ASUS GeForce GTX 590 3 GB

[Kreij]

and talk about what else the card brings to the table

Good idea. What exaclty does this card "bring to the table?"
Anything other than Nvidia can say we have one too? (dual GPU)

 

[newtekie1]

You cannot get anywhere close to 50% faster without overvolting the card. Its common sense.

And it also says on the box that you can't get anywhere near 50% without extreme cooling.

The card can be overvolted safely even with the stock cooler, just not overvolted to 1.2v, as we've been trying to tell you. So there is nothing misleading on the box.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Good idea. What exaclty does this card "bring to the table?"
Anything other than Nvidia can say we have one too? (dual GPU)

It will bring the smell of burnt electronics to your room.

And it also says on the box that you can get anywhere near 50% without extrreme cooling.

Cooling would have made zero difference. Unless you put an ice pack on the fuse/resistor.

 

[qu4k3r]

http://img.techpowerup.org/110326/btajsjbc874d.jpg

is that the easter egg ???

no, it's a letter soup.

 

[W1zzard]

So in you're opinion would they have been better off with two 570's in one card rather then two 580's clocked low?

i would have designed the card with 3x 8 pin or 8+8+6, a VRM that can handle this load + 25% safety margin and two higher clocked GTX 580 GPUs for "in your face AMD" effect

 

[Deleted member 24505]

Now that card i would like to see you test W1zz.

 

[TheMailMan78]

i would have designed the card with 3x 8 pin or 8+8+6, a VRM that can handle this load + 25% safety margin and two higher clocked GTX 580 GPUs for "in your face AMD" effect

I understand the higher VRM but the use of 3x 8pin connectors? At draw it didn't seem like it needed more power. Am I correct? Why another 8 pin?

 

[W1zzard]

I understand the higher VRM but the use of 3x 8pin connectors? At draw it didn't seem like it needed more power. Am I correct? Why another 8 pin?

nvidia is limited in their TDP and power draw by the input power configuration.

so now they have 375 W and need to adjust their whole card to that limit, read my conclusion for a longer explanation

 

[Kreij]

3x8 pin + PCI-E bus gives you a max power draw of 525 Watts.
That almost 1/3 of the max output from a standard (15A) US household circuit for the GC alone.

W1zz, remind me to update my house wiring and breakers if you release your own GC.

Oh I also wanted to add that if you release a TPU GPU, the word fanboy will have to be redefined in the dictionary.

 

[W1zzard]

3x8 pin + PCI-E bus gives you a max power draw of 525 Watts.
That almost 1/3 of the max output from a standard (15A) US household circuit for the GC alone.

W1zz, remind me to update my house wiring and breakers if you release your own GC.

if the TPU GPU is too powerful for you to handle, you can always go with the much weaker hd 6990

 

[(FIH) The Don]

EPICFAIL

 

[Kreij]

if the TPU GPU is too powerful for you to handle, you can always go with the much weaker hd 6990

Rofl ... Nah, I'll update to 1200A service and put 480 lines in the computer room.
Is the TPU GPU going to be three-phase? lol

 

[TheMailMan78]

I would just have the power company run a 3 phase line to my house. Problem solved More juice at a constant stream = COOLING WIN!

All joking aside if you hooked up with a GPU vendor to produce a TPU certified GPU I would buy one in a second. I want the TPU troll edition!

 

[Kreij]

So W1zz, are you taking pre-orders for the TPU GPU yet?

Anyway, in a previous question I asked if the 590 actually brought anything new to the table.
Did it?

 

[HalfAHertz]

So W1zz, are you taking pre-orders for the TPU GPU yet?

Anyway, in a previous question I asked if the 590 actually brought anything new to the table.
Did it?

You can officially haz 3d surround sega mega drive vision with a dash of physx without the need of a 2nd card? EVGA and Galaxy's twin 460 cards were advertised earlier but are not sold anywhere yet..

You win a pci-e slot, nvidia wins your m00nies ergo 2win Boombastic edition.

 

[Frick]

BTW, If a 7 is considered a very bad score the scoring system is broken imo.

 

[W1zzard]

BTW, If a 7 is considered a very bad score the scoring system is broken imo.

i never said "very bad"

 

[Frick]

i never said "very bad"

How about Epic Fail then? I know it was a joke, but it implies that's how you see it.

 

[newtekie1]

Cooling would have made zero difference. Unless you put an ice pack on the fuse/resistor.

When you us extreme cooling, the entire card is cold, even with insulation. And people using extreme cooling are killing the cards anyway.

But again, that doesn't change the fact that no where on the box does it say 1.2v is safe. All it says is that you can raise the voltage and get higher clocks, which you can do safely with the stock cooling, and you can do to the extreme with extreme cooling.

So the argument "well it says you can do it on the box" doesn't fly because it doesn't say you can pump 1.2v though the card on the box, and the BIOS limits the voltage to a very safe 1.06v*.

*Again, I'm assuming that ASUS' BIOS had that limit since it the limit nVidia has obviously set for the reference design. If ASUS' BIOS didn't have this limit, then that is ASUS' fault and this particular card deserves the grief it gets for popping, but it still don't make the GTX590 design in general bad.

i never said "very bad"

What I don't get is why give this card a 7 and the HD6990 a 9? So the GTX590 doesn't being anything really new, well what did the HD6990 bring that was new? So you can't overvolt the GTX590 that much, you couldn't overvolt the HD6990 at all. The HD6990 overclocked worse than this card. The HD6990 was louder than this card. The only thing worse about this card really is the higher power draw and the weaker display output configuration, is that worth dropping the score all the way down to a 7?

 

[Harlequin_uk]

it would appear that nvidia actually emailed before the nda was lifted about keeping voltage below 1.05v , was this before or after wizzard blew this one up?

 

[TheMailMan78]

When you us extreme cooling, the entire card is cold, even with insulation. And people using extreme cooling are killing the cards anyway.

But again, that doesn't change the fact that no where on the box does it say 1.2v is safe. All it says is that you can raise the voltage and get higher clocks, which you can do safely with the stock cooling, and you can do to the extreme with extreme cooling.

So the argument "well it says you can do it on the box" doesn't fly because it doesn't say you can pump 1.2v though the card on the box, and the BIOS limits the voltage to a very safe 1.06v*.

*Again, I'm assuming that ASUS' BIOS had that limit since it the limit nVidia has obviously set for the reference design. If ASUS' BIOS didn't have this limit, then that is ASUS' fault and this particular card deserves the grief it gets for popping, but it still don't make the GTX590 design in general bad.



What I don't get is why give this card a 7 and the HD6990 a 9? So the GTX590 doesn't being anything really new, well what did the HD6990 bring that was new? So you can't overvolt the GTX590 that much, you couldn't overvolt the HD6990 at all. The HD6990 overclocked worse than this card. The HD6990 was louder than this card. The only thing worse about this card really is the higher power draw and the weaker display output configuration, is that worth dropping the score all the way down to a 7?

Maybe because the 6990 didn't detonate W1zzs test bench and place his whole office into a thermonuclear winter?

Anyway like I said you could have set the card volts at 6.5v. It shouldn't have mattered. The overdraw protection is flawed.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

So W1zz, are you taking pre-orders for the TPU GPU yet?

Anyway, in a previous question I asked if the 590 actually brought anything new to the table.
Did it?

yeah pretty good performance for being pretty quiet, runs pretty cool, and more efficient then the 6990 and its wthin ~3% of 6990 performance

 

[CDdude55]

Maybe because the 6990 didn't detonate W1zzs test bench and place his whole office into a thermonuclear winter?

Overreacting..

 

[newtekie1]

Maybe because the 6990 didn't detonate W1zzs test bench and place his whole office into a thermonuclear winter?

Anyway like I said you could have set the card volts at 6.5v. It shouldn't have mattered. The overdraw protection is flawed.

No, the BIOS limit to 1.06v should have saved the card. Once you start going past that, no enthusiust should expect protection on the card to save you, especially not protection that we know only works by downclocking the card.

Talk all you want, the only thing that was flawed about the card was the initial driver, beyond that the BIOS was fine with a 1.06v limit, and the overcurrent limit was fine as well as long as the voltage limit set by nVidia is actually adhered to.

 

[TheMailMan78]

No, the BIOS limit to 1.06v should have saved the card. Once you start going past that, no enthusiust should expect protection on the card to save you, especially not protection that we know only works by downclocking the card.

Talk all you want, the only thing that was flawed about the card was the initial driver, beyond that the BIOS was fine with a 1.06v limit, and the overcurrent limit was fine as well as long as the voltage limit set by nVidia is actually adhered to.

If the over current was fine it wouldn't have popped. I know you have problems accepting that but the many reviews on the Internet support my view. Where as you sound to be making excuses. Boo Whoo. Its everyone elses fault but Nvidias. Sometimes a duck is a duck.