NVIDIA Forces EVGA to Pull EVBot Support from GTX 680 Classified

[EarthDog]

Not sure... its wired for it, and the evbot works on its own not off the card (has its own FW, not associated with the GPU - you update FW on the evbot via the motherboard, not the GPU).

I would GUESS, yes.

 

[radrok]

I can agree, however these cards were advertised to do these things. People who bought these cards with this feature in mind have now been stolen from. Regardless, as I said there's still 3rd party software to do it. So really, it isn't an issue.

You mean the modified bios?

Also it is AIBs fault in part, cause they promised what they couldn't deliver.

 

[Benetanegia]

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/new...proving-quality-or-strangling-innovation.aspx

We support overvoltaging up to a limit on our products, but have a maximum reliability spec that is intended to protect the life of the product. We don’t want to see customers disappointed when their card dies in a year or two because the voltage was raised too high.

Regarding overvoltaging above our max spec, we offer AICs two choices:

· Ensure the GPU stays within our operating specs and have a full warranty from NVIDIA.

· Allow the GPU to be manually operated outside specs in which case NVIDIA provides no warranty.

Yes, you’ve seen some cases of boards getting out into the market with OV features only to have them disabled later. This is due to the fact that AICs decided later that they would prefer to have a warranty. This is simply a choice the AICs each need to make for themselves. How, or when they make this decision, is entirely up to them.

With regards to your MSI comment below, we gave MSI the same choice I referenced above -- change their SW to disable OV above our reliability limit or not obtain a warranty. They simply chose to change their software in lieu of the warranty. Their choice. It is not ours to make, and we don’t influence them one way or the other.

I don't know if this is 100% true, but if true it looks very reasonable to me. It paints quite a different picture than what it's been, for the most part, assumed in this thread and other forums. For instance, Nvidia wouldn't be forcing anything. I do understand, that maybe before now they'd get the warranty from Nvidia no matter what, but personally I see no reason for Nvidia offering a warranty if their specs are not met. From manufacturer's perspective not getting the warranty might be scary enough that it really forces them to the only option, but it's not like Nvidia is aiming a gun to their heads.

I think that when Jacob Freeman said "It was removed in order to 100% comply with NVIDIA guidelines for selling GeForce GTX products" he might actually be like saying "If we want to get the warranty...".

 

[Hilux SSRG]

Sucks for persons who bought the "Classified" model card from Evga who were interested in it's feature-set and willing to pay top dollar.

 

[radrok]

Sucks for persons who bought the "Classified" model card from Evga who were interested in it's feature-set and willing to pay top dollar.

Indeed, the only way to get voltage control is to flash a 680 Lightning with the old BIOS or hotwire with an Asus card and Motherboard.

 

[m1dg3t]

Hate to say I told ya so...

 

[HumanSmoke]

I don't know if this is 100% true...

Sounds reasonable. MSI look like they've been playing fast and loose with specification, and there is no way that the anti-Nvidia crowd or casual tech reader/Googling card upgrader is going to parse the information solely as being about MSI. The inference will be- especially on forum threads- that Nvidia is producing an inferior/unstable product. Once the affected users start and trolls start bombing the Newegg reviews and the like, you'll end up with a PR problem out of proportion with the situation. Remember when EVGA recalled a batch of GTX 680 SuperClocked cards? It took about five minutes before some forums managed to spin that into "the GTX 680 as a design is borked"

 

[Benetanegia]

Reading about this topic on another forum I came across this:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/MSI-GTX-660-670-overvolting-PowerEdition,news-40278.html

edit: lol it's the same posted by Humansmoke (kinda)

A small component completely superfluous to the normal circuit in one of the ground connections causes major overvoltage in the PWM chip in question – instead of the 5 volts specified by Richtek, the chip is hit with up to 9.3 volts.

We find it hard to believe in a design accident here, since the circuit in question is a standard design – if implemented correctly.

I think there's much more to the voltage story than we can know by just looking at a single source.

Right now, to me the whole thing just looks like the kids have been misbehaving and toying with things they shouldn't have and now daddy is angry.

 

[eidairaman1]

In short...it's all a big fucking ruse. Any average Joe that thinks they are an overclocker anymore is either lying to themselves or extremely delusional.

that right there i agree with, people taking a Intel SB or IVB up to 4.5GHz isnt anything special anymore.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Like Erocker said, this is bullshit for people who bought eitherh te MSI lightning or Evga Classified card with Voltage tweaking in mind. BUt on the other hand, I can see why Nvidia is doing this. So that people whop buy these cards thinking they know what they are doing won't throw voltages at the cards and grenade them, like so many of the GTX570s did, which is why the power limit and voltage limit was on those cards in the first place.

 

[eidairaman1]

Like Erocker said, this is bullshit for people who bought eitherh te MSI lightning or Evga Classified card with Voltage tweaking in mind. BUt on the other hand, I can see why Nvidia is doing this. So that people whop buy these cards thinking they know what they are doing won't throw voltages at the cards and grenade them, like so many of the GTX570s did, which is why the power limit and voltage limit was on those cards in the first place.

well a price slash should be due then cuz technically youre paying for their software too

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Common sense is not so common anymore.

 

[radrok]

Found an interesting read about the matter on another forum

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/new...proving-quality-or-strangling-innovation.aspx

 

[m1dg3t]

I'm going to start patenting the shit I say! It's starting to become contagious now lol Imitation is the greatest form of flattery they say.

Thank you all! You know who you are

 

[eidairaman1]

http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-rada...mmon_sense_super_power-thumb-300x412-8243.jpg

Ow my kidney

 

[HossHuge]

No it only goes to 1.175V or if lucky 1.2V

I'm not sure what version of Trixx you're using brandonwh64, but every one I've ever used goes to 1.3.

 

[xBruce88x]

Don't worry guys... Freeman will just whack nVidia with his crowbar and save the day!

seriously though... this is a bad move on nVidia's part.

 

[EarthDog]

I'm not sure what version of Trixx you're using brandonwh64, but every one I've ever used goes to 1.3.

http://img.techpowerup.org/121003/voltage control.jpg

This is an Nvidia card not an AMD card...

 

[brandonwh64]

This is an Nvidia card not an AMD card...

I was about to say the EXACT same thing. Hoss nvidia's bios limits are set to 1.175 or SOMETIMES 1.2V but The bot made you go above that.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I don't know if this is 100% true, but if true it looks very reasonable to me. It paints quite a different picture than what it's been, for the most part, assumed in this thread and other forums. For instance, Nvidia wouldn't be forcing anything. I do understand, that maybe before now they'd get the warranty from Nvidia no matter what, but personally I see no reason for Nvidia offering a warranty if their specs are not met. From manufacturer's perspective not getting the warranty might be scary enough that it really forces them to the only option, but it's not like Nvidia is aiming a gun to their heads.

I think that when Jacob Freeman said "It was removed in order to 100% comply with NVIDIA guidelines for selling GeForce GTX products" he might actually be like saying "If we want to get the warranty...".

not very fair or reasonable imho(by nvidia or Evga), patrons should be repaid the premium they payed on these cards at least.

 

[Benetanegia]

not very fair or reasonable imho(by nvidia or Evga), patrons should be repaid the premium they payed on these cards at least.

I mean it's reasonable for Nvidia to impose those conditions. Either you respect the specs or you lose warranty. If you buy a phone and use it as a frisbee, and it breaks you don't expect the warranty to cover it, do you?

MSI put a part speced with a maximum operating voltage of 5v, way up to 8v, why is Nvdia supposed to cover that graphics card with a warranty?

EVGA is not as bad, or maybe it is, since they are allowing users (even idiots) to use whatever voltage they want, way higher than the maximum safe voltage specified by Nvidia. It's EVGA who has to take responsabilty if it breaks, not Nvidia. That's why specifications are set in the first place.

Nvidia just said, "we quit covering parts that do not meet our specifications, if you want to go beyond that, you are on your own", MSI and EVGA simply prefered to get the warranty. It's all their fault.

EDIT: Of course EVGA should keep the feature and suck it up if they get a very high return rate. Problem is they probably know full well they'd end up having big loses. All the related stories makes me think that Nvidia was covering those faulty chips until now, which is unthinkable in any industry that I know off. Anywhere if you push something beyond the specifications you're SOL.

 

[Xzibit]

I think Nvidia has every right to do product control.

The way its doing it or atleast the info that is being reported on is bad.

If project greenlight was established as a product quality control for AIB designs. Common sense would make you beleive all designs go through Nvidia. So they had to approve the desing at some point as per the BSN report.

So what changed ?

Did Nvidia strong arm the MSI and EVGA to change those designs or suffer ?

Reasonable thing to do if they were approved by Nvidia at somepoint just to phase them out. They were advertise and sold as such and if approved Nvidia and AIB should suffer the RMAs but Nvidia shouldn't strong arm to drop "card x" or AIB to risk warranties on all others cards.

 

[Benetanegia]

or AIB to risk warranties on all others cards.

From what I read they don't risk losing warranties on other cards, only the ones affected.

And the cards are still approved. Greenlight seems to be about what AIBs can do, not about what is covered by Nvidia's own warranty. They are and have always been free to create such products, they still are, but Nvidia doesn't cover the warranty. And they shouldn't, why should they cover warranties of products that exceed their safety limits? Overvolting is allowed and covered by warranty, up to a point, extreme overvolting is not covered. Makes 100% sense.

What it doesn't make any sense is that it's implied that before now, Nvidia actually covered designs that went beyond their specifications and limits. At least to me, that's competely unheard off in any industry and if AMD is doing that too, they better change that model since it's not reasonable, nor fair for them. Nvidia has typically offered more extreme OC cards and maybe that's why tho.

 

[EarthDog]

then perhaps its time for the AIB's to step up and drop the crutches... I dont mind paying more of a premium for such cards (being an 'extreme' overclocker). I can see why most wouldnt want to pay for that, but most, that know anything, wouldnt be buying such a card for 'ambient' overclocking in the first place. There will always be people 'not in the know' that buy a Lightning or a Matrix just for ambient use so AIB's get the best of both worlds that way.

 

[HossHuge]

I would stop thinking out loud if I were you. It hurts peoples ears.

Doesnt Trixx do this already?

I was about to say the EXACT same thing. Hoss nvidia's bios limits are set to 1.175 or SOMETIMES 1.2V but The bot made you go above that.

MM mentioned Trixx, so that's what I thought you were talking about.