[VR-Zone] NVidia GTX-590 *FINAL* Specs Revealed!

[SHAQ]

Why do people care if it is 5% slower? OC this and the 6990 and the 590 will win. Not everyone has to have the fastest stock clocked card to be a success. It's not a failure and will sell out. I thought about getting one but I think I'll wait for 3rd party coolers/designs.

 

[pcm81]

Thermal power is the kig of the hill. Always was, always will be untill we have optical chips. The thermal design of a good cooler is not cutting edge science, so 3rd party solutions will always be avaiable which outperform stock coolers. The key is performance per watt and in this 6970 beats 580. This is why I went with 6990. 590 has to be 2x crippled 580s b/c 580 are just too power hungry...

 

[formulav8]

Seriously. Why not just tape over all them, put a label on the box itself that states your warranty is void if you expose the video card to your computer in any way.

Yuk Yuk Yuk :awe:

Looks like AMD will continue to have the fastest video card for the months to come...

 

[3DVagabond]

Thats because TechPowerUP measures around 100cm from the pc (normal sitting range from a pc). Some measure it like 3cm from it, but who in their right mind sit with their ears 3cm from a gpu? no one, does it matter how much noise it makes at 3cm then? no.



TechPowerUP: (GPUs under heavy load):100cm from GPU:


580 = 41 dB
280= 51 dB
480= 50 dB
6990 = 53 dB

TechPowerUP: (GPUs under idle load):100cm from GPU:

580 = 31 dB
6990 = 34 dB


also the 590 isnt released yet, if it turns out to be ~50 dB or 54 dB, will the people the crusified the 6990 for being noisy say the same about the about the 590?

Distance is one of the reasons. The other is the scale used for measuring, A weighting (sp?). It's not just a raw decibel rating. It takes into consideration frequencies that are most noticeable to people and places more emphasis on those and less on frequencies that we don't hear as well.

Just for the record, I consider the 6990 far from an elegant or cost effective solution. Personally, I'd much rather spend my money on a pair of 6950/70 Twin frozer designs from MSI, or something similar (Gigabyte's 3 fan cooler. Whatever they call that. ). Something cooler and quieter. There are some people who the 6990 is a better solution for, Quadfire, for instance.

 

[SolMiester]

Even if GTX590 doesn't outperform the 6990, the 6990 is more or less unusable in reference design form. It really doesn't matter if the 6990 is 10-20% faster. Who would subject themselves to 70 DB+ of noise levels? At the end of the day if the 590 comes in at 10% slower but is FAR quieter, it's the winner imo. When comparing such videocards, +/-10% performance isn't much at all. If I had a $700+ graphics card, I may also want to try 3D, where NV wins again. Also, the card would be fast enough to run AA+PhysX. So I don't necessarily agree that this card has to be faster to be better.

If the noise levels are correct here, I think you are spot on!....

 

[SolMiester]

You would think that wouldn't you but according to these guys who ran 2 GTX 580s at 600 core, the GTX 590 would still be producing more heat than a HD 6990.

http://plaza.fi/muropaketti/artikkelit/naytonohjaimet/ennakkokatsaus-nvidia-geforce-gtx-590

That graph is flawed....2 cards use more power than 1 GPU sandwich...in order to read this correctly, you would need to compare 2 x 6970 at the slower clocks against these slower 570's to get an idea of % decrease on the power envelope

 

[3DVagabond]

Why do people care if it is 5% slower? OC this and the 6990 and the 590 will win. Not everyone has to have the fastest stock clocked card to be a success. It's not a failure and will sell out. I thought about getting one but I think I'll wait for 3rd party coolers/designs.

Could be.
For that to happen, you are assuming that nVidia will have a cooling solution that will handle the extra power it takes to push the 590 to, and beyond, the performance levels of the 6990. Or, you haven't considered that that the 590 will use more power than the 6990 to achieve the same performance as the 6990, never mind surpass it. There's some reason the clocks are set so low on the 590. To help keep it cool, is likely.

 

[SolMiester]

NV wouldnt release a dual GPU that was slower than the 6990, period! Thats not the way operate, and seriously, what would be the point?

 

[MentalIlness]

NV wouldnt release a dual GPU that was slower than the 6990, period! Thats not the way operate, and seriously, what would be the point?

Maybe because they didn't think the 6990 would be as fast as it is ?

 

[TerabyteX]

Thats because TechPowerUP measures around 100cm from the pc (normal sitting range from a pc). Some measure it like 3cm from it, but who in their right mind sit with their ears 3cm from a gpu? no one, does it matter how much noise it makes at 3cm then? no.



TechPowerUP: (GPUs under heavy load):100cm from GPU:


580 = 41 dB
280= 51 dB
480= 50 dB
6990 = 53 dB

TechPowerUP: (GPUs under idle load):100cm from GPU:

580 = 31 dB
6990 = 34 dB


also the 590 isnt released yet, if it turns out to be ~50 dB or 54 dB, will the people the crusified the 6990 for being noisy say the same about the about the 590?

That's my POV, who sits at 3cm from the videocard cooler shroud to play games??

Maybe because they didn't think the 6990 would be as fast as it is ?

Exactly, I expected something similar like the HD 5970, having all the stream processors enabled but running at HD 5850 speeds, it is a feat considering the restrains of the 40nm process.

 

[WelshBloke]

NV wouldnt release a dual GPU that was slower than the 6990, period! Thats not the way operate, and seriously, what would be the point?

Nvidia can only control how fast their own cards are, if they aren't as fast as AMD's they cant just wave the magic video card wand at them.

Disclaimer: Not that I'm saying they WILL be slower than AMD's offerings, I'll just wait for the reviews.

 

[badb0y]

That graph is flawed....2 cards use more power than 1 GPU sandwich...in order to read this correctly, you would need to compare 2 x 6970 at the slower clocks against these slower 570's to get an idea of % decrease on the power envelope

I am assuming with those clocks it is going to be between the GTX 580 SLi and GTX 570 SLi.

 

[Kenmitch]

Nvidia can only control how fast their own cards are, if they aren't as fast as AMD's they cant just wave the magic video card wand at them.

Disclaimer: Not that I'm saying they WILL be slower than AMD's offerings, I'll just wait for the reviews.

If the 590 turns out to be somewhat slower than the 6990 it'll still have things like CUDA and physX and 3d gaming with a single card.

The real battle is gonna be on the next node

 

[Lonyo]

Why do people care if it is 5% slower? OC this and the 6990 and the 590 will win. Not everyone has to have the fastest stock clocked card to be a success. It's not a failure and will sell out. I thought about getting one but I think I'll wait for 3rd party coolers/designs.

Considering Crossfire scales better than SLI with the respective GPUs, you will need to push a 590 quite close to stock clocks to match or beat the 6990 at stock clocks, and then the 6990 can overclock a small amount too.
At the end of the day, you will entirely possibly start to push either the thermal limit or you will run out of voltage if the voltage can't be tweaked before you can manage to equal performance.

 

[Baasha]

So regarding ultra high resolutions and Surround/Eyefinity, is it pretty much a given that AMD 6990 CrossFire will perform MUCH better than NVidia GTX-590 SLI?

If the reviewers test this card on some 1080p monitors, they should be disbarred from testing high-end equipment in the future. Nobody who buys a 6990 or 590, especially TWO for CrossFire/SLI, will care about lower resolutions.

I want to see triple monitor setups with ultra high resolutions. Shit, perhaps I should buy the cards and just do a review myself! LOL!

 

[Madcatatlas]

So regarding ultra high resolutions and Surround/Eyefinity, is it pretty much a given that AMD 6990 CrossFire will perform MUCH better than NVidia GTX-590 SLI?

If the reviewers test this card on some 1080p monitors, they should be disbarred from testing high-end equipment in the future. Nobody who buys a 6990 or 590, especially TWO for CrossFire/SLI, will care about lower resolutions.

I want to see triple monitor setups with ultra high resolutions. Shit, perhaps I should buy the cards and just do a review myself! LOL!

You are SO wrong my friend. People buy stuff for all kind of reasons.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Why do people care if it is 5% slower? OC this and the 6990 and the 590 will win. Not everyone has to have the fastest stock clocked card to be a success. It's not a failure and will sell out. I thought about getting one but I think I'll wait for 3rd party coolers/designs.

From the numbers I have seen, the GTX580 can really start sucking the wattage as you overclock and add voltage. Two 8 pin connectors and a PCIE slot are rated for 375 watts. I'm sure it's doable with a good power supply, but you would be pushing some things pretty far beyond spec.

 

[Arkadrel]

If the 590 turns out to be somewhat slower than the 6990 it'll still have things like CUDA and physX and 3d gaming with a single card.

The real battle is gonna be on the next node

AMD 6990 can do HD3D too, both in bluray movies or in games, with over 400 supported titles (about equal to nvidias supported list).

So again the main advantages of the 590 would just be CUDA and PhysX.

 

[Kenmitch]

AMD 6990 can do HD3D too, both in bluray movies or in games, with over 400 supported titles (about equal to nvidias supported list).

So again the main advantages of the 590 would just be CUDA and PhysX.

I know

Was just trying to cheer up the nvidia fanboys in case the 590 is slower

 

[wahdangun]

I am assuming with those clocks it is going to be between the GTX 580 SLi and GTX 570 SLi.

yikes!!!!!!! even GTX 560 SLI is more power hungry than HD 6990

btw, i don't understand why nvdia bother to launch a halo card that slower than HD 6990 ??? and that card potentially hurting GTX 580 price ??? is it better to leave it alone and profiting form GTX 580 ??

 

[Madcatatlas]

yikes!!!!!!! even GTX 560 SLI is more power hungry than HD 6990

btw, i don't understand why nvdia bother to launch a halo card that slower than HD 6990 ??? and that card potentially hurting GTX 580 price ??? is it better to leave it alone and profiting form GTX 580 ??

Who said it was slower? Have you seen it? Link to the review would be nice. Cheers.

 

[Lonyo]

Who said it was slower? Have you seen it? Link to the review would be nice. Cheers.

Based on the supposed specs, all signs point to it being slower.
Benchmarks of a similarly clocked pair of GTX580s are earlier in the thread and give an indication of where performance would fall if the clocks in the OP are correct.

 

[Jionix]

Who said it was slower? Have you seen it? Link to the review would be nice. Cheers.

If you are to believe this thread's title (and the specs they revealed), then it is most likely slower at default. This is based off of comparing 2 x 580 at the same down-clocked speeds compared to the 6990.

 

[Keysplayr]

AMD 6990 can do HD3D too, both in bluray movies or in games, with over 400 supported titles (about equal to nvidias supported list).

So again the main advantages of the 590 would just be CUDA and PhysX.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-3.html

"First, there are no dedicated 3D monitors in North America that employ the HDMI 1.4 standard...our experience has shown us that Nvidia’s 3D Vision driver works better and more consistently in the majority of games...you can either game in stereo at 720p maxing out at 60 frames per second per eye, or you can game at 1080p with up to 24 frames per second per eye
"
Safe to say that Nvidias 3D remains in the over and above feature list you're trying to wittle down.

 

[badb0y]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-6870-radeon-hd-6850-barts,2776-3.html

"First, there are no dedicated 3D monitors in North America that employ the HDMI 1.4 standard...our experience has shown us that Nvidia’s 3D Vision driver works better and more consistently in the majority of games...you can either game in stereo at 720p maxing out at 60 frames per second per eye, or you can game at 1080p with up to 24 frames per second per eye
"
Safe to say that Nvidias 3D remains in the over and above feature list you're trying to wittle down.

It's basically how nVidia dealt with Eyefinity, they don't have a real answer so they scrap together what they can and try to get a "tick" marker under the feature list. As for CUDA, not everyone benefits from this but those who do certainly appreciate it and finally PhysX, quite possibly the biggest F' Up nVidia has done. It angers me because nVidia could have done so much more with it yet they completely mis-handled the situation and now it's a cool effect added on to games rather than a epic game enhancing feature.

Have you guys seen the BF3 episode 2? Those physics are awesome with the debri falling all over and I have no doubts that we will see destructable environments like in BC2. That's what PhysX should be doing not making my explosion look cooler.