Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TR] Nvidia, Asus put the clamps on GTX 590 voltage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[TR] Nvidia, Asus put the clamps on GTX 590 voltage - Page 7  

post #61 of 224
Another badly planned product from nvidia.
post #62 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcde7ago View Post
There had to be performance compromises made in order for a 590 to cost only $700 and maintain the reduced thermals, power consumption and noise of, say, 580s in SLI.

Nvidia isn't going to release a single-card, dual-GPU solution with all of the advantages of having 2 of its most powerful single-GPU cards in SLI but none of the disadvantages and have it cost $300 less. That obviously doesn't make sense.

If Nvidia releases a 590 revision able to surpass the performance levels of 580s in SLI/the 6990 (which is not going to happen), it's going to cost more than the cost of 2 580s - probably in the ballpark of $1300. And everyone would then be crying, "who would buy this when you could get 2x580s for $300 less? FAIL NVIDIA!"

Everyone needs to understand that this card wasn't engineered to appeal to the masses wanting the power of 2x580s in a single card AND having it be affordable; this was to fill a niche. It just unfortunately was not marketed as such.
I understand your point -- you are saying that given the cost, among other factors, that 1) we shouldn't have expected 580SLI performance and 2) Nvidia was just trying to hit a niche market...

Hmm, allow me to respectfully disagree...

To the first point, lets go back and look at the 570 compared to the 580. The 570 is 30% cheaper (same as 580SLI vs 590) but there are plenty of 570s that reach 580 performance. My 570 at my sig settings has no problem doing that. Now sure, not every 570 clocks that well and some 570s them blow up if you get too aggressive, but the fact remains that every though you spend less -- even though Nvidia removed CUDA cores to reduce power consumption, reduced memory size, etc -- if you have a little luck and tweak/OC the 570 then you can get an extra $150 of performance. It is not unreasonable to expect a fighting chance at 580SLI performance with a 590 and now that chance doesn't exist.

To the second point about the niche market... well the enthusiast community itself is a niche market compared to the overall computer consumer market. So you are saying that within the already small enthusiast community that Nvidia is trying to find certain customer that:

1) Doesn't want to SLI (570 SLI is cheaper and more reliable)
2) Hates Nosie (6990 is faster especially at large resolutions -- but much louder)
3) Doesn't mind having no OC headroom (locked voltage)

That is a small percentage of an already small enthusiast market... like Nvidia was trying to trying to hit a mole on a bat's ass with a pea shooter.

The fact is Nvidia is a business -- they wanted to have the fastest dual GPU (they marketed it as such), they wanted the card to clock great (ASUS 50% OC capability makreting) -- but it failed... simple as that.

After the release and reviews, let's not try to reinvent the facts

EDIT: To be clear, I am not trying to say that the 590 is without merit (i.e noise) but I am saying that the results (compared to the competition) could not have been what Nvidia was hoping for when they set to designing the card.
Edited by JCPUser - 4/5/11 at 3:26pm
post #63 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCPUser View Post
I understand your point -- you are saying that given the cost, among other factors, that 1) we shouldn't have expected 580SLI performance and 2) Nvidia was just trying to hit a niche market...

Hmm, allow me to respectfully disagree...

To the first point, lets go back and look at the 570 compared to the 580. The 570 is 30% cheaper (same as 580SLI vs 590) but there are plenty of 570s that reach 580 performance. My 570 at my sig settings has no problem doing that. Now sure, not every 570 clocks that well and some 570s them blow up if you get too aggressive, but the fact remains that every though you spend less -- even though Nvidia removed CUDA cores to reduce power consumption, reduced memory size, etc -- if you have a little luck and tweak/OC the 570 then you can get an extra $150 of performance. It is not unreasonable to expect a fighting chance at 580SLI performance with a 590 and now that chance doesn't exist.

To the second point about the niche market... well the enthusiast community itself is a niche market compared to the overall computer consumer market. So you are saying that within the already small enthusiast community that Nvidia is trying to find certain customer that:

1) Doesn't want to SLI (570 SLI is cheaper and more reliable)
2) Hates Nosie (6990 is faster especially at large resolutions -- but much louder)
3) Doesn't mind having no OC headroom (locked voltage)

That is a small percentage of an already small enthusiast market... like Nvidia was trying to trying to hit a mole on a bat's ass with a pea shooter.

The fact is Nvidia is a business -- they wanted to have the fastest dual GPU (they marketed it as such), they wanted the card to clock great (ASUS 50% OC capability makreting) -- but it failed... simple as that.

After the release and reviews, let's not try to reinvent the facts

EDIT: To be clear, I am not trying to say that the 590 is without merit (i.e noise) but I am saying that the results (compared to the competition) could not have been what Nvidia was hoping for when they set to designing the card.
You make some good points, but I wouldn't exactly call the 570 "more reliable" than the 590. It suffers from the same poor VRM/circuitry issues the 590 does. In fact, there's probably more data to support the fact that 570s are far less reliable than 590s, even given the difference in the number of units sold. The 570 should still have a greater percentage of issues than the 590.

And you can't just get a $150 performance upgrade from overclocking a 570 - cause obviously, if you're going to do that and assume that logic, then the 580 owner may as well go ahead and overclock with even MORE headroom and far outclass the 570 altogether.

As for what the 590 is marketed to be as - I personally don't think it was made to be better than a pair of 580s in SLI or the 6990, but to each his own.

The niche market I was referring to was someone like myself - who, coming over from a pair of noisy, power hungry and hot-running 480s in SLI, is very satisfied with his purchase.
Apotheosis
(27 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5960X @ 4.6 Ghz (1.32v) ASUS X99-Deluxe 2x Nvidia Titan Xp SLI 32GB Crucial DDR4 2666 (4x8GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
2x Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (OS) 4x Crucial M4 256GB SSD 14x Corsair SP120 Quiet Edition 4x EK-RAM Monarch Module (Black) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
EK-XTOP w/ Dual D5 Pumps, EK-X3 250 Res, EK-D5 ... 2x Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 480mm Rads (1x top mo... 2x Alphacool NexXxos UT60 240mm Rads (1x front ... PrimoChill Rigid Acrylic tubing (White), Advanc... 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
2x EK-FC Titan X Pascal Nickel GPU Blocks w/ EK... 2x EK-RAM Monarch X4 Nickel/Acetal CSQ RAM Bloc... Windows 10 Pro, 64-bit 1x Acer Predator X34 @ 3440x1440p 34" IPS + 100... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G810 Orion Spectrum EVGA SuperNova P2 1600W Platinum CaseLabs SMA8 (Gunmetal Exterior/Black Interior... Logitech G502 Proteus Core 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Logitech G440 Audioengine HD6 w/ S8 Subwoofer Campfire Audio Vega IEMs Schiit Magni 2 Uber Amp 
AudioOtherOther
Schiit Modi 2 Uber DAC NZXT Sentry Mesh Fan Controller NZXT HUE RGB LED Controller 
  hide details  
Apotheosis
(27 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5960X @ 4.6 Ghz (1.32v) ASUS X99-Deluxe 2x Nvidia Titan Xp SLI 32GB Crucial DDR4 2666 (4x8GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
2x Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (OS) 4x Crucial M4 256GB SSD 14x Corsair SP120 Quiet Edition 4x EK-RAM Monarch Module (Black) 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
EK-XTOP w/ Dual D5 Pumps, EK-X3 250 Res, EK-D5 ... 2x Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 480mm Rads (1x top mo... 2x Alphacool NexXxos UT60 240mm Rads (1x front ... PrimoChill Rigid Acrylic tubing (White), Advanc... 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
2x EK-FC Titan X Pascal Nickel GPU Blocks w/ EK... 2x EK-RAM Monarch X4 Nickel/Acetal CSQ RAM Bloc... Windows 10 Pro, 64-bit 1x Acer Predator X34 @ 3440x1440p 34" IPS + 100... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G810 Orion Spectrum EVGA SuperNova P2 1600W Platinum CaseLabs SMA8 (Gunmetal Exterior/Black Interior... Logitech G502 Proteus Core 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Logitech G440 Audioengine HD6 w/ S8 Subwoofer Campfire Audio Vega IEMs Schiit Magni 2 Uber Amp 
AudioOtherOther
Schiit Modi 2 Uber DAC NZXT Sentry Mesh Fan Controller NZXT HUE RGB LED Controller 
  hide details  
post #64 of 224
My personal opinion is that NVIDIA was hoping all would come out in the wash as design moved forward and then it realized at some point the card was just going to be an abortion. They limited supply greatly and were hoping to pull off some PR coup with billing it as the "Fastest Video Card in the World" title which obviously it is not. Here is our graphing of the way scaling up the card impedes its worthiness.

post #65 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by saulin View Post
That's basically what the HOCP article found out as well. Raising the voltage did nothing but decrease the scores.

That's basically what I thought Nvidia would do in order to stop all the talk about cards blowing up. They do know that stock voltages are fine and should not blow up any card but even then people claimed they were blowing up on stock clocks and voltages. Lets see now how many cards still blow up
Interesting to see this was all you had to say.
Intel Killer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 8320 4.4ghz Gigabyte 990fx XFX R9 290 (1100/1250) 8GB DDR3 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
750GB Momentus XT Corsair H80i Windows 8 3x 23" 1080p 
KeyboardPower
Logitech Mk 710 OCZ 1000 watts 
  hide details  
Intel Killer
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 8320 4.4ghz Gigabyte 990fx XFX R9 290 (1100/1250) 8GB DDR3 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
750GB Momentus XT Corsair H80i Windows 8 3x 23" 1080p 
KeyboardPower
Logitech Mk 710 OCZ 1000 watts 
  hide details  
post #66 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by SecrtAgentMan View Post
Maybe nVidia will learn to not cheapen out on minute components that end up playing a major factor.
What minute components? The voltage regulator circuitry? It's the GPUs getting too hot that we are talking about here. Now if everybody put water blocks on them they probably wouldn't be so stringent on the voltage. With basic air cooling and OCing it's another story. Nvidia doesn't want their cards at a 90% RMA rate. You can either put the card up for market or wait for the next generation. Nvidia decided to put the card out with the exception that OCing would be limited.
My System
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
1090t ASUS Sabertooth 990fx PNY GTX470 2x4g GSkill 1333 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x 500gig WD DVD ±RW Black TRUE Vista Ultimate SP2 
MonitorPowerCase
Gateway FPD2275 Corsair HX1000 Antec 1200 
  hide details  
My System
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
1090t ASUS Sabertooth 990fx PNY GTX470 2x4g GSkill 1333 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x 500gig WD DVD ±RW Black TRUE Vista Ultimate SP2 
MonitorPowerCase
Gateway FPD2275 Corsair HX1000 Antec 1200 
  hide details  
post #67 of 224
Called it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD2600 View Post
What minute components? The voltage regulator circuitry? It's the GPUs getting too hot that we are talking about here. Now if everybody put water blocks on them they probably wouldn't be so stringent on the voltage. With basic air cooling and OCing it's another story. Nvidia doesn't want their cards at a 90% RMA rate. You can either put the card up for market or wait for the next generation. Nvidia decided to put the card out with the exception that OCing would be limited.
More aggressive cooling on the GPU's will only account for a very, very small percentage in headroom gained by the VRM's. It's not that the VRM's capacities have changed as opposed to the GPU's needing less power for the frequencies being requested of it. Extremely aggressive cooling will start tampering with capacitance, and other electrical properties of the GPU's and components on the PCB. However, the problems lie with the VRM's here and not the cooling on the GPU's.
Edited by JeremiahTheBullfrog - 4/5/11 at 4:59pm
post #68 of 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMD2600 View Post
What minute components? The voltage regulator circuitry? It's the GPUs getting too hot that we are talking about here. Now if everybody put water blocks on them they probably wouldn't be so stringent on the voltage. With basic air cooling and OCing it's another story. Nvidia doesn't want their cards at a 90% RMA rate. You can either put the card up for market or wait for the next generation. Nvidia decided to put the card out with the exception that OCing would be limited.
I don't know very much on VRMs, but you can cool the GPU core as much as your heart contends.

If you use a terrible power delivery system and shoddy amounts of VRMs all that cooling will amount to squat.
Revofev
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 950 EVGA E770 2x EVGA GTX 570 6GB Mushkin Redline Ridgeback 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
128GB Crucial M4/ 4x1TB WD Black/ 1TB F3 Lite-On 24x Win 7 Ultimate x64 Acer H233H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Filco Majestouch 2 w/ Red Switches Corsair AX850 800D Logitech G500 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries QcK+ 
  hide details  
Revofev
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 950 EVGA E770 2x EVGA GTX 570 6GB Mushkin Redline Ridgeback 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
128GB Crucial M4/ 4x1TB WD Black/ 1TB F3 Lite-On 24x Win 7 Ultimate x64 Acer H233H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Filco Majestouch 2 w/ Red Switches Corsair AX850 800D Logitech G500 
Mouse Pad
Steelseries QcK+ 
  hide details  
post #69 of 224
This is fail for the reason that non-reference cards WILL come out with better and more capable VRM designs and they will be forced unto the same limit also
I rather make this a video BIOS limitation

For the sake of reference GTX 590s, they are right, you should never OC or overvolt any reference GTX 590.
post #70 of 224
fail fail fail and more fail
Scorpion
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2500K Gigabyte GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 MSI GeForce GTX 580 Lightning Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1600 CL9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Agility 2 120GB Samsung SH-S223L DVD-RW Windows 7 Professional 64-Bit AOC e2243Fwk 21.5" LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
XArmor U9 Mechanical Corsair HX850 Corsair Carbide Series 500R Logitech G500 
Mouse PadAudio
Nova Gaming Winner 3 Realtek ALC889 Codec 
  hide details  
Scorpion
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 2500K Gigabyte GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 MSI GeForce GTX 580 Lightning Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1600 CL9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ Agility 2 120GB Samsung SH-S223L DVD-RW Windows 7 Professional 64-Bit AOC e2243Fwk 21.5" LED 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
XArmor U9 Mechanical Corsair HX850 Corsair Carbide Series 500R Logitech G500 
Mouse PadAudio
Nova Gaming Winner 3 Realtek ALC889 Codec 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [TR] Nvidia, Asus put the clamps on GTX 590 voltage