Doesn't the 6990 run a bit cooler than the 590? Sounds like AMD just went with a more aggressive fan profile.
Odd. But it doesn't matter they are not in stock anyway.AnandtheMan, your link takes me to a GTX580. I can find no trace of the GTX590 on Newegg... seems like there might be a problem to me.
And some cards died with a slight voltage bump. Remember, Nvidia is saying NO voltage increases are to be used. :\ I just don't understand why there is no hardware protection, makes zero sense to me. Especially on such a high end, high power device.
And some cards died with a slight voltage bump. Remember, Nvidia is saying NO voltage increases are to be used. :\ I just don't understand why there is no hardware protection, makes zero sense to me. Especially on such a high end, high power device.
AMD hasn't had to deal with extremely hot GPUs like Nvidia has, maybe thats why Nvidia puts more into the cooling solution than AMD. Before the HD69xx series, their cards have always run pretty cool, even with basic reference cooling.
Its not that simple. "Performance per watt" is what is killing 590...
no, what is killing the 590 is some a$$hat in the engineering/purchasing/accounting dept decided that they needed to save a few bucks here and there to keep gross margins high, and when amd blew past the 300w barrier NV was left unprepared. And even that might not be fair, b/c AMD does have a significant advantage when building a dual gpu ultra high end card. Heck, AMD builds their whole lineup around the concept, it's probably more surprising that nvidia got as close as they did.
Odd. But it doesn't matter they are not in stock anyway.
And some cards died with a slight voltage bump. Remember, Nvidia is saying NO voltage increases are to be used. :\ I just don't understand why there is no hardware protection, makes zero sense to me. Especially on such a high end, high power device.
Its not that simple. "Performance per watt" is what is killing 590...
Yeah I was talking about the 590 being quieter than the 6990, it looks like AMD tuned more for cool and Nvidia tuned more for quiet.
I agree that its the sheer power draw thats killing those 590's.
When I search (and am logged in) I get:
OCP Refined, A Word On Marketing, & The Test
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4239/nvidias-geforce-gtx-590-duking-it-out-for-the-single-card-king/4
...image...
Try a different browser. They are not in stock right now.
When I search this is the link for the results
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...iption=gtx+590
Asus card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-436-_-Product
Evga card
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-630-_-Product
If your looking to buy one, EVGA has the water cooled 590 in stock.
First to market I believe.
EDIT : Its in stock at Tigerdirect , get your CC out
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...p?EdpNo=128723
Its not that simple. "Performance per watt" is what is killing 590...
killing the 590? like blowing it up? or you mean its killing its performance wise? From what i have seen the 590 is equal to the 6990, the larger the data/benchmarks, the more the equal out. They both trade blows across the spectrum. There are only a few sites that claim the 6990>590 in performance and any site that comes to that isnt using a large enough data sample. I promiss, the more benchmarks ran and the more data you get, they will even out. The higher resolutions favor 4gb ram, but as i said the more data you collect they become identical in performance.
This whole forum is talking the 590 performance as poor. Its simply not the case. The 6990 and the 590 performance is closer than any cards ever. If you want to believe the 6990 outperforms the 590 than believe it. But the data dont lie! the more game benchmarked the more they become nearly identical.
I was upset with the fact that this thread was totally the 590 bashing thread, that keys couldnt even say nvidia had to work hard to make the 590, that it was an engineering marvel. He got beef, it was like the thread couldnt accept one good thing about the 590. This was the 590 sux thread, i was told. At least dont just make things up, like saying that the 590 is lacking in performance! Its to the point of the 6990.and if you dont think thats good, then you cant give the 6990 props either.
I believe its insain that the two totle different approaches lead to the two best tops they could do. And they are almost identical in performance. This is two totally different designs, Great designs they are, cayman and gf110. They both met at the same max, it shows that both approaches are great and you can prefer one over the other. Or you can instead see the fact that AMD and Nvidia are the world leaders in GPUs and they both met their limits of the 40nm, and performance shows they ended up at the same wall in performance. This lets me know that they both are as good as they could be, the best they could get from two vary different architectures.....is a tie!!!
killing the 590? like blowing it up? or you mean its killing its performance wise? From what i have seen the 590 is equal to the 6990, the larger the data/benchmarks, the more the equal out. They both trade blows across the spectrum. There are only a few sites that claim the 6990>590 in performance and any site that comes to that isnt using a large enough data sample. I promiss, the more benchmarks ran and the more data you get, they will even out. The higher resolutions favor 4gb ram, but as i said the more data you collect they become identical in performance.
This whole forum is talking the 590 performance as poor. Its simply not the case. The 6990 and the 590 performance is closer than any cards ever. If you want to believe the 6990 outperforms the 590 than believe it. But the data dont lie! the more game benchmarked the more they become nearly identical.
I was upset with the fact that this thread was totally the 590 bashing thread, that keys couldnt even say nvidia had to work hard to make the 590, that it was an engineering marvel. He got beef, it was like the thread couldnt accept one good thing about the 590. This was the 590 sux thread, i was told. At least dont just make things up, like saying that the 590 is lacking in performance! Its to the point of the 6990.and if you dont think thats good, then you cant give the 6990 props either.
I believe its insain that the two totle different approaches lead to the two best tops they could do. And they are almost identical in performance. This is two totally different designs, Great designs they are, cayman and gf110. They both met at the same max, it shows that both approaches are great and you can prefer one over the other. Or you can instead see the fact that AMD and Nvidia are the world leaders in GPUs and they both met their limits of the 40nm, and performance shows they ended up at the same wall in performance. This lets me know that they both are as good as they could be, the best they could get from two vary different architectures.....is a tie!!!
What I mean by killing is that they cant do as much as they should be able to...
gtx cuda core design is a much more powerful core than stream processor, its like comparing 4 core extreme cpu to a 4core core2 duo non extreme version... The problem with GTX is to run at its full potential it needs ALLOT of power, the power given to GTX now is much less than the GPU can handle. The problem is that 2 powerful GPUs, running at their max clocks and voltages, generate more heat than can be taken off by coolers and they would more electrical power than PCIe can provide.
This is why performance per watt is killing the 590. 590 is not a bad card, but it is too power hungry to run at its full potential. This is what I mean performance per watt is killing 590. It should be a 600-700 watt electrical consumption card if you can feed it and keep it cool...
What I mean by killing is that they cant do as much as they should be able to...
gtx cuda core design is a much more powerful core than stream processor, its like comparing 4 core extreme cpu to a 4core core2 duo non extreme version... The problem with GTX is to run at its full potential it needs ALLOT of power, the power given to GTX now is much less than the GPU can handle. The problem is that 2 powerful GPUs, running at their max clocks and voltages, generate more heat than can be taken off by coolers and they would more electrical power than PCIe can provide.
This is why performance per watt is killing the 590. 590 is not a bad card, but it is too power hungry to run at its full potential. This is what I mean performance per watt is killing 590. It should be a 600-700 watt electrical consumption card if you can feed it and keep it cool...
Wow,i get what your saying mate,but you only needed to say it once^^No, you dont get it. And you cant get out of it. Your not understanding the truth. The only way nvidia could out do AMD, as you saying the shouldve, then that would be proof that nvidias design was better than AMDs. Which i dont think you want that to be. What this proves is that they are both doing something right, the best they both could get their vastly different architectures is a tie. This is the top, as far as they could go with their designs, and it proves that they are equally capable. That neither failed, niether is better. Both have proven that in the end. Do you not see what this proves? it proves AMD/Nvidia went drastically different directions and their best are a tie!!!
This isnt a bad thing for either company, it should be an end all debate. Hats off to AMD for making the best, Nvidias best only tied AMD. This proves there both equally capable drastically different designs. Nvidias powerful cores come at a cost, but at the end of the day AMDs approach is equally capable. This has never been before, they both did the very best they could and couldn't beat one another. Its great.... This says a lot, maybe you should stop seeing negative for nvidia, its no worse than AMDs best. You must see that neither design is more capable, neither is sufficient. This is undeniable proof. They ended up the same and most ppl dont see the beauty in this. This is proof they are equals, totally different designed race cars that end in a dead tie. you cant say nvidia didnt do good enough when thats the best the could and it matched AMDs best. It proves both companies have achieved the same outcome. This is the best you can get, neither design is better, you cant dis one without saying something negitive about the other.
If you say nvidia shouldve been able to wine but they failed then your saying Nvidia has the better archtecture, by default. Nvidia couldnt top AMD cause AMD reached the highest nvidia could.
No, you dont get it. And you cant get out of it. Your not understanding the truth. The only way nvidia could out do AMD, as you saying the shouldve, then that would be proof that nvidias design was better than AMDs. Which i dont think you want that to be. What this proves is that they are both doing something right, the best they both could get their vastly different architectures is a tie. This is the top, as far as they could go with their designs, and it proves that they are equally capable. That neither failed, niether is better. Both have proven that in the end. Do you not see what this proves? it proves AMD/Nvidia went drastically different directions and their best are a tie!!!
This isnt a bad thing for either company, it should be an end all debate. Hats off to AMD for making the best, Nvidias best only tied AMD. This proves there both equally capable drastically different designs. Nvidias powerful cores come at a cost, but at the end of the day AMDs approach is equally capable. This has never been before, they both did the very best they could and couldn't beat one another. Its great.... This says a lot, maybe you should stop seeing negative for nvidia, its no worse than AMDs best. You must see that neither design is more capable, neither is sufficient. This is undeniable proof. They ended up the same and most ppl dont see the beauty in this. This is proof they are equals, totally different designed race cars that end in a dead tie. you cant say nvidia didnt do good enough when thats the best the could and it matched AMDs best. It proves both companies have achieved the same outcome. This is the best you can get, neither design is better, you cant dis one without saying something negitive about the other.
If you say nvidia shouldve been able to wine but they failed then your saying Nvidia has the better archtecture, by default. Nvidia couldnt top AMD cause AMD reached the highest nvidia could.
Yes I read that. Let's put it this way, drivers should not be needed to ultimately protect the hardware. It can interact with the hardware, but it can't be the last line of defense, software is simply too failure prone to solely rely on.
he 6990 and the 590 performance is closer than any cards ever.