Official GTX 590 Review Thread (23 reviews at this time)

[AnandThenMan]

Why was it set to 0?
Who modded the bios?

Are you saying all the cards that failed had a modded BIOS?

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Are you saying all the cards that failed had a modded BIOS?

yes. When the gpu boots it sets itself to a performance level which is set in its bios. That way they always boot on a safe mode. Now the bios got tables for each performance levels eg 2d, 3d etc etc and its got a voltage table. When the gpu boots up its in a low performance setting. When the drivers and windows loads the drivers will scan both tables and select one for the situation. When windows starts it will select 2d mode. Now it monitors the gpu when the gpu starts to work it will then select a different performance level from the table which will make it run to its reference or whatever clocks that were set while it will scan the voltage table then select the a value from it. Remember the driver doesn't know a thing of the gpu it just scans the tables. Now the only way to bypass thermal throttle and such is to hide that tables from the drivers. Eg zap the pointer or set it as 0. Which Asus do with their cards. So for the card to get damaged only points to the bios. What happened to the tables on it?

 

[TerabyteX]

I would not say that. Due to SLI and Crossfire scaling issues, where one may scale really well or really badly compared to the other, I would not call these the closest cards ever. Comparing two single-GPU cards would be more accurate. Like 460 vs 6850. 6970 vs 570. 4870 vs 260. Etc. Dual-GPU cards may average out the same, but the range is bigger.

Now these are probably the closest performing dual-GPU cards from each company. And that isn't too surprising. Both of these chips are the second generation on 40nm. So each company was able to tweak their designs and get maximum performance at 40nm. And due to power delivery and thermal restraints, both companies had to work with that limitation. So they were able to maximize (rather, improved, as I'm sure they could still make more efficient chips at 40nm) efficiency for their second generation, and basically tune the performance until they hit the power and thermal wall for a single PCB card. Since each maximized efficiency, the end result is efficiency is roughly the same, with it looking like overall AMD has a small advantage for now (considering their card uses a bit less power and is at least equal in performance). But that also shouldn't be a surprise, since efficiency has been AMD's design goal since HD 3000.

Yes, it seems that the smaller die approach of AMD helped a lot here. I wonder who would had jumped first in the 32nm process if it ever existed, or who would had the fastest dual GPU solution. . . Food for though..

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Amd wouldve ruled the gpu market if they only get consistency with their drivers. A lot of people spend their money on nvidia gpus just for that reason. The drivers

 

[3DVagabond]

The latest drivers are the 267.85 on Nvidia's website.
Hardware heaven has used them.
Just a heads up bud.:thumbsup:

Thanks for the heads up, but it doesn't apply to my post about the original drivers performing better than the later ones they used. I did know that there was another update, apparently to enable quad SLI (590x2), after they did their review.

 

[ocre]

It may seem that I favor AMD, which is actually not the case, I like both architectures. I am an engineer, so I appreciate equally the strengths of both of these architectures. The facts are:
1. The two architectures are drastically different, one is SIMM (AMD) the other is MIMM (NV) architecture.
2. MIMM architecture is allot more power hungry. Can you call it superior? Depends on your definition of superior...

One Cuda Core is allot more powerful than 1 stream processor. This is why you see NVidia win at lower resolutions. This is not the 1.5GB vs 2GB limit, this is number of simultaneous instructions limit. Cuda Core can render 1 pixel faster than stream processor can render that same pixel, but 500 cuda cores cant render 1500 pixels as fast as 1500 stream processors can render them, b/c cuda core is less than 3 times faster than 1 stream processor.

The end result is:
590 is a MASSIVE card with ALLOT of potential, but it only ties 6990, rather then beat it, because it can not run at its full potential due to power requirement and heat generated.

I own 2 6990s, because when I saw power specs for a 580 I realized that 590 will have to be crippled by clock speeds and voltages to have it stay within PCIe spec. Which is what it is...

I think its clear that I am not a fanboy for either camp, since I own 2x6990s and am arguing for superior architecture, but terrible power profile of 590...

GF110 GPUs CAN handle clock cycles and voltages of 580, its just imposible to keep em cool with air at the voltages required. Plus the power circuit for the card is not beefy enough to feed the 2 gpus at their full potential. I suspect that 3rd party non-reference designs will be much better, if are coupled with water cooling and beefier power circuit, but then they will pull 600-700W per card...

first you mixing up things idk why. the 590 being underclocked? the 580 is much more capable than the 6970, it uses more power too. the 570 is closer to the 6970, i think your missing this fact, if it was about clock speed, if that mattered, wouldnt you think nvidia could clock 2 570s higher than 2 580s? you act as if it was even from the go, its not even at all. These are two radically different approaches, by design, all along. nvidia went for more cores and a low clock rather that higher clocked 570s? is it no surprise to see the low clocks? this was their design. you can say what you will but the AMD approach wasnt any better in the end than nvidias. you missing the fact, clearly AMDs design met limitations and they got no more performance than nvidias.

Now you are going stray from true understanding. Its your fanboyism, no offense. You arent seeing the big picture. These are two totally different architectures completely. Both have the pros and cons. you say the 590 is a massive card with a lot of potential but its too power hungry to reach it? What? understand that both cards are the max they could be, AMD and Nvidia! they both took their designs to the Max. The both had power limitations, Your 6990 is slower than two 6970s btw! But thats not the point, you are looking for a way to feel like AMD done it better. I am hear tellin you that AMDs approach got them no further than nvidias. thats truth.

was you asking if i thought the MIMM architecture was better? not at all, Nvidias more powerful cores do use more power than AMDs. AMD has a winning design, but the reality is they are different means to an end. These ultra powerful race to the top proves nothing but both approaches are great and neither wins in the end. Of course nvidia clocked its cuda cores lower, thats to get a card to the max the best they could. this max was also AMDs max, they ended in nearly the exact place. Did u really want to see nvidia be able to have to full 580s and blow the 6990 away? would everyone realize that they both had limitations and took their architectures to the highest possible and it was a tie!

its crazy cause its like i am having to defend nvidia when i am extremely proud of AMDs accomplishment. I think they did the best they possibly could and i think its awesome that nvidia proved that AMD is an extreme. You cant say the 6990 performance isnt amassing, can you? well nvidia reached that, exactly that performance and you better believe both tried hard to be on top!!

its never been this outcome, nvidia and amd proved to me that they are both on top of their game. If one design was more capable, it wouldve won. They both mastered their individual architectures and proved to each other, they both are on the same level. They tied, and its unbelievable ppl dont see this as amassing. AMD proved that their design was no more capable than nvidias. The power limitations of fermi is still being thrown up? well nvidias approach got them just as far as AMDs.

 

[Idontcare]

Do you know the stock voltage of a 6970? They use up to 1.4v when overclocked, so I would say 1.2v is fine. Now to put the shoe on the other foot. If the 6990 was released today and this Wizzard guy pumped 1.5v in the card and blew it up within hours,I would still call him a retard, especially when the 6970 would not handle that voltage (1.5v), just as we all know a gtx580 would not handle 1.2volts. There is a reason Msi afterburner puts a cap of about 1.087 on all Nvidia cards, because they run at lower voltages at stock, and we all know this.
On any Nvidia card you must hack the bios to overvolt to 1.2v.
I'm sure if Wizzard is the genious that everyone thinks he, is HE KNEW THAT.
Are you saying he did it on purpose?,because if he did he would be called alot worse things then retard.

Dum, stupid, irresponsible, mabe retard is the wrong word, but I think you get my point.

Folks...it was reported, and I was curious so I did a ctrl-f on "retard" and my google finder tells me there are 37 instances of this disparaging word on page 3 alone (my pages are 100posts).

This is just shameful. There are many acceptable uses of the word "retard"...but it is not acceptable to use it in a disparaging manner.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/retard

We are better than this. I thank the poster above for publicly recognizing this truth in their last sentence.

Throwing out the intermittent "that's retarded" quip is not acceptable. Using it to disparage people, and in wholesale fashion as I am witnessing here in this thread, is disgraceful.

C'mon folks, you are better than this. Mentally challenged individuals don't deserve to have the reality of their mental faculty be used as the basis of a disparaging term.

And I am darn well sure that Anand would be none to proud to see the members of his supposed technical community using this term to disparage anyone.

Is this how you guys want people across the internet to come to think of Anand's forums?

For shame people. For shame.

Get your act together. I spent that last week in bed quite ill with the flu and I come back to see the forum has been over-run with potty-mouthed children throwing temper-tantrums who can't do better than to pull out the classic 3rd grader "retard" quip to spice up their posts.

Now stop acting like children that need their mouths washed out with soap and try acting like the technical forum this place is supposed to be.

Idontcare
Super Moderator

 

[3DVagabond]

I bought the cheapest 460 I could find, then overvolted it as high as afterburner would let me and overclocked it over 900 core. Lots of people have done the same thing. Go ahead and criticize gtx 590 all day b/c it deserves it, but you're not going to enhance your credibility much by criticizing the best card released in 2010.

I wasn't disparaging it in that post. I was just noting how the card I assumed (bad on my part, apparently) happymedium had chosen for himself was, arguably, the best 460 you could buy. I didn't realize it was a friend he got it from.

Now, with that said, I have posted a link to 460's with reference PWN blowing their power stage when O/C.

http://translate.google.com/transla...809-5/comparatif-14-geforce-gtx-460-1-go.html

Take from it what you want.

As far as the 460 being the best card released in all of 2010, that's your opinion. I don't even think it's the best card released in '10 in it's price category. I would take the 6850 over it. More efficient, better overall performance. YMMV, of course.

 

[ArchAngel777]

I wasn't disparaging it in that post. I was just noting how the card I assumed (bad on my part, apparently) happymedium had chosen for himself was, arguably, the best 460 you could buy. I didn't realize it was a friend he got it from.

Now, with that said, I have posted a link to 460's with reference PWN blowing their power stage when O/C.

http://translate.google.com/transla...809-5/comparatif-14-geforce-gtx-460-1-go.html

Take from it what you want.

As far as the 460 being the best card released in all of 2010, that's your opinion. I don't even think it's the best card released in '10 in it's price category. I would take the 6850 over it. More efficient, better overall performance. YMMV, of course.

Yeah, but the 6850 was late.

 

[ocre]

thanks i dont care, i dont think ppl realize that they arent getting the result they think they are. I have consistently been hearing how insane it is in the forums over here and its for real. I posted trying to let yous see that its being a joke at other sites. I have always been an anand viewer and fan, I havent posted in yrs. I didnt even think i should. How many others are afraid to post. I enjoy tech forums, this one is brutal? its a level that you might not see. Really fights over brands have made this place only for the ones who fight, your not getting to the ones who are against you, they will never sway their views. You no its no use when your arguing with a fanboy. What you dont see is the outsiders perception, your not getting the results you want. its just mmessing up the forums here.

I am not judging you guys, i am not saying i am better, i just want you to know, for real as an outsider its not a good place at the atf anymore. all of your opinions matter but your actions are not making any progress. Please dont take any offense, i decided to try to join in here.

I just dont think you realize what the result is, you cant get threw to fanboys but the site is a battleground, nothing good is coming from it. Please see that i am only trying to let you guys know whats the big picture has become. I hope i dont get heat, or banned. I dont mean any harm


The proper venue for discussing moderator-related activies is the Moderator Discussions sub-forum. As it stands now, posting this discussion here, no matter how valuable in its own right, is only serving as a thread-derail in this otherwise technical thread in this otherwise technical sub-forum.

We want community vigilance and community ownership, but we need it channeled and expressed in the proper way (i.e. proper venue, aka sub-forum) in order for a productive outcome to result.

Idontcare
Super Moderator

 

[TerabyteX]

If one design was more capable, it wouldve won. They both mastered their individual architectures and proved to each other, they both are on the same level. They tied, and its unbelievable ppl dont see this as amassing. AMD proved that their design was no more capable than nvidias. The power limitations of fermi is still being thrown up? well nvidias approach got them just as far as AMDs.

nVidia did well considering that they pretty much pushed the limits of the 40nm with the GTX 590. The main advantage here is that the HD 6990 still having margins left for addition performance gains through overclocking. AMD's approach of a smaller die, higher transistor density and being first with the 40nm process helped a lot. But I'm pretty sure that if nVidia wasn't TDP limited with the GTX 590, they would had aimed to the HD 6990s jugular.

 

[3DVagabond]

No you missed my point totally.
Have you EVER seen a 1.2v air overclock with a gtx580 without a modded bios and hopefully on water? I hope not, or someone has a extra special chip or a fried card. So why on earth would you try it with a dual gtx580 card?

Have you ever seen a 6970 at 1.55 volts, I hope not, because they also have a fried card or a card that I would never buy used off them.

It's not about the % of the increase, its why if a gtx580 can't do it how would you expect a dual gtx580 to do it?
Same goes for the 6990.

See what I'm getting at?

You're like a pit bull holding onto that one point. W1zzard's wasn't the only one that blew up. As much as you would like to, you can't use that one example to explain away all of the bad cards.

 

[ocre]

i just dont see how so many are against the 590. i dont think its better than the 6990 but its not worse. so everyone, what can we say is good with the 590....

like pros, do we have any to speak of?

 

[TerabyteX]

It isn't like everybody hates the GTX 590. Is just that it performs the same or slightly slower at Surround Resolutions against the HD 6990 and consumes more power and no overclocking margins at all, which is something bad for an enthusiast class product. It is like buying a Phenom II X4 Black Edition that runs at stock 2.8GHz and can't be overclocked beyond 3.0GHz.

 

[3DVagabond]

Yeah, but the 6850 was late.

I suppose the rating "best" would have to be qualified. If meant applying from a commercial success, then there is much to merit the claim that the 460 was the best card released in 2010.

The 6850 was released in 2010 (and only 3mos later) though and for a similar price point offers better performance in the areas I already mentioned.

Someone could claim the 580 because it's the highest performance card released in 2010 as well as being the fastest single GPU card ever.

Some could argue it's the 6950 because of it's overall value at it's price and performance spot.

The 460 is a really good card. It's not the second coming though as it's fans would like you to believe.

 

[3DVagabond]

Well, I guess this goes in the 590 review thread?

Anyone notice this before?

I'm not the one who picked up on this. I saw it posted on another board. W1zzard can be pretty cheeky.

 

[Qbah]

Well, I guess this goes in the 590 review thread?

Anyone notice this before?

I'm not the one who picked up on this. I saw it posted on another board. W1zzard can be pretty cheeky.

Haha Good one!

 

[ocre]

It isn't like everybody hates the GTX 590. Is just that it performs the same or slightly slower at Surround Resolutions against the HD 6990 and consumes more power and no overclocking margins at all, which is something bad for an enthusiast class product. It is like buying a Phenom II X4 Black Edition that runs at stock 2.8GHz and can't be overclocked beyond 3.0GHz.

haha. i asked if there was anything good that could be said about the 590, that their had to something. I asked for at least one pro.......

and this is the response????

this whole thread is a 590 bashing, page throughout page of the flaws and inabilities. I ask for some pros and why cant someone list one? is it fear? will it hurt? will it make it better than the 6990? NO!

so what if the 6990 is better? there has to be something positive about the 590, can we hear anyone with something pro about the card. It is after all the official 590 thread, lets talk about what the card is and not what it isnt.

so 590 pros.....any takers?

 

[Idontcare]

Well, I guess this goes in the 590 review thread?

Anyone notice this before?

I'm not the one who picked up on this. I saw it posted on another board. W1zzard can be pretty cheeky.

Now THAT is an epic reviewer with a sense of humor LMFAO

When I read the reviews and conclusion I was all like "Limited relevance of DX11? WTF does that even mean"...now I understand, he was at a loss to find something to say that began with an "L". Funny

 

[krumme]

What would you call a card, if AMD send it to the market for usd 700 - calling it the fastest gpu on earth? And the result was:

Fastest on the old games but slowest on the new games
Fastest on low res but slower on the high res
Less noise than the competitor
Explode when you oc it slightly

Well i would call it an epic fail. But NV can do it, because it have the brand strenght. Then its labeled a draw. All all the marketing machine of NV is working in the forum too.

This card is clearly faulty. And vrm and hw regulation will be corrected by NV.

The label "its a draw" was just so predicteble. And that even before its was known the card was faulty.

This card was never needed in the first place. The architechture was not made for it, and it was obvious when the 6970 hit the selves, that NV had to do crazy things to beat the 6990. And they did just that. Excepts they ended with a slightly slower card that exploded when you oc it.

Unless reviewers and forum members clearly say stop for this kind of nonsense marketing stunts NV will continue doing it, because its good business. It all leads to lower performing architechtures for everyone, because the marketing department will have the power in NV to dictate irrational decisions for the engis.

So if we all want better cards for the future, we have to support the rational choices, and the engis decisions. And say stop for theese irrational marketing moves like this card.

It start in the forums, it will move to the reviewers. And then in the future we will have better cards.

 

[Lonyo]

haha. i asked if there was anything good that could be said about the 590, that their had to something. I asked for at least one pro.......

and this is the response????

this whole thread is a 590 bashing, page throughout page of the flaws and inabilities. I ask for some pros and why cant someone list one? is it fear? will it hurt? will it make it better than the 6990? NO!

Again, there has to be something positive about the 590, can we hear anyone with something pro about the card. It is after all the official 590 thread, lets talk about what the card is and not what it isnt.

so 590 pros.....any takers?

It will fit into more cases than the HD6990 because it is shorter. No point caring which is faster if you can only use one in your case.

 

[tincart]

Now THAT is an epic reviewer with a sense of humor LMFAO

When I read the reviews and conclusion I was all like "Limited relevance of DX11? WTF does that even mean"...now I understand, he was at a loss to find something to say that began with an "L". Funny

He's actually put that line as a negative in many of his GPU reviews. Meaning: Sure it can run DX11 games. What DX11 games?

 

[Keysplayr]

He's actually put that line as a negative in many of his GPU reviews.

Exact words?

 

[tincart]

Exact words?

I don't remember and I don't care to comb through all the reviews to check. His 5870 review has it as "DirectX 11 won't be relevant for quite a while" and I recall permutations of that statement in other reviews.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/Radeon_HD_5870/34.html

 

[pcm81]

first you mixing up things idk why. the 590 being underclocked? the 580 is much more capable than the 6970, it uses more power too. the 570 is closer to the 6970, i think your missing this fact, if it was about clock speed, if that mattered, wouldnt you think nvidia could clock 2 570s higher than 2 580s? you act as if it was even from the go, its not even at all. These are two radically different approaches, by design, all along. nvidia went for more cores and a low clock rather that higher clocked 570s? is it no surprise to see the low clocks? this was their design. you can say what you will but the AMD approach wasnt any better in the end than nvidias. you missing the fact, clearly AMDs design met limitations and they got no more performance than nvidias.

Now you are going stray from true understanding. Its your fanboyism, no offense. You arent seeing the big picture. These are two totally different architectures completely. Both have the pros and cons. you say the 590 is a massive card with a lot of potential but its too power hungry to reach it? What? understand that both cards are the max they could be, AMD and Nvidia! they both took their designs to the Max. The both had power limitations, Your 6990 is slower than two 6970s btw! But thats not the point, you are looking for a way to feel like AMD done it better. I am hear tellin you that AMDs approach got them no further than nvidias. thats truth.

was you asking if i thought the MIMM architecture was better? not at all, Nvidias more powerful cores do use more power than AMDs. AMD has a winning design, but the reality is they are different means to an end. These ultra powerful race to the top proves nothing but both approaches are great and neither wins in the end. Of course nvidia clocked its cuda cores lower, thats to get a card to the max the best they could. this max was also AMDs max, they ended in nearly the exact place. Did u really want to see nvidia be able to have to full 580s and blow the 6990 away? would everyone realize that they both had limitations and took their architectures to the highest possible and it was a tie!

its crazy cause its like i am having to defend nvidia when i am extremely proud of AMDs accomplishment. I think they did the best they possibly could and i think its awesome that nvidia proved that AMD is an extreme. You cant say the 6990 performance isnt amassing, can you? well nvidia reached that, exactly that performance and you better believe both tried hard to be on top!!

its never been this outcome, nvidia and amd proved to me that they are both on top of their game. If one design was more capable, it wouldve won. They both mastered their individual architectures and proved to each other, they both are on the same level. They tied, and its unbelievable ppl dont see this as amassing. AMD proved that their design was no more capable than nvidias. The power limitations of fermi is still being thrown up? well nvidias approach got them just as far as AMDs.

Please take some electronics classes, and then reread my post, which you quoted.