Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [HWC][Nvidia] Nvidia's response to GTX 590's frying
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[HWC][Nvidia] Nvidia's response to GTX 590's frying - Page 12  

post #111 of 172
The Nvidia fan boys also seem to be forgetting that OCP down clocks the cards when the VRM's are close to there limits, This is a built in feature to protect the VRM's from damage, A clever move by Nvidia.

Overclocking the card with or with out extra voltage increases the cards power draw and thus, Increases the load on the VRM's.

High overclocks will trigger OCP and the card will be downclocked to keep things safe.

There has been review samples doing this very thing.

High overclocks with this card will not happen.

A few quotes...

Techpowerup

Quote:
Performing overclocking the GTX 590 can only be described as a big pain in the ass. I've never seen a more crash-happy card than this when doing overclocking. Basically my "find maximum overclock" consisted of setting a clock speed, running a benchmark for 10 seconds and then waiting 45 seconds until the system finished rebooting after a system hang. If you plan to do overclocking, please make a system image backup, so you can recover quickly in case the constant system crashes break something
Techreport

Quote:
One has to be careful here, though, because the GF110 chips will definitely reach much higher clock speeds when given enough voltage—we reached 772MHz at 1025 mV, similar to the GTX 580—but you'll also definitely bump up against the GTX 590's power limiting circuitry if you push too hard. The result, as we learned, is that performance drops with the supposedly overclocked config.
Techreport hit the VRM's OCP limiter and as I said above it downclocked the card to protect the VRM's thus reducing the cards max usable overclock.
Edited by almighty15 - 3/25/11 at 10:33am
post #112 of 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masked View Post
I think this is an unfair statement.

I fry cards all the time, 99% of the time, when it happens; it's a driver issue.

Fried a 6990 last week and a 6970; shall I start a thread and claim the card was faulty as are all 6990s? No...Because that's wrong and unreasonable.

People fried their cards because of over-heating on Beta drivers...Every review where the card was fried; said that...

So, it is, 100%, a driver issue and is/was solved.
Me thinks you need to read a few tutes on how to OC graphics cards properly.

Or you have more money than cents.......JK.
post #113 of 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsm106 View Post
This is clearly a sign of under engineering, and all you can do is rationalize every and any which way you can as a fanboy?
I'd love to see you do better.
post #114 of 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsm106 View Post
This is clearly a sign of under engineering, and all you can do is rationalize every and any which way you can as a fanboy?
Dude we are talking about overclocking and adding voltage and you are telling me Nvidia is too blame because the card should take much more voltage?

Do you think that anyone that kills a card at this point will admit to overvolting the card? Of course not, that will void his warranty

I think if Nvidia knew the card can run fine say with 1.1v at 850Mhz they would probbaly released the card at those clocks with that much voltage and make more money from the card. If they are telling peopel 1.2v is not safe and what should be safe it's because they have done some testing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty15 View Post
The Nvidia fan boys also seem to be forgetting that OCP down clocks the cards when the VRM's are close to there limits, This is a built in feature to protect the VRM's from damage, A clever move by Nvidia.

Overclocking the card with or with out extra voltage increases the cards power draw and thus, Increases the load on the VRM's.

High overclocks will trigger OCP and the card will be downclocked to keep things safe.


There has been review samples doing this very thing.

High overclocks with this card will not happen.

A few quotes...

Techpowerup



Techreport



Techreport hit the VRM's OCP limiter and as I said above it downclocked the card to protect the VRM's thus reducing the cards max usable overclock.
Funny you say that, because that's why most reviewers can't get good overclocks on the 6990 lol

They just get lower scores because it downclcoks the card thanks to the 6990 weak cooling and OCP kicking in.
Edited by saulin - 3/25/11 at 10:35am
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 920 @ 4.3Ghz Asus P6X58D Premium Zotac GTX 480 6GB CORSAIR XMS3 7-7-7-20 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2X Vertex LE 100GB SSDs/RAID-0 & 2TB Barracuda XT Samsung SH-S243D 24x DVD-Writer Windows 7 LG Flatron W2242TQ & LG Flatron W1942TQ 
PowerCase
Corsair TX750W Cooler Master Haf 932 
  hide details  
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 920 @ 4.3Ghz Asus P6X58D Premium Zotac GTX 480 6GB CORSAIR XMS3 7-7-7-20 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2X Vertex LE 100GB SSDs/RAID-0 & 2TB Barracuda XT Samsung SH-S243D 24x DVD-Writer Windows 7 LG Flatron W2242TQ & LG Flatron W1942TQ 
PowerCase
Corsair TX750W Cooler Master Haf 932 
  hide details  
post #115 of 172
I wish Monday new revisions of the 590 would come out, handle the power just fine and OC to 900mhz+. ONLY to see how each side then "defends" which card is better/faster/stronger/quieter/derpy herpy derp.

In a side note, how can a card be "fastest/faster", if it doesn't win 100% of the tests? I'm not in to flame (to much?) but saying one card is fastest/faster than the next would mean that it doesn't lose, ever.

But maybe that's just me. I see, that both cards are 50/50 on games (depending on which you play). But, weeeeeeeeee!
post #116 of 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by saulin View Post
Funny you say that, because that's why most reviewers can't get good overclocks on the 6990 lol

They just get lower scores because it downclcoks the card thanks to the 6990 weak cooling and OCP kicking in.
And how many review sample 6990's went bang?

Exactly



Would you also like me to post some results showing an overclocked 590 still being slower then a stock 6990?
post #117 of 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by xsf View Post
I wish Monday new revisions of the 590 would come out, handle the power just fine and OC to 900mhz+. ONLY to see how each side then "defends" which card is better/faster/stronger/quieter/derpy herpy derp.

In a side note, how can a card be "fastest/faster", if it doesn't win 100% of the tests? I'm not in to flame (to much?) but saying one card is fastest/faster than the next would mean that it doesn't lose, ever.

But maybe that's just me. I see, that both cards are 50/50 on games (depending on which you play). But, weeeeeeeeee!
The way I see it is that games that have always loved Nvidia the 590 is the same as or slightly faster then the 6990.

In games that don't have a CF profile yet the 590 is faster

Every were else the 6990 mullers it..
post #118 of 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by smash_mouth01 View Post
Me thinks you need to read a few tutes on how to OC graphics cards properly.

Or you have more money than cents.......JK.
Dont be too hard on him. He's on a.. Factory Overclocked card.
post #119 of 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty15 View Post
And how many review sample 6990's went bang?

Exactly



Would you also like me to post some results showing an overclocked 590 still being slower then a stock 6990?
Thanks OCP not many most lilkely

That still doesn't mean the 6990 can take as much voltage as you put through and that it's a mighty overclocker because it just isn't
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 920 @ 4.3Ghz Asus P6X58D Premium Zotac GTX 480 6GB CORSAIR XMS3 7-7-7-20 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2X Vertex LE 100GB SSDs/RAID-0 & 2TB Barracuda XT Samsung SH-S243D 24x DVD-Writer Windows 7 LG Flatron W2242TQ & LG Flatron W1942TQ 
PowerCase
Corsair TX750W Cooler Master Haf 932 
  hide details  
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 920 @ 4.3Ghz Asus P6X58D Premium Zotac GTX 480 6GB CORSAIR XMS3 7-7-7-20 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2X Vertex LE 100GB SSDs/RAID-0 & 2TB Barracuda XT Samsung SH-S243D 24x DVD-Writer Windows 7 LG Flatron W2242TQ & LG Flatron W1942TQ 
PowerCase
Corsair TX750W Cooler Master Haf 932 
  hide details  
post #120 of 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty15 View Post
And how many review sample 6990's went bang?

Exactly



Would you also like me to post some results showing an overclocked 590 still being slower then a stock 6990?
As was stated by Tweaktown:

Quote:
It seems that most of the GTX 590s are dieing due to the amount of Voltage being put through the card. I spoke to MSI last night about Afterburner and asked them that if 1.2v isn't safe, how come Afterburner allows the GTX 590 to go that high? - The answer to that question was; "no, Afterburner only allow to 1.05v - 1.2v is not possible".


It came as a bit of a surprise, though, when I said that MSI Afterburner indeed did offer 1.2v on the ASUS GTX 590. Originally MSI thought only Smart Doctor allowed the voltage to go that high, but we've been told that the ASUS BIOS has been tweaked, giving the ability to push the voltage higher.
Can we guess what program MOST of these reviewers used to tweak the voltage?

Or are you just going to straw man this argument, too?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [HWC][Nvidia] Nvidia's response to GTX 590's frying