6990 vs. GTX 590

KapteinFruit

New member
I didn't believe my own eyes when I looked at the graphs for the GTX 590... AMD finally got the performance crown this generation! I would never have thought that because of the GTX 580. I thought the 6990 would be crushed by the GTX 590, but look how wrong I was. Did you guys expect this outcome or are you guys as shocked as me? But in the end, as TTL said, I would've gone for the GTX 590 (If I could afford it. lol). With waterblocks the story would be different, though. I'm wondering if the GTX 590 can steal a bit from the performance crown when we get to see how the GTX 590 performs in SLI. What do you guys think?
 
People that are spending that much on cards wan't performance. And that is currently the red team. I couldn't care less if its a bit noisy. I use headsets. As far as performance, I too was expecting the 590 to have better performance, perhaps with better drivers, the gap will thin out, however, I doubt it. AMD is known for their crappy drivers, but if they can pump out as much performance with bad drivers, then imagine what it will do once they get some quality drivers out.

However, there are things the green team will always have an advantage on. Specifically, folding, better AA and PhysX.
 
However, there are things the green team will always have an advantage on. Specifically, folding,

This will change
smile.gif
 
I think it's a 590 for me. Cooler, quieter, (I don't have my headphones on 24/7 and heat can bother me) smaller and I'll get to try out their nifty features for once. We're at the point where benchmarks are at acceptable framerates even with certain things enabled that you could turn down and get a massive performance increase. It also doesn't look like game developers give two quacking ducks; cards we purchase now will likely be more future proof than they previously were. Besides, if not having to worry about temperatures and noise is the tradeoff for a few lost frames-per-second on the highest possible settings, so be it. On top of that, even the worst case scenarios seem playable. Sure, I could also go for single GPU sli, but getting a 590 or a 6990 means more free bays.
 
We've been told this for years. It's about freakin time stanford talked to amd tbh. There are a hell of a load of powerful gpus out there that need exploiting.

I couldn´t agree more mate! its been ridiculous how long this is taking
wacko.gif


just look at the shaders the Ati cards have yet they can´t get a nice PPD out of it
blink.gif
 
We've been told this for years. It's about freakin time stanford talked to amd tbh. There are a hell of a load of powerful gpus out there that need exploiting.

I know, seriously Stanford is just ignoring half of the GPU market effectively when they don't release AMD F@H.
 
seriously look at how underclocked each core is. Those are specially BINNED cores so they should be easily oc'd to beat the pants off the 6990. We need to wait for oc'd tests before we can say this. I truly believe Nvidia still has the crown and until AMD can control power consumption and noise better I'll stay Green. Trust me I wish it was better for the Red team as I am AMD and want to try dual gpu's but my sanity from the noise pollution is most important.

Back to topic even at the small margin Amd wins by a small oc to say 650core from the stock 612 core would IMHO blow AMD away. And AMD runs its cores at 800ish.
 
no performance is more than what ATI/AMD have done. Overall stability is most important especialy with special effects. Nvidia design thouroughly to meet standards. ATI may have higher max FPS etc and often minimum too. What the common gamer needs is 60FPS Vsync'd, looking as good as possible, running smoothly wich I think Nvidia has achieved the best result for.

That 590 is good and quiet, I'm experiencing the benifits of quiet PC performance now
smile.gif
 
seriously look at how underclocked each core is. Those are specially BINNED cores so they should be easily oc'd to beat the pants off the 6990. We need to wait for oc'd tests before we can say this. I truly believe Nvidia still has the crown and until AMD can control power consumption and noise better I'll stay Green. Trust me I wish it was better for the Red team as I am AMD and want to try dual gpu's but my sanity from the noise pollution is most important.

Back to topic even at the small margin Amd wins by a small oc to say 650core from the stock 612 core would IMHO blow AMD away. And AMD runs its cores at 800ish.

In fairness, if I can be fair, there are waterblocked evga cards about to hit the shelves which are only carrying a stock clock of around 680mhz. I don't do wc, cos I'm a wuss, but they do look slick despite costing double the price of a standard single gpu card.

However, and I think someone quoted the speeds last week, they're ""rumored"" to hit clocks in excess of 800mhz. I say rumored as I've seen no proof of this other than unofficial hear-say.

My feeling is that nvidia have supply a lame duck (poor choice of words, but something they feel does just enough whilst giving you quality textures and physx etc) as a reference model, and partners are given license to do what they will.

What you need to steer away from atm is that a reviewer melted one during test - of course, this now gives license to the whole community to regard them as melt-down fodder.
 
no performance is more than what ATI/AMD have done. Overall stability is most important especialy with special effects. Nvidia design thouroughly to meet standards. ATI may have higher max FPS etc and often minimum too. What the common gamer needs is 60FPS Vsync'd, looking as good as possible, running smoothly wich I think Nvidia has achieved the best result for.

That 590 is good and quiet, I'm experiencing the benifits of quiet PC performance now
smile.gif

Thant's my knowledge and I said I 'think'. reading many reviews many good gamers do prefer Nvidia. it's not the be all and end all of it, and you put a - rep point for that post i included here. ?

Also many know AMD supports more monitors and like I wrote the common gamer is important. it controls the market so we wont be using 6 monitors and AMD crossfire microstutters more.

poor Godsmack
laugh.gif
angry.gif
 
When a new card is released I thin Nvidia plays a bit safe with the drivers, the card has to be tested for everything, Nvidia needs community feedback, compatability tests with hardware and software. Game developers tweek their files to match. They failed with the voltge protection for overclockers lol o dear. The GTX 480 performes alot better today compared to release, and it was a new architecture. Over time the GTX 590 will be tweeked I think, it will satisfy todays users next year too. My GTX 480 are perfect for todays games on 1920x1080, suits me. AMD are playing it safe too i hope with th HD 6990. Just how safe the future should reveal. In 4-6 months I think they'll be impressivly better.

Bad Company 2 wasn't compatable enough in DX 11 with GTX 480 on launch and Youtube had alot of videos benchmarking them and Nvidia used it for the Preview gameplay at an event. ? Just can't wait!
laugh.gif
 
This vid is 3D mark 11. 6990 is v good at this, it's on basic low res setting settings, i don't know if AA is used, it rarely stuttered. POWER - PERFORMANCE it's excellent too. I'm at early levels of understanding GPU's and I've known Nvidia to be best for gaming and ATI for 3D rendering. Today CUDA is very good so maby thats best. Mostly I'm in for gaming so I'd choose the Nvidia solution. My brother has a 4870x2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seM43T1ez4Y
 
6990 wins at stock but if you check the scores on hwbot when oc the 590 kills because it has so much ocing headroom.
 
Back
Top