SweClockers: Geforce GTX 590 burns @ 772MHz & 1.025V

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
This is what i understand on the build quality. Regular GTX580 has 6+2 VRMs, 6 dedicated to the GPU core. The 590s PCB has 4 VRMs per GPU, there's already 2 short. This would be fine if these were ran well under-spec. At stock clocks, 590s use around 50W more than a 6990, so we know the NV rated TDP of 375W off the mark by a fair bit. This suggests the following:

1. NV did not expect the 6990 to be clocked so high to be a 300+ W card.
2. They were aiming their 590 to have a max of ~375W, and average load of ~300W. There's no way you just put in 4 VRMs per core if its going to be using 400+ W on max. NV engineers are not stupid.
3. This would have put the core clock at around 525, which would have given it plenty of room for OC to around the safe mark of 670 without big vcore bumps.
4. 6990 released, they and everyone else was shocked it used so much power at stock. Now they have to make the 590 compete, only option is a stock clock boost. So its near its limits already at stock (essentially operating at OC conditions based on the hardware designs).
5. From what i understand, the components blowing are the VRMs or resisters to VRMs. Too much strain if you OC further.
6. Wait for a non-reference card if you want a 590.

Edit: 10 VRM total, typically not all feed the GPUs as other components suck power too, so its 4+1 assigned. I could be wrong. :)
 
Last edited:

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
33,542
11,676
136
This is what i understand on the build quality. Regular GTX580 has 6+2 VRMs, 6 dedicated to the GPU core. The 590s PCB has 4 VRMs per GPU, there's already 2 short. This would be fine if these were ran well under-spec. At stock clocks, 590s use around 50W more than a 6990, so we know the NV rated TDP of 375W off the mark by a fair bit. This suggests the following:

1. NV did not expect the 6990 to be clocked so high to be a 300+ W card.
2. They were aiming their 590 to have a max of ~375W, and average load of ~300W. There's no way you just put in 4 VRMs per core if its going to be using 400+ W on max. NV engineers are not stupid.
3. This would have put the core clock at around 525, which would have given it plenty of room for OC to around the safe mark of 670 without big vcore bumps.
4. 6990 released, they and everyone else was shocked it used so much power at stock. Now they have to make the 590 compete, only option is a stock clock boost. So its near its limits already at stock (essentially operating at OC conditions based on the hardware designs).
5. From what i understand, the components blowing are the VRMs or resisters to VRMs. Too much strain if you OC further.
6. Wait for a non-reference card if you want a 590.


:hmm: This post, makes sense it does. Listen you shall.
 

Outrage

Senior member
Oct 9, 1999
217
1
0
Again the thing reads the power and performance levels of the bios. The bios was modded simple fact

What do you consider being a modded bios, anything that are not from nvidia? in that case there are a lot of modded bioses being sold, from many aib's.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
480
126
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2235832#post2235832

W1zzard has been directly addressing the defective 590 issues. So if you think his methodology of card testing is flawed, you can ask him for some clarity here :ninja:

Of course there are also the 7 other reviewers and reports of people who purchased the cards at xtremesystems having them incinerate...

The Wizzard guy was asked 3 times in that thread , what made him think that a gtx590 should be pumped with 1.2 volts when a gtx580 will not handle that sort of voltage.

Not one time was it answered but any other tip toe around the truth answer was.

He don't even know why a 6970 can use 1.45v and a gtx580 shouldn't.
This is the genious eveyone is defending? Are you kidding me?
The guy screwed up and he should just own up to it.

I'm waiting for that link to the stock voltage/overclock card blowing up also AtenRa.
 

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,147
1,330
126
2 cards died in this first link
http://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/137...boven-i-dramat

http://translate.google.ro/translate...-video%2F13%2F

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...9&postcount=37

http://tbreak.com/tech/2011/03/zotac-gtx-590-review/3/

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...TX_590/27.html

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/825-...e-gtx-590.html


Unfortunately the 590 is a turd/lame duck, what have you.


Cool post at xtremesystems that highlights the 590's fragility, 590 results are starting to show up on Futuremark's website with 3DMark 11 results.. note the best overclocks seen are 750Mhz.

The consensus is that the 590's power circuitry is simply inadequate and that is why it blows up or you are resigned to a very low overclock and fingers crossed it doesn't incinerate on you.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4794896&postcount=216

gtx 590
590.jpg


Radeon 6990
6990.jpg



That and the fact the best of the 590 scores only equal the lowest of the 6990 scores.


This is what i understand on the build quality. Regular GTX580 has 6+2 VRMs, 6 dedicated to the GPU core. The 590s PCB has 4 VRMs per GPU, there's already 2 short. This would be fine if these were ran well under-spec. At stock clocks, 590s use around 50W more than a 6990, so we know the NV rated TDP of 375W off the mark by a fair bit. This suggests the following:

1. NV did not expect the 6990 to be clocked so high to be a 300+ W card.
2. They were aiming their 590 to have a max of ~375W, and average load of ~300W. There's no way you just put in 4 VRMs per core if its going to be using 400+ W on max. NV engineers are not stupid.
3. This would have put the core clock at around 525, which would have given it plenty of room for OC to around the safe mark of 670 without big vcore bumps.
4. 6990 released, they and everyone else was shocked it used so much power at stock. Now they have to make the 590 compete, only option is a stock clock boost. So its near its limits already at stock (essentially operating at OC conditions based on the hardware designs).
5. From what i understand, the components blowing are the VRMs or resisters to VRMs. Too much strain if you OC further.
6. Wait for a non-reference card if you want a 590.


:thumbsup: This is a good hypothesis. A lot of people were of the opinion nv was waiting to see the 6990 before they showed their cards.

AMD may have caught them with their pants down and they simply got behind the performance p. watt/power consumption eight ball. Then snookered themselves by putting out a card dangerously close to its specified threshold.
 
Last edited:

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,362
136
It sure can, gf110 @ 1.21V http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_580_Direct_Cu_II/27.html

and look who did it, this might be a reason why he thought the 590 could do it to.

ASUS DC II GTX580 can over-voltage more because it has a 10 VRM phase when NV reference GTX580 has 6 phase and GTX590 has 5 phase for each GPU (Total 10). This is one of the reasons why I have said before that you have to know the limits of your hardware when you want to OC.

GTX590 can Overclock and Over-voltage but not as far as other cards plain and simple. Wait for custom designs if you want to OC the GTX590 ;)
 

SolMiester

Diamond Member
Dec 19, 2004
5,330
17
76
2 cards died in this first link
http://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/137...boven-i-dramat

http://translate.google.ro/translate...-video%2F13%2F

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...9&postcount=37

http://tbreak.com/tech/2011/03/zotac-gtx-590-review/3/

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...TX_590/27.html

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/825-...e-gtx-590.html


Unfortunately the 590 is a turd/lame duck, what have you.


Cool post at xtremesystems that highlights the 590's fragility, 590 results are starting to show up on Futuremark's website with 3DMark 11 results.. note the best overclocks seen are 750Mhz.

The consensus is that the 590's power circuitry is simply inadequate and that is why it blows up or you are resigned to a very low overclock and fingers crossed it doesn't incinerate on you.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4794896&postcount=216

gtx 590
590.jpg


Radeon 6990
6990.jpg



That and the fact the best of the 590 scores only equal the lowest of the 6990 scores.





:thumbsup: This is a good hypothesis. A lot of people were of the opinion nv was waiting to see the 6990 before they showed their cards.

AMD may have caught them with their pants down and they simply got behind the performance p. watt/power consumption eight ball. Then snookered themselves by putting out a card dangerously close to its specified threshold.

As yet Linus appears to be able to OC the 590 to over 800 core w\ memory and shader OC as well.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRhne0odjJA&feature=player_embedded

You have been watching too many Top Gear shows....LOL at your metaphors!...
 

pcm81

Senior member
Mar 11, 2011
598
16
81
This is what i understand on the build quality. Regular GTX580 has 6+2 VRMs, 6 dedicated to the GPU core. The 590s PCB has 4 VRMs per GPU, there's already 2 short. This would be fine if these were ran well under-spec. At stock clocks, 590s use around 50W more than a 6990, so we know the NV rated TDP of 375W off the mark by a fair bit. This suggests the following:

1. NV did not expect the 6990 to be clocked so high to be a 300+ W card.
2. They were aiming their 590 to have a max of ~375W, and average load of ~300W. There's no way you just put in 4 VRMs per core if its going to be using 400+ W on max. NV engineers are not stupid.
3. This would have put the core clock at around 525, which would have given it plenty of room for OC to around the safe mark of 670 without big vcore bumps.
4. 6990 released, they and everyone else was shocked it used so much power at stock. Now they have to make the 590 compete, only option is a stock clock boost. So its near its limits already at stock (essentially operating at OC conditions based on the hardware designs).
5. From what i understand, the components blowing are the VRMs or resisters to VRMs. Too much strain if you OC further.
6. Wait for a non-reference card if you want a 590.

Isn't this what i've been saying for about 4 days now? I am glad to see that at least one other person is sharing my opinion... I did not know about the 6 vs 4 VRM difference though...
 

badb0y

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2010
4,015
30
91
This is what i understand on the build quality. Regular GTX580 has 6+2 VRMs, 6 dedicated to the GPU core. The 590s PCB has 4 VRMs per GPU, there's already 2 short. This would be fine if these were ran well under-spec. At stock clocks, 590s use around 50W more than a 6990, so we know the NV rated TDP of 375W off the mark by a fair bit. This suggests the following:

1. NV did not expect the 6990 to be clocked so high to be a 300+ W card.
2. They were aiming their 590 to have a max of ~375W, and average load of ~300W. There's no way you just put in 4 VRMs per core if its going to be using 400+ W on max. NV engineers are not stupid.
3. This would have put the core clock at around 525, which would have given it plenty of room for OC to around the safe mark of 670 without big vcore bumps.
4. 6990 released, they and everyone else was shocked it used so much power at stock. Now they have to make the 590 compete, only option is a stock clock boost. So its near its limits already at stock (essentially operating at OC conditions based on the hardware designs).
5. From what i understand, the components blowing are the VRMs or resisters to VRMs. Too much strain if you OC further.
6. Wait for a non-reference card if you want a 590.
This makes sense, I don't think anyone thought that AMD would break the 300 watt PCI spec since they tried so hard for the AMD 5970 to be within it.
 

pcm81

Senior member
Mar 11, 2011
598
16
81
ASUS DC II GTX580 can over-voltage more because it has a 10 VRM phase when NV reference GTX580 has 6 phase and GTX590 has 5 phase for each GPU (Total 10). This is one of the reasons why I have said before that you have to know the limits of your hardware when you want to OC.

GTX590 can Overclock and Over-voltage but not as far as other cards plain and simple. Wait for custom designs if you want to OC the GTX590 ;)

I suspect that the overclockable custom design will have 3 connectors on the top of the card... The card needs 600+ watts. There is no magic in science, 590 will consume close to 2x the power of a 580...
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
480
126
I suspect that the overclockable custom design will have 3 connectors on the top of the card... The card needs 600+ watts. There is no magic in science, 590 will consume close to 2x the power of a 580...

Yea that Wizzard guy confirmed that a 3 connector card is on its way.
Do you have a Techpowerup account?
 

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,147
1,330
126
As yet Linus appears to be able to OC the 590 to over 800 core w\ memory and shader OC as well.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRhne0odjJA&feature=player_embedded

You have been watching too many Top Gear shows....LOL at your metaphors!...

Linus is a cool guy, he's helpful and has helped me out before.. with customer service.

Just so you know, he's not a reviewer. He actually works for ncix.com, an online etailor. And his techtips are great and helpful, but the main drive of them is to sell product and advertise what they have in stock at ncix.

Regardless the 3dMark results speak for themselves. Best overclocks seen on 590s are 750, most are at 700. Some explode.
 
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Actually, to settle this issue, this is why these cards are dangerous to OC even by a little bit: http://html.alldatasheet.com/html-pdf/312873/INFINEON/TDA21211/776/2/TDA21211.html

These are the VRMs on the PCB, its a DrMOS, rated for 35A each. There's 10 of these on the PCB for all the components. That's a max of ~350W at 1V +/- 5%. Clearly even at stock clocks, the 590 is already stressing these VRMs to the max. It's evident NV never designed the card to operate at 607mhz core clock (and using 50W more than the 6990) and were forced to do it by AMDs aggressive 6990 release.
 

Gloomy

Golden Member
Oct 12, 2010
1,469
21
81
incoming apologetics, deflections and spin :thumbsdown:

speaking of, where's wreckage? this is kinda weird without him