[Review] GTX590 & GTX560Ti

Ratt

Ratt

New Member
#1
Finding a GTX 590 for sale was almost impossible. 2 months ago my sources told me that they stopped production due to parts shortages. Even now, they are trickling out in small quantities. GTX590 cards are hard to find globally and I don't think it's going to change anytime soon.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Thanks to the help from my acquaintance, I've got these 2 cards. The GTX 560 Ti arrived 6 weeks before the GTX 590. Not really recommended since RMA will be a PITA since both are not meant for North American market but no problems with the cards so far since getting them.

Galaxy GeForce GTX 560 Ti LTD OC WHITE EDITION (2 years warranty)
Gigabyte GeForce GTX590 (3 years warranty)

The reviews I've read never mentioned this:
At the back of the sleeve that covers the GTX 590 toolbox there is a Warning (ad verbum):
This product contains chemicals, including lead, know to the State† of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm. Wash hands after handling.
Leaded solder is making a comeback..? Not surprised at all seeing how unreliable lead-free solders are over the years. Can't find any lead free logo on the card either.

The GTX 560 Ti White Edition is using lead-free solder based on the lead-free logo on the PCB. It is slightly thicker than a reference design card. In order to use it as a Physx card on the 3rd PCI-E slot on the CH IV (leave the 2nd empty for better GTX590 cooling), I had to detach the front panel audio connector cable from the motherboard to make it fit into the slot. Previously, I did consider using the MSI GTX580 Lightning for Physx, but it was more thicker than the White Edition. Thankfully I did not get that card. The FX990 Sabertooth should be ok since the slot layout is better unlike the CH V that has the exact layout as CH IV.

Overkill? Maybe, but it's nice to have a high end spare card around.

Review Links:
Galaxy/KFA2 GTX 560 Ti
Guru3D.com
Hardwarezone.com
The GTX 560 Ti WE is no longer in production.

GeForce GTX590
Hexus.net
LegionHardware.com
Guru3D.com

Test configuration:

Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
AMD Phenom IIX4 955BE @ 3.6 Ghz with Asus Turbo Unlocker
Asus Crosshair IV
12GB Team Elite DDR3 1333 RAM (4GB X 2 + 2GB X 2 sticks)
2 units WD Caviar Black 1TB FAEX

I planned to get the FX-8150 but seeing how it stacks up against the Phenom II in games, I'd rather wait till they release an improved FX processor. :eek:

4GB vs 12GB memory configuration
There is no frame rates or performance increase when upgrading from 4GB (2 sticks) to 12GB (4 sticks). In my earlier tests, the benchmark scores are consistently lower by a small margin. It probably needs an improved IMC or triple channel support. I speculate that getting an FX-8150 won't give me any improvement.



However, there is a noticeable decrease in windows 7 start-up and game loading times and IMO the 12GB RAM upgrade is worth it. I discovered that some 32-bit programs do not work properly with 12GB rams installed and tends to BSOD the system after period of time. One may not notice this if the computer is not running 24/7.



GTX 560Ti White Edition Benchmarks using the latest drivers.



GTX 590 Benchmarks using the latest drivers.



GTX 590 with GTX 560Ti (Physx) Benchmarks using the latest drivers using Auto-select Physx settings.

There is some improvement in 3DMarks Vantage scores. I wonder how much of an improvement will I get from using a GTX 580 for Physx coupled with a better processor...

There is no improvement in 3DMark11 scores with the addition of GTX 560 Ti for Physx since 3DMark11 uses Direct Compute instead.

In fact, when using the GTX 560 Ti as a Physx card, both CUDA and Direct Compute are shown disabled under GPU-Z although in the Nvidia control panel all three cards are CUDA enabled.

Could it be a driver limitation that can be enabled using Coolbits or a GPU-Z bug? Or maybe Nvidia wants me to get a dedicated Tesla card if I want a dedicated Direct Compute Card?

Based on playing both Mafia II and Batman Arkham Island GOTY, having a Physx card helps to get a smoother action by getting a more consistent higher frame rate instead of fluctuating wildly, especially when using a sole GTX 560 Ti. (Around 35fps ~ 100fps @ 1920 x 1080 res)

Although there is only a handful of games out there now that benefits from Physx, after experiencing it, it is definitely going to be a feature in my future gaming computer builds. :D

CUDA Benchmark

Lastly a CUDA benchmark that anyone with an Nvidia card can run for comparison.

CudaMFLOPS1.zip Graphics Parallel Computing Benchmark





The CUDA benchmark will run only on a single GPU on a dual GPU card. Looks like the 560Ti is scoring much higher due to its higher clock speed 950Mhz vs 607Mhz.

Feedback, criticism and comments and posting benchmarks from your own PC are welcome. :)

I'm sharing this to learn and to improve.
 
Shinma

Shinma

____________
#2
Ratt said:
... I discovered that some 32-bit programs do not work properly with 12GB rams installed and tends to BSOD the system after period of time...
:eek: Not popular/commonly used software I hope?
 
equinoxe3d

equinoxe3d

Active Member
#3
When I built my system last month I briefly thought about importing a video card from Europe as well, because at first I wanted the quietest 560Ti and the supposedly best models are not available or out of stock here (Gainward Phantom, Sparkle Calibre, KFA2 Anarchy). Finally, the nonexistent support here, exorbitant prices on eBay and international stores, and possible shipping issues turned me off from the idea. Glad you got yours in good shape :D

The white PCB looks great on the WE 560Ti, great factory overclock as well :) The 3DMark2011 score is not too far from my factory OC'd 6950 (P5401)
 
Ratt

Ratt

New Member
#6
Shinma & Huge,
The first is the ROG Gamefirst Traffic shaping software that is bundled together with the motherboard.

The second is Firefox 7.01. Browsing with the above will cause the computer to crash. After uninstalling the former, I still have the problem of Firefox (Not responding) for 30 seconds if I open too many (20 or more) browser tabs. Never faced this issue with 4GB ram. No more crashes now but a bit frustrating.

equinoxe3d,
My first choice was the Asus Mars II but I failed to secure a unit. I was too hasty and ended up with the Gigabyte GTX 590. If I was bit more patient, the Mars II would be in my hands now.

The White Edition would be a poor choice for a quiet pc. As soon as the fan speed reaches 55% (3060 rpm) it is no longer whisper quiet. The metal cover makes the fan noise worse. I bought it for its unique color, no solid capacitors cans design and limited production run.

I think your 3DMark11 scores are bit low with the 2600K running at 1.6Ghz. I'm sure that your pc is a far more capable than mine. What surprises me is that a Seasonic 430W fanless is able to power up your pc. How does it hold up under load? My 955BE is no match for a 2600K even with a GTX 590 and GTX 560 Ti video card. In reality it holds back the potential of these two cards.

You heard they made a 2x 560 ti?
Yeah, read about it in the Evga forum months ago before it was launched, nice but I prefer to get the fastest single card available. :D
 
equinoxe3d

equinoxe3d

Active Member
#8
The first is the ROG Gamefirst Traffic shaping software that is bundled together with the motherboard.

The second is Firefox 7.01. Browsing with the above will cause the computer to crash. After uninstalling the former, I still have the problem of Firefox (Not responding) for 30 seconds if I open too many (20 or more) browser tabs. Never faced this issue with 4GB ram. No more crashes now but a bit frustrating.
Somehow I'm not that surprised, I heard about many problems with Asus software (the AI Suite causing high DPC Latency, etc.). I have not installed anything on mine except ROG CPU-Z :p

That's troubling for Firefox however, have not installed it yet on the new system.

My first choice was the Asus Mars II but I failed to secure a unit. I was too hasty and ended up with the Gigabyte GTX 590. If I was bit more patient, the Mars II would be in my hands now.
Newegg has the Mars II in stock but it does not let you put it in your cart unless you buy their combos... If I remember correctly it's a 1000 card limited run so it's a good excuse for stores to gouge the hell out of them it seems...

I think your 3DMark11 scores are bit low with the 2600K running at 1.6Ghz. I'm sure that your pc is a far more capable than mine.
Somehow, 3DMark11 got all my clockspeeds wrong. The 1.6GHz is the idle speed because of SpeedStep and the video card clocks are wrong as well (they are the 2D clocks).

I seem to be in the upper midrange compared to similar systems, but I have no overclock and apparently only my "Physics" score is lower than average (maybe just because I don't have a PhysX card ?).

What surprises me is that a Seasonic 430W fanless is able to power up your pc. How does it hold up under load?
Actually it's more than enough because the parts I have are not that power-hungry, and many people are overestimating how much power they need (I'm guilty as well on some systems I built for friends :D).

The biggest power draw I recorded at the wall was 295w with Prime95 Large FFT on the CPU and FurMark in extreme burn-in mode on the GPU simultaneously. Since it's 80Plus Gold, at that load the PSU should be above 90% efficiency so it has only around 30w of heat to dissipate :) Also I tuned the CPU and motherboard for power management so I idle at 63-65w.
 
Ratt

Ratt

New Member
#9
Somehow I'm not that surprised, I heard about many problems with Asus software (the AI Suite causing high DPC Latency, etc.). I have not installed anything on mine except ROG CPU-Z
The ROG Gamefirst is an utility by cfos Software Gmbh. Perhaps the latest shareware version solves the problem? Updated to Firefox 8.0 still facing the same issue. (Not responding) for 30 seconds.

If I remember correctly it's a 1000 card limited run so it's a good excuse for stores to gouge the hell out of them it seems...
That's the problem with free-market capitalism. Everyone is ok with it until they get the short end of the stick. ;) I pre-ordered and paid in full for a unit for roughly the same price as newegg's before official release. When the stock arrived, the seller is more interested in short term profits. I was uncertain of future availability and ordered the GTX590. 2 weeks later I had an opportunity to get a Mars II at a fair price. Keeping my word, I took the GTX590 since I can't justify getting both. :(

I seem to be in the upper midrange compared to similar systems, but I have no overclock and apparently only my "Physics" score is lower than average (maybe just because I don't have a PhysX card ?).
3DMark11 uses Direct Compute by Microsoft. It is a part DirectX 11 API feature that runs on both DX10 & DX11 similar to Nvidia's CUDA and Khronos Group's OpenCL.
It shouldn't be a problem for Ati GPUs. Try running Microsoft dxwebsetup to check if your DX11 is up to date.

The biggest power draw I recorded at the wall was 295w with Prime95 Large FFT on the CPU and FurMark in extreme burn-in mode on the GPU simultaneously. Since it's 80Plus Gold, at that load the PSU should be above 90% efficiency so it has only around 30w of heat to dissipate Also I tuned the CPU and motherboard for power management so I idle at 63-65w.
Your setup is very well planned then. :)

There is no improvement in 3DMark11 scores with the addition of GTX 560 Ti for Physx since 3DMark11 uses Direct Compute instead.

In fact, when using the GTX 560 Ti as a Physx card, both CUDA and Direct Compute are shown disabled under GPU-Z although in the Nvidia control panel all three cards are CUDA enabled.

Could it be a driver limitation that can be enabled using Coolbits or a GPU-Z bug? Or maybe Nvidia wants me to get a dedicated Tesla card if I want a dedicated Direct Compute Card?
I think I may have found the answer:
DirectCompute Benchmark 0.45b

It's beta, not updated in 2 years and I had checksum errors runnng the DirectCompute test but it does support what GPU-Z shows.







Based on the GPU temps running the tests, Direct Compute currently supports a single gpu while OpenCL supports multiple GPUs. Pity that 3DMark11 did not use OpenCL. It is after all a DX11 benchmark.

cs_5_0 Profile is for DX11 the rest for DX10.
 
Ratt

Ratt

New Member
#11
It seems that Gigabyte GTX 590 has been deactivated but available in Newegg.ca. The work of either Evga or Asus? Nobody likes their turf invaded. :D

GPU Temperatures
At load, both cards GTX 560 Ti WE and GTX 590, will output hot air into the casing. I never install side panels on any of my systems for a few years now for easy access and rely on table fans for extra cooling.

I'm using an open tower casing without both side panels and a table fan blowing across the HDD cage area with Evga Precision as my temp monitor and using a custom fan profile.

Temp monitoring software takes cpu time cycles and affects the benchmark scores depending on the polling rate selected.
Mine is listed as:
GPU1: GTX 560 Ti (Physx)
GPU2: GTX 590
GPU3: GTX 590

My best online score is lower than the one published above due to extra processes needed in the background.
(P7285)

Still, I highly recommend to use a temp monitoring software, as I will explain below.

GTX 560 Ti White Edition

Idle
35°C at the 1st PCI-E Slot
37°C at the 3rd PCI-E Slot used as PhysX card. Roughly 1/2" gap between the card and the PSU.

Load
82°C max using as a video card
50°C max using as a Physx card

Nothing unusual with the GTX 560 Ti cooling. The GTX 590 is different. Funny that no reviews I read mentioned it.

GTX 590

Idle
44°C 1st GPU
45°C 2nd GPU

Load
82°C max 1st GPU
85°C max 2nd GPU

The temp monitoring on the GTX 590 is only connected to a single gpu. In my case GPU2 though I'm too lazy to find out which is GPU2 and GPU3. It is possible to overheat the second one (GPU3) running software like DX11 Computemark since it only utilize a single GPU on the GTX 590. In my setup it chooses to run on GPU3. While GPU2 temp is around 48°C with fan load at 55% load the GPU3 temp shoots up to 93°C and increasing rapidly.

I don't want to find out how high it can go. :eek:

Without a temp monitoring software, you won't even know that the GPU is overheating until it finally fails due to heat damage. As a precaution, I enabled the alarm function on GPU3 at 90°C in addition to the OSD and tray temp display for all 3 GPUs in case I fail to notice it.
 

Associates