people talking about that though.
Click to expand...

Good point I suppose. I guess a lot has been cherry picked and in all honesty, I've been following at a distance. It's probably been blown out of proportion but still, releasing a driver update to downclock and reduce the symptoms seems underhanded.
 
snips86x said:
Good point I suppose. I guess a lot has been cherry picked and in all honesty, I've been following at a distance. It's probably been blown out of proportion but still, releasing a driver update to downclock and reduce the symptoms seems underhanded.
Click to expand...
Nvidia only guarantee 1740mhz. Anything above that is controlled by GPU boost and dependant on cooling and power headroom.

My understanding is that the driver limits the absolute maximum that the gpu boost will achieve for stability.

Think of broadband... they advertise “up to 80Mbps” because some people only get 35Mbps”. If they live closer to the service they can typically get more but that’s life.

As long as the card hits the guaranteed minimum then anything else is a bonus.
 
EVH said:
Nvidia only guarantee 1740mhz. Anything above that is controlled by GPU boost and dependant on cooling and power headroom.

My understanding is that the driver limits the absolute maximum that the gpu boost will achieve for stability.

Think of broadband... they advertise “up to 80Mbps” because some people only get 35Mbps”. If they live closer to the service they can typically get more but that’s life.

As long as the card hits the guaranteed minimum then anything else is a bonus.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is the caps that is the issue. I think it is a mixture of all the lower performing cards are constantly hitting the power limit and the drivers didn't work so well. After the new drivers came out I got noticeably more stability with my 3080. But still experienced crashes with the Ventus. It has the lowest power limit. I could leave it for hours static on the same screen and it wouldn't crash. But bring into the mix action, aiming down the sights and cut scenes and it would become crash city even with new drivers. Had to return my 3080 ventus in the end for (hopefully) a replacement if I don't lose my place in the queue (not from here) because I need an RMA replacement. Otherwise refund. Not overly keen on the Ventus so I don't mind.
 
EVH said:
Is it an issue though? I think Jayztwocents caused a lot of trouble by jumping the gun.

Debauer had a good video where he replaced the expensive MLCCs with the cheap alternative and the cards performed the same. Now, shunt-modding appears to be the best gains.

Not many people talking about that though.
Click to expand...


TiN from EVGA had a good comment on that whole situation and he knows a hell of a lot more about the makeup of the actual hardware than most of the youtubers ...... lifted it from the EVGA forums below ......

"Whole article is based on speculations of speculations. First of all, high-current DC-DC PDN (power delivery network) is real challenge, and indeed must use proper decoupling. However it does not mean that use of POSCAP/SPCAP or MLCC is the best in every case. Much more depends on transient tuning and VRM settings, and PCB layout itself, than using MLCC or POSCAP in specific spot. Just replacing everything with MLCCs will NOT help the design to reach higher speeds and stability. Why? Because one need to use all different caps in tandem, as their frequency response is different, as well as ESR, ESL and other factors.

Having everything with MLCC like glorified asus does means you have single deep resonance notch, instead of two less prominent notches when use MLCC+POSCAP together. Using three kinds, smaller POSCAP, bigger POSCAP, and some MLCCs gives better figure with 3 notches.. But again, with modern DC-DC controllers lot of this can be tuned from PID control and converter slew rate tweaks. This adjustability is one of big reasons why enthusiast cards often use "digital" that allows tweaking almost on the fly for such parameters. However this is almost never exposed to user, as wrong settings can easily make power phases go brrrrrr with smokes. Don't ask me how I know...

Everybody going nuts now with MLCC or POSCAP, but I didn't see a single note that actual boards used DIFFERENT capacitance and capacitor models, e.g. some use 220uF , some use 470uF
smile.gif
There are 680 or even 1000uF capacitors in D case on the market, that can be used behind GPU die. It is impossible to install that much of capacitance with MLCC in same spot for example, as largest cap in 0603 is 47uF for example.

Before looking onto poor 6 capacitors behind the die - why nobody talks about huge POSCAP capacitor bank behind VRM on FE card, eh? Custom AIB cards don't have that, just usual array without much of bulk capacitance. If I'd be designing a card, I'd look on a GPU's power demands and then add enough bulk capacitance first to make sure of good power impedance margin at mid-frequency ranges, while worrying about capacitors for high-frequency decoupling later, as that is relatively easier job to tweak.

After all these wild theories are easy to test, no need any engineering education to prove this wrong or right. Take "bad" crashing card with "bad POSCAPs", test it to confirm crashes... Then desolder "bad POSCAPs", put bunch of 47uF low-ESR MLCCs instead, and test again if its "fixed". Something tells me that it would not be such a simple case and card may still crash, heh. ;-)"
 
Absolutely, I think that Jay saw a card crash then tested it against a card which didn’t and did a simple “spot the difference” which led to the wrong conclusion.

I’m subscribed to him on YouTube and I don’t envy anyone having to break these sorts of stories before Joe public gets their hands on but I just think in his eagerness he created a storm where perhaps there wasn’t one.
 
Krazeyivan said:
TiN from EVGA had a good comment on that whole situation and he knows a hell of a lot more about the makeup of the actual hardware than most of the youtubers ...... lifted it from the EVGA forums below ......

"Whole article is based on speculations of speculations. First of all, high-current DC-DC PDN (power delivery network) is real challenge, and indeed must use proper decoupling. However it does not mean that use of POSCAP/SPCAP or MLCC is the best in every case. Much more depends on transient tuning and VRM settings, and PCB layout itself, than using MLCC or POSCAP in specific spot. Just replacing everything with MLCCs will NOT help the design to reach higher speeds and stability. Why? Because one need to use all different caps in tandem, as their frequency response is different, as well as ESR, ESL and other factors.

Having everything with MLCC like glorified asus does means you have single deep resonance notch, instead of two less prominent notches when use MLCC+POSCAP together. Using three kinds, smaller POSCAP, bigger POSCAP, and some MLCCs gives better figure with 3 notches.. But again, with modern DC-DC controllers lot of this can be tuned from PID control and converter slew rate tweaks. This adjustability is one of big reasons why enthusiast cards often use "digital" that allows tweaking almost on the fly for such parameters. However this is almost never exposed to user, as wrong settings can easily make power phases go brrrrrr with smokes. Don't ask me how I know...

Everybody going nuts now with MLCC or POSCAP, but I didn't see a single note that actual boards used DIFFERENT capacitance and capacitor models, e.g. some use 220uF , some use 470uF
smile.gif
There are 680 or even 1000uF capacitors in D case on the market, that can be used behind GPU die. It is impossible to install that much of capacitance with MLCC in same spot for example, as largest cap in 0603 is 47uF for example.

Before looking onto poor 6 capacitors behind the die - why nobody talks about huge POSCAP capacitor bank behind VRM on FE card, eh? Custom AIB cards don't have that, just usual array without much of bulk capacitance. If I'd be designing a card, I'd look on a GPU's power demands and then add enough bulk capacitance first to make sure of good power impedance margin at mid-frequency ranges, while worrying about capacitors for high-frequency decoupling later, as that is relatively easier job to tweak.

After all these wild theories are easy to test, no need any engineering education to prove this wrong or right. Take "bad" crashing card with "bad POSCAPs", test it to confirm crashes... Then desolder "bad POSCAPs", put bunch of 47uF low-ESR MLCCs instead, and test again if its "fixed". Something tells me that it would not be such a simple case and card may still crash, heh. ;-)"
Click to expand...

So if I understand this correctly, something something capacitors, something something GPU mur-mur-hur-debur...
 
Last edited:
We've created a system to email customers their queue positions, which we're planning on doing weekly. I believe we've already started emailing queue positions out and we're working on emailing everyone's initial queue positions to them within the next few days
Click to expand...

Has anyone that ordered a 3090 recieved one of these emails yet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom