GeForce GTX 590 Review Thread

[Madpistol]

Originally Posted by azanon

I just started at the back page, but I think what is sad is that there's a discussion involving an ATI card on a nVidia forum in a thread entitled "GTX 590 Review thread". If nvnews isn't the place to be a nvidia fanboy, do you mind me asking you where the hell is the place? Where are the GTX 590 reviews? Are folks struggling understanding the topic of the thread?

Be glad I'm not a moderator. The ATI posts would disappear, and several folks would no longer have the ability to post. AFAIK, the folks with tri-ATI in their sig are lost.

This industry is driven by one thing: competition. If you take one side out of the equation, you lose that competition, and thus, this industry grinds to a screeching halt.

If anyone here is showing bias, it's you. There, I said it. This thread is about GTX 590 reviews. We understand that. Do you realize that the GTX 590's direct competion is the HD 6990? The logical conclusion here is that we would COMPARE the two cards. Each card has a set of pros and cons. They've been listed over and over and over again, so there's really no point in reiterating them. There are several nvidia fanboys on this forum. I accept that. What I CAN'T accept is people that play blind bias to a certain side without any rhyme or reason as to why they're doing it. They simply say their side is "better" than the other side.

That doesn't fly with me. I like to think of things logically. I like to create comparison charts that compare competing products to one another. When one product is clearly superior to the other, I recommend the superior product. Thus, I do not have any sort of bias towards one side or another. I simply take the side of the "best" product. What's my criteria for the "best"?

• Performance
• Power consumption
• Feature set
• Acoustics of the cooling solution.
• Price

Notice how I have "Price" bolded. That's because it's the most important aspect in my criteria. A video card can be insanely fast, but if it isn't priced to compete, then I'm not going to recommend it if there's another product that gets close to the same performance without the huge price premium. Also, if that card runs so loud and hot that it makes the person go deaf while sweating in a wife beater, I'm not going to recommend that either. If there's a card that requires a small nuclear reactor to run, but it's only a small percentage faster than the competing card, I'm going to recommend the one that uses less power. If there's a card that outperforms the competition and it costs the same, I'm going to recommend the card that performs the best.

What's the point of this post? It's simple. I'm glad you're not a moderator on these forums. If you were, we wouldn't have the freedom to express our opinions on a product, and ultimately, this forum would die. There is a list of GTX 590 reviews in the very first post of this thread (which was made by yours truly. ) Feel free to read them and express your opinion on this wonderful product from Nvidia.

[Roadhog]

Originally Posted by slaWter

I'd say this is directly related to multi-GPU scaling and more importantly the available VRAM per GPU.

Agreed, such a powerful card and you can't really use it due to the vram limitations.

Turn up the res and it starts to fall behind.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-17.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-18.html

Notice the minimum fps.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by slaWter

Yeah and that's not really a high resolution. Even the more/most common 3x 1080p setups require more VRAM.
2GB really is the sweetspot these days.

So you keep saying, even though I keep posting reviews that show it's not necessarily true.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...lletstorm.html

Bulletstorm 57X10 4X AA GTX590 40fps min/45fps ave HD6990 33fps min/49fps ave The 590 will be smoother at this game.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...-crysis-2.html

Crysis 2 57X10 0X AA GTX590 26fps min/36fps ave HD6990 16fps min/20fps ave The GX590 wins, another AAA title launches without CF support.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...d-space-2.html
Deadspace2 57X10 Max AA GTX590 65fps min/105fps ave HD6990 39fps min/75fps ave The GTX590 is much faster.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...w-f1-2010.html

F1 2010 57X10 4XAA GTX590 25fps min/26fps ave HD6990 24fps min/26fps ave The GX590 has tiny edge in this functional tie.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...ew-hawx-2.html

Hawx 2 57X10 4X AA GTX590 87fps min/152 ave HD6990 50fps min/96fps ave The GTX590 walks away with this.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...a-2-physx.html

Mafia 2 57X16 AA on GTX590 61fps min/83fps ave HD6990 40fps min/53 fps ave The GTX590 walks away on this game as well.

So the GTX590 provided a better gaming experience at six of the eight games tested at 57X10, even though you keep saying the 1.5GB per card is a limitation to for it.

I'd note that 57X10 is nowhere close to mainstream, and that calling something less than 1% of gamers are using (as evidenced by the STEAM survey) "common" is misleading at best.

I've just posted fourteen games where the GTX590 is faster than the 6990 at 25X16, and a review where it's the better solution at 6/8 games at 57X10. This is pretty good evidence the GTX590 isn't struggling with high resolutions as some people like to post with nowhere near as much backing evidence as I just posted.

[john19055]

If Evga had made a GTX 590 like the one they were showing at the CES2011 It looks like it would have run even cooler with three fans.But they called it a GTX 595

[Johnny C]

Originally Posted by john19055

If Evga had made a GTX 590 like the one they were showing at the CES2011 It looks like itAttachment 42575 would have run even cooler with three fans.But they called it a GTX 595

Now that's "cool"....

[AngelGraves13]

Originally Posted by Roadhog

Agreed, such a powerful card and you can't really use it due to the vram limitations.

Turn up the res and it starts to fall behind.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-17.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-18.html

Notice the minimum fps.

Still rather impressive for 5K resolution I must say.

[Roadhog]

Originally Posted by AngelGraves13

Still rather impressive for 5K resolution I must say.

By impressive you mean falling far behind in min fps, then yes.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Roadhog

By impressive you mean falling far behind in min fps, then yes.

You cherry pick isolated benches that support your views. I provided links to 26 benchmarks where the GTX590 wins (or in a few cases, ties) at 25 X16 or 57 X10 that I found in the first few reviews I looked at.

You provide three benchmarks and yell "ATi wins again!" and then say "I can't be bothered to provide evidence like you did, because ATi doesn't give me free video cards".



The difference between what we post is that I at least try to back my opinions with some evidence from independent review sites. You link to a benchmark or two and say "Look, I was right!".

All you have proven is that in the couple games at one setting 99.9% of people can't even run the ATi card has some advantage.

What I proved is that across a very large cross section of games, at high resolution, the GTX590 competes well.

I have no doubt you could go and find 26 benches at high res where the 6990 wins or ties as well, but even if you did, there would be the poor 3d, no PhysX, no forced ambient occlusion, no CF profiles when games launch, no AA in some UE3 games at launch, no CUDA apps to consider. Also, the ATi benches done by reviewers who use default settings (most) are not at comparable IQ due to ATi's performance enhancing, image quality reducing AF optimizations that have received more and more mention in reviews lately.

Not to mention the 6990 may be the loudest video card ever sold, including the FX5800 Ultra.

As much as you try to paint the 6990 as some "superior solution" for high end gaming, you can't change its limitations.

What it has going for it is better OCing, and comparable performance. These are just facts.

[AngelGraves13]

Originally Posted by Roadhog

By impressive you mean falling far behind in min fps, then yes.

I meant that it even runs half-way decent and isn't a slideshow 100% of the time. There's always dips here and there.

[Roadhog]

Originally Posted by Rollo

You cherry pick isolated benches that support your views. I provided links to 26 benchmarks where the GTX590 wins (or in a few cases, ties) at 25 X16 or 57 X10 that I found in the first few reviews I looked at.

You provide three benchmarks and yell "ATi wins again!" and then say "I can't be bothered to provide evidence like you did, because ATi doesn't give me free video cards".



The difference between what we post is that I at least try to back my opinions with some evidence from independent review sites. You link to a benchmark or two and say "Look, I was right!".

All you have proven is that in the couple games at one setting 99.9% of people can't even run the ATi card has some advantage.

What I proved is that across a very large cross section of games, at high resolution, the GTX590 competes well.

I have no doubt you could go and find 26 benches at high res where the 6990 wins or ties as well, but even if you did, there would be the poor 3d, no PhysX, no forced ambient occlusion, no CF profiles when games launch, no AA in some UE3 games at launch, no CUDA apps to consider. Also, the ATi benches done by reviewers who use default settings (most) are not at comparable IQ due to ATi's performance enhancing, image quality reducing AF optimizations that have received more and more mention in reviews lately.

Not to mention the 6990 may be the loudest video card ever sold, including the FX5800 Ultra.

As much as you try to paint the 6990 as some "superior solution" for high end gaming, you can't change its limitations.

What it has going for it is better OCing, and comparable performance. These are just facts.

Rollo, you make me laugh. Thanks.

[K007]

[Sean_W]

Originally Posted by Rollo

I have no doubt you could go and find 26 benches at high res where the 6990 wins or ties as well, but even if you did, there would be the poor 3d, no PhysX, no forced ambient occlusion, no CF profiles when games launch, no AA in some UE3 games at launch, no CUDA apps to consider. Also, the ATi benches done by reviewers who use default settings (most) are not at comparable IQ due to ATi's performance enhancing, image quality reducing AF optimizations that have received more and more mention in reviews lately.
.

Except that PhysX is pretty unplayable without a second card, Forced AO is pretty useless and gives such a performance loss is no use, hardly any CUDA games(again CUDA takes a huge performance drop in Just Cause 2 for example). NVIDIA have a history of AF optimizations as well, reducing image quality or making big gains in benchmark apps.