SLi does not play too kindly with deferred rendering....
SLi does not play too kindly with deferred rendering....
Stop looking at the walls, look out the window
Does this count as a user review from someone who bought one?
Originally Posted by Greg Brown
And I do. I'm just questioning the discrepancy between the tPU! test scores and the final results that the two cards got. Just that.This is why you should read multiple reviews.
The "best of the best" for gaming are screens that work @ 2560...? Isn't 2560 a resolution where the majority of screens are IPS? IPS and gaming? Sure...
As I said, you have no hard data to back that statement.And even if they choose just the most common denominator, its gonna be Full HD aka 1920x .
Again, show me a study or a statistic and then we'll talk. In the meanwhile you're just (wrongly) assuming that everyone who spends money on dual GPUs is a connaisseur.If you really believe that such a card will be paired with a low res monitor be it an joe enthusiast or joe gold teeth.I guess youre just out of touch with reality.
So why did they test it @ four resolutions? If the lower resolutions aren't relevant, why do it at all? And if they did it, why ignore those results? ...But getting back to the review score, they almost definitely took the highest res results only for consideration of the performance, because thats the target audience of this kind of cards.Ultra high end.
Mate, you've got some serious comprehension issues. The "all round" performance result chart gives the GTX590 a 4% lead over the 6990. Stop trying to spin that, it's a fact.Again, back from fairy land.It didnt get "all round" better results.
S-c-e-n-a-r-i-o. Cause it was one resolution only.It got worse results in high res scenarios (which are the most important ones for the reviewer i guess).
It blew up highly overvolted and with voltages way above the limits recommended by Asus.It blew up ,and wasnt alone in it.
Stop making stuff up...As for the price, they listed MSRP, because thats what they got from Nv.Real price is different.And they take into consideration real price not the imaginary one.
(http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...TX_590/27.html)Price-wise both HD 6990 and GTX 590 are tied around $700 which is a lot of money to spend on a graphics card.
Sure... He can (and he did) toss all the results up in the sky and give it the mark he wishers (and the, very subtle, EPIC FAIL anagram).And most importantly the score, isnt just a mathematical calculation of all the single results.Its a reviewers opinion based on what HE thinks is important for a buyer of such card.
The card blew up on him during testing @ stock? No. The card blew up on him while OCing? No. The card blew up on him while overvolting theThe card blew up on the guy. He wasnt particurarly impressed by that it seems.out of it to run... stock clocks. That's a really interesting test.
There's no reference to that on their review.As for the drivers and blewing up, for one, its nvidias fault and second ,asus gtx590 blew up in pclab.pl with the non-blewing drivers.
1- 11% advantage @ 1024x768, 7% advantage @ 1280x1024, 3% advantage @ 1680x1050, and same performance @ 1920x1200. But hey the 6990 got a 3% advantage @ 2560x1600, so it clearly deserves 2.1 more points.But yes, if you take only points you like, then the card is awesome.
-Massive 11% performance advantage (in 1024x768)
-Quieter (from very loud to loud)
-Most of them dont blow up!
-Overclocks higher! (with a big chance of not blowing up using semi correct drivers!)
2- If the GTX590 is loud imagine the 6990, but I'm sure that's a plus for the 6990.
3- Overclocks higher is certainly a con, right? No comments.
Good luck picking a red t-shirt among other t-shirts of other colors. It would be quite the feat for you.I strongly believe all TPU`s results are fair.As to the conclusion, reviewer has different opinion then yours, but given all the info this review gives out.Its up to you to really decide.
If he would be on AMDs payroll as you faintly suggest, they would choose specific amd only benchmarks and do them most favorably to AMD.Theres nothing fishy about the results.
Last edited by RSC; 03-28-2011 at 03:41 PM.
^^ And in the post above yours you have a card that blew up within a few days at stock voltage.
Both Asus and MSI fully cover the overvoltage limit within their overclocking software, every card by them comes advertised with an overvolting feature.It blew up highly overvolted and with voltages way above the limits recommended by Asus.
1025 Mv at which a card blew up in a video is meant to be perfectly acceptable under Asus's waranty and voltage tweak advertising.
Also, there are lots of GTX 590s actually blowing up at stock voltage and clocks, overvolting the cards within the limits of either Asus or MSI's overclocking software is not the issue.
Last edited by Mungri; 03-28-2011 at 03:42 PM.
My HP ZR30W has no problems gaming.
Bill Cosby: Stewie, what do you think candy is made out of?
Stewie Griffin: Sunshine and farts! What the hell kind of question is that?!
1- I don't see a valid link to that quote. And secondly, what drivers was he running?
2- The card @ tPU! blew up @ 1.2v, not 1.025v. The guys who blew up the card @ 1.025v tried it again with the new drivers and had no problems.
7ms response time is your idea of a good gaming monitor?
My HP ZR30W has no problems gaming.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...2&postcount=84
Even if its because of the drivers, have ATI cards ever blown up due to a driver problem? Erm, nope
This is at least the second time now for Nvidia to have released drivers that cause card explosions.
1.2v really isnt too much voltage for the current gen of video cards. Most people have already been going up to that much safely on air on all the fermi based cards so far. I'm sure that ATIs current cards run fine without blowing up on air up to 1.4v.
Last edited by Mungri; 03-28-2011 at 03:51 PM.
But if it is a driver problem it can be (or already was) easily fixed.
It really doesnt help if someone didnt know that prior to buying the card, and simply installed the drivers on the CD and ended up exploding their card.
You cant fix the problem after the card blows up with the drivers provided in the box. ATI's cards have never blown up like this due to drivers as far as I'm aware. Simply being able to fix it isnt a good enough excuse for such a faulty driver being released and supplied with the card.
An extract from ASUS’ GTX 590 reviewer’s guide:
It is not advised to exceed the 1.050 to 1.065 vcore range as this begins to meet the limits for the OCP/OVP mechanism on the card. Exceeding these values without disabling OCP/OVP or having superior cooling could affect the lifespan and functionality of the card/gpu.
--//--
Funny post @ tPU!:
(http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/sh...&postcount=479)i have found that the 6990 had similar issues with some reviewers.... looking for dead 590 cards of all things,but they were to scared to mention it in reviews.
they have good pmw so lets face it the deul cards of both side are trash
http://forums.overclockersclub.com/i...c=183386&st=36
BOSCO's posts
page 4-6
Ya the 6990's are not fairing much better I know of 4 cards that are dead so far with 2 more having issues. One of ours died as well..... shakes head
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Ha...tilles/18.html
so how did the overvolting go with the 6990 wizz any issues?
i dont see any voltage tweeks in that asus 6990 review maybe not avaliabe at the time? any plans for follow up review with of 20%+ voltage??
Last edited by RSC; 03-28-2011 at 04:03 PM.
Ok, but cards are still blowing up quite a fair amount under those voltages. Sticking them up to 1.2v was pretty stupid for a review tbh.It is not advised to exceed the 1.050 to 1.065 vcore range as this begins to meet the limits for the OCP/OVP mechanism on the card. Exceeding these values without disabling OCP/OVP or having superior cooling could affect the lifespan and functionality of the card/gpu.
Whith old drivers or new drivers..? That's the big question.
wow I haven't been here for a while, but its good to see some healthy flagship product rivalry, I'll continue on reading your interesting posts
Actually yes, IPS monitors do work decently well for gaming.
Let us know how you enjoy gaming at 800x600 with your GTX590.
All along the watchtower the watchmen watch the eternal return.
The point of buying a $700 dual GPU card is to play "decently"?
'Mate', if you were familiar with statistics you would know something about weighting.
E7200 @ 3.4 ; 7870 GHz 2 GB
Intel's atom is a terrible chip.
So then why are you ripping on IPS? Do you just not understand there is more at play than just pixel response times, or is that why you bother to take into consideration numbers below 1920x1080 which are pretty much pointless for anyone who's gonna blow that much cash on something like this?
All along the watchtower the watchmen watch the eternal return.
I'd let him hold on to that 4% which may very well be within the margin of error, without even considering anything below 1080p is pointless. You can't really take anyone using that argument seriously
http://translate.google.com/translat...count%3D352%27
Well, gentlemen, as to forget everything I wrote because GAME OVER ... I turned off the computer for lunch and rest a bit .. I've heard Clak plugged ... I smelled something burning .. and it's over. . no graphics, completely charred on the back ...
What a mob this **** Nvidia ... this is a clear manufacturing fault ... there was no OC at that time .. I have treated gently and returned it to me and
Anyway, what a joke ... I hope this dual Nvidia take action on the matter and review ALL call them back .. and under conditions as intel ... this has nothing to do with either the OC or to the driver .. just have a bad component and exploit .. as in the above video ... and I think the board has taken another P67 ahead ..? ?How many go ...
Well .. I think if I throw myself over a cliff or go to get drunk .. probably opt for the former ....
Last edited by Final8ty; 03-28-2011 at 08:35 PM.
And I do. I'm just questioning the discrepancy between the tPU! test scores and the final results that the two cards got. Just that.
The "best of the best" for gaming are screens that work @ 2560...? Isn't 2560 a resolution where the majority of screens are IPS? IPS and gaming? Sure...
As I said, you have no hard data to back that statement.
Again, show me a study or a statistic and then we'll talk. In the meanwhile you're just (wrongly) assuming that everyone who spends money on dual GPUs is a connaisseur.
So why did they test it @ four resolutions? If the lower resolutions aren't relevant, why do it at all? And if they did it, why ignore those results? ...
Mate, you've got some serious comprehension issues. The "all round" performance result chart gives the GTX590 a 4% lead over the 6990. Stop trying to spin that, it's a fact.
S-c-e-n-a-r-i-o. Cause it was one resolution only.
It blew up highly overvolted and with voltages way above the limits recommended by Asus.
Stop making stuff up...
(http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...TX_590/27.html)
Sure... He can (and he did) toss all the results up in the sky and give it the mark he wishers (and the, very subtle, EPIC FAIL anagram).
The card blew up on him during testing @ stock? No. The card blew up on him while OCing? No. The card blew up on him while overvolting the
There's no reference to that on their review.
1- 11% advantage @ 1024x768, 7% advantage @ 1280x1024, 3% advantage @ 1680x1050, and same performance @ 1920x1200. But hey the 6990 got a 3% advantage @ 2560x1600, so it clearly deserves 2.1 more points.
2- If the GTX590 is loud imagine the 6990, but I'm sure that's a plus for the 6990.
3- Overclocks higher is certainly a con, right? No comments.
Good luck picking a red t-shirt among other t-shirts of other colors. It would be quite the feat for you.
I've never seen such blatant nVidia fanboyism in my life.
That being realized, the GTX 590 had the potential to be a great card. I think nVidia tried to rush it and it is obviously showing. I'm sure most would have been as happy/enthused if nVidia took a bit longer to release a more robust card/reference design rather than this.
Last edited by ichime; 03-28-2011 at 09:04 PM.
Well they rushed it and now they have egg all over their face and sadly its going to stick till the next generation. Lets hope they fix this in a week or asap im sure by now they should have figured out what is causing it and really it does look like the VRM is a bad match. Maybe they can fix it with drivers but really wtf were their QC department doing.
on testing at lower resolutions:
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/sh...3&postcount=38
After reading some last pages... guys you should take % ratio / resolution with a little bit of distance .. watch game / game and make your conclusion based on that ..
On TP review, just remove WOW catalyst and you will end with ~4% difference in all resolution... Same goes when in a review you have the SLI who are not working for a games or driver bug ( DragonAge 2 ), imagine with the 6990 who run with nearly the double fps of the 590 in this game what happend if i put this result in a % ratio composed of 5 games ... whatever if the difference between both card, ( let say 2% ) , you will get a result who show a difference of maybe 7% on the end. using those type of " performance % ratio " is just here for be indicative.. Don't use thoses number like they was engrave on the stone . ( sorry for my english )..
Last edited by Lanek; 03-28-2011 at 11:49 PM.
CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0
yes i looked into this one since his is the first end user death..he had that puppy going 830 at 1.04 the day before.
althuogh he was using cd that came with the card,not the recommended driver
now that is a shame more then people always bringing up the fact that the card is weak .release a driver/card with no ocp in api?
_________________
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...&postcount=113Originally Posted by Greg Brown
It was my first overclock on the card, which was why I was running 3dMark11 on loop to check stability. The gpu clock was at 650Mhz and memory at 3600Mhz (1800Mhz in MSI Afterburner) so I'd barely started overclocking the card. After the horror stories going around the net I'd left 'voltage change' turned off in Afterburner so the card was running at its default 0.913v. It was part way through it's eighth run through of 3dmark when the fan noise started getting quieter and quieter. The instant the card went silent, I knew, but I couldn't leap across to the psu fast enough to yank the cable. Bang! Flash! Smoke!
The driver was v267.84, downloaded Wednesday from Nvidias site.
PS. I'd run Heaven for an hour at stock clocks just before doing the above.
Last edited by Final8ty; 03-29-2011 at 02:40 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks