|
The fans are definitely spinning and that would also explain why it held at 80C so well.  The stock ramp is not aggressive enough (it was only like 40% at 80C) so I bumped it up some. Maybe later today I'll see if it performs a little better.My caseflow is poo poo I'm sure. I haven't bothered reinstalling the panels and now that I look I only have the intake fan right now anyway. The focus has been silence for the past few years. All this makes me think of is my 4850 and its woefully ineffectual stock cooler wheezing its brains out to keep the GPU at 100C. AMD doesn't believe in thermal throttling I guess, but that little chip took it and asked for more.
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
BurritoJustice posted:Nvidia cards definitely don't throttle at 70c. Default is 80c, can be raised to 95c with a simple slider in Afterburner. Even then, that is a "temp target", in that the card will still generally run at its max boost clock while at those temps, but it won't have the dynamic boost beyond that. The 670 definitely did start throttling at 70, but it was mild at first ramping up as it approached 80. I'll admit I haven't checked with the 970 but I figured they'd kept that functionality.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
Just opened up my PC yesterday and discovered one of the fans on my GTX 560 Ti (MSI Twin Frozr II) isn't spinning up (the one closest the ports). I've been thinking about upgrading to a GTX 970 but wish I'd jumped on it when Canadian prices were better and they had the free ubisoft game offer. Oh well. I've been semi-following the GTX 970 memory fallout over the last month or so but I still think the GTX 970 is my best bet since I'm still gaming at 1080 and don't plan to upgrade my monitor any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
dpbjinc posted:Class action lawsuits are less about awarding the plaintiffs and more Quoted for accuracy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
Lots of them have good payouts http://www.classactionrebates.com/ The lcd price fixing one got some people $1800 and poo poo, i think i got $372
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Does anybody know how I can fix the coilwhine noise my GTX 780 does when for example I have two game windows open one in each monitor? (Dual screen setup), when I have my headphones on I don't hear it but when I take them off it's annoying as hell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
NyxBiker posted:Does anybody know how I can fix the coilwhine noise my GTX 780 does when for example I have two game windows open one in each monitor? (Dual screen setup), when I have my headphones on I don't hear it but when I take them off it's annoying as hell. you can try over or underclocking, or exchanging cards, or adjust voltage
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
This might be better suited to the monitor thread, but can you run three monitors with different refresh rates in-game? Google says probably not. I have a 144hz and a 60hz. I would like to add a third monitor for 3 screen gaming, but I don't want to shell out a ton of money to bring the other two monitors up to speed to match the 144, and I don't want to bring the 144 down a level to 60hz if I don't have to. Is this even something to worry about if I'm not at 60FPS constantly? DadWilly fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Just incase anyone is running a 750TI in a quiet system and wants more silence, the Accelero S3 has compatibility. (Also the Accelero S1 Plus fits, too, **E- it fits my EVGA SC, anyhow** no modification required. It has the correct mounting holes... I did this after buying an EVGA SC edition, and the fan running at a min of 40% all the time. It never hits over 65deg now, in a case with low ventilation). GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Rhaegar posted:Just opened up my PC yesterday and discovered one of the fans on my GTX 560 Ti (MSI Twin Frozr II) isn't spinning up (the one closest the ports). I've been thinking about upgrading to a GTX 970 but wish I'd jumped on it when Canadian prices were better and they had the free ubisoft game offer. Oh well. I've been semi-following the GTX 970 memory fallout over the last month or so but I still think the GTX 970 is my best bet since I'm still gaming at 1080 and don't plan to upgrade my monitor any time soon. Those 560ti fans are very easy to fix. Easiest way is just unscrew the assembly and separate it from the rest of the card, hold it over a sink, pour mineral oil all up in the fans, turn them by hand a bit then use a can of air to force the fans to spin super fast, after that wipe off the excess oil and put it back on. I did that to a 560ti and it is butter smooth now, I also gave it fresh thermal paste and I have it for sale for $80 shipped if anyone wants it. Edit: And yeah I know some fans let you peel back a sticker and there's a hole to put oil, that is easier but mine didn't have those holes, it was single-molded plastic. Zero VGS fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Feb 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
wipeout posted:Just incase anyone is running a 750TI in a quiet system and wants more silence, the Accelero S3 has compatibility. Considering the low low TDP couldn't you take off the fan and leave it at that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
wipeout posted:Just incase anyone is running a 750TI in a quiet system and wants more silence, the Accelero S3 has compatibility. Any word if the S3 works with the GTX 970? It doesn't say specifically on AC's site but if it works with a 760 a 970 should be ok (as far as TDP, no idea about form factor). I loved my S1, my 4850 never got hotter than 65-70C under the worst circumstances with it, and that's 100% passive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
So about a year ago I built a machine with 4gb GTX 760 and six months later I saw the same card on sale so I made my setup SLI. Is this going to last me for a bit or should I consider upgrading to a 980 in the future?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 00:00
|
|
Stentorian Hoot posted:So about a year ago I built a machine with 4gb GTX 760 and six months later I saw the same card on sale so I made my setup SLI. Is this going to last me for a bit or should I consider upgrading to a 980 in the future? A 980 would only be a slight upgrade, I'd wait for DX12 and see how things look then.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Considering the low low TDP couldn't you take off the fan and leave it at that? I tried this on mine but it kept throttling  The stock heatsink didn't have much surface area. Maybe some other 750Ti cards have better stock heatsinks and it would be fine. quote:Any word if the S3 works with the GTX 970? It doesn't say specifically on AC's site but if it works with a 760 a 970 should be ok (as far as TDP, no idea about form factor). Sadly it doesn't look like the S3 supports 58.4 mm x 58.4 mm mounting holes Wonder if the mono plus mounting hardware fits? that supports the 970. (Ya, the S1's are good - I have another on a 7850 and it's still going strong). GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
Safetyland posted:This might be better suited to the monitor thread, but can you run three monitors with different refresh rates in-game? Google says probably not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
Rhaegar posted:Just opened up my PC yesterday and discovered one of the fans on my GTX 560 Ti (MSI Twin Frozr II) isn't spinning up (the one closest the ports). I've been thinking about upgrading to a GTX 970 but wish I'd jumped on it when Canadian prices were better and they had the free ubisoft game offer. Oh well. I've been semi-following the GTX 970 memory fallout over the last month or so but I still think the GTX 970 is my best bet since I'm still gaming at 1080 and don't plan to upgrade my monitor any time soon. Having said this earlier I'm looking at the prices of decent 4k monitors and I'm starting to think that within a year or two I might want to pick one of these up. Given that the GTX 970 might not be as ideal for 4k gaming as initially thought I'm now looking at picking up a cheap GTX 750 Ti to hold me over until that time. A GTX 750 Ti seem to run from $150-165 CDN instead of the GTX 970 at $430-460. Might be the way to go. How do the vendors stack up for the GTX 750 Ti assuming I'm willing to OC and want to squeeze as much out of this until the time I go 4k? By the way the games I want to play now that have been unsatisfactory on the GTX 560 Ti are Far Cry 4 and Dragon Age. Edit: Looks like the EVGA GeForce GTX 750TI FTW is a top contender. $185 after mail-in-rebate at NCIX (CDN). Thanks Rhaegar fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
Daviclond posted:I disagree. I'm not looking to give Nvidia an easy pass here but it's completely conceivable that in a large, highly technical and multi-discipline working environment, two separate groups (marketing guys and engineer guys) hosed up in communicating technical specifications and a fairly obscure, esoteric piece of information was missed out. It's not the job of Engineer Guys to go on websites in the months following the product release and check every marketing chart. Checking should have happened before the information was released to marketing (though I don't know how strict their checking/approval QA processes would be - these things get very lax in the absence of audits even if they do have procedures. We can expect they're much stricter now I think you're being too easy on them. The incorrect specs stood for five months, until NVIDIA was called to task for a separate issue. Neither the bus width nor the number of ROPs were true, even in a technical sense. Even the "fast" 3.5GB runs on a shorter bus than the originally posted specs. The 3.5 + 0.5 issue was actually separate and not just a simple case of mistaken specs being posted; as far as we know they never intended to tell anyone about it. When I pay $350 for the second best card in a lineup I expect no funny business or fudged numbers. If this were an entry level card or something, sure, hide the fact that the memory is partitioned in some fine print and no one will notice or care, but not for your second highest tier card, and definitely not without telling anyone. This is a case where if NVIDIA had been upfront about it I would have still bought it. I only game at 1920x1200, so the fact that the VRAM bandwidth gets cut in half at >3.5GB (due to the way it accesses it, it causes even the "fast" 3.5GB to slow down significantly when forced to use the slow 0.5GB) won't affect me for the foreseeable future. However if I were still willing to deal with AMD I may very well have returned my card for a 290 or 290x. Desuwa fucked around with this message at 10:54 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 09:05
|
|
|
Ah, fair point, I forgot about the ROP/L2 cache being wrong as well. Yeah that's a bit worse and I guess the lawsuit will decide just how bad it was. Thing is 99 % of consumers don't buy a GPU because of ROPs or other minutiae of the architecture. They buy one based on benchmarks, and those results are still valid: the benchmarks indirectly reflect clock speeds and ROPs and cache in a much more useful way. I actually think the VRAM issue is more of a problem as that is a technical parameter that the discerning consumer will look at to determine the card's suitability for, say, 4K gaming. My impression of the "slow" .5 GB of VRAM is that the card's memory heuristics avoid using it in the vast majority of real-world usage scenarios, such that it may as well not be there - that seems like a bigger issue than whether its FPS reported in benchmarks was achieved on 64 or 56 ROPs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
Daviclond posted:Thing is 99 % of consumers don't buy a GPU because of ROPs or other minutiae of the architecture. They buy one based on benchmarks, and those results are still valid: the benchmarks indirectly reflect clock speeds and ROPs and cache in a much more useful way. Yeah, but you don't let off a cake manufacturer because they put tons of crap in that wasn't on the ingredients list, just because some websites said the cake was tasty even before they knew the recipe. Benchmarks and blogging has nothing to do with this - we're talking about simple misinformation, which is far easier to argue in a simple "Did you let incorrect information stand for months?" yes/no kind of way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Yeah, but you don't let off a cake manufacturer because they put tons of crap in that wasn't on the ingredients list, just because some websites said the cake was tasty even before they knew the recipe. Your analogy is pretty bad, if not also your reasoning. Most food reviews have no idea of the recipe, and only address the "performance". You can't see inside food or drivers or many important aspects of GPU hardware. Both people who bought the 970 because their careful analysis of a workload (the equivalent of a very rare food allergy) matched up exactly with the reported ROP count should return their cards (and apply for jobs, because they must have intuited a lot about the inner workings of the card). Everyone else should stop pretending that the misreporting, whether intentional or otherwise, was in any way material to their purchase, just as those not affected by a stray allergen would be unlikely to qualify members of a class action suit against General Mills. There's a reason all those late-night-TV ads say "if you've taken Superpill and developed Condition". Many products have differential performance characteristics in different configurations and workloads, and are marketed on the best-case performance measurements. SSDs are a common example, where performance often varied widely according to how full the drive is. If NVIDIA is going to be punished for misadvertising the ingredients while people are satisfied with the taste, a lot of conpanies should be going down on similar complaints.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
yes very bad nvidia dont do it again amd make better cards please - 1nogirents
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:If NVIDIA is going to be punished for misadvertising the ingredients while people are satisfied with the taste... Subjunctive posted:...a lot of companies should be going down on similar complaints. You realize what you just wrote right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
I should amend that: anyone who is dissatisfied with their purchase should return it, whether for technical or emotional reasons. NVIDIA and its manufacturers should gracefully accept them and apologize. But the pitchforks and torches and lawsuits are silly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
SwissCM posted:You realize what you just wrote right? Yeah, I should have left the relativism out of my post. I'm OK with it as the basis for an argument for proportionate popular reaction, but anchoring isn't a good way to make law. That said, I'm pretty sure there's case law about reporting maximal performance being OK, but I'm thinking of something from like the 70s related to gas consumption, and I can't find it now. Maybe there's a law-knower here who can say.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:you can try over or underclocking, or exchanging cards, or adjust voltage I did try over clocking but it didn't change much, I went to the point that I Overclocked it so much that obviously the monitor freezed and I have to restart (it was just a software overclock thankfully). I think I tried changing Voltage too but I don't remember if it changed much, I will try it again in these days. In case I think I'll just RMA the card because it's horrible, and it seems it does this coil whine noise when the card seems under alot of stress, which it really shouldn't for 2 monitors and one client in each monitor at 1080p resolution. Aren't there any other solutions to try in the meanwhile? Thanks
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
NyxBiker posted:I did try over clocking but it didn't change much, I went to the point that I Overclocked it so much that obviously the monitor freezed and I have to restart (it was just a software overclock thankfully). I think I tried changing Voltage too but I don't remember if it changed much, I will try it again in these days. In case I think I'll just RMA the card because it's horrible, and it seems it does this coil whine noise when the card seems under alot of stress, which it really shouldn't for 2 monitors and one client in each monitor at 1080p resolution. Coilwhine is a thing, Your replacement card may be just as bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Does anyone have any experience with Gainward GeForce® GTX 970 Phantom 4GB? I can get one for about 50€ cheaper than other "cheap" 970s like Palit/KFA/Inno3d.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Never heard of them, their site has some of the worst english I've seen on a tech manufacturer's website (and claiming to be Nvidia's number one partner), and I can't find anything about them on any of the major tech sites at all except for one anecdotal forum post about their 570s. Save up a bit more and buy a card from a manufacturer that actually has approval from major tech sites. Who knows what Gainward's warranty/RMA process is like if you happened to need that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
They are a subsidiary of Palit and their (reference) cards are in a lot of prebuilt PCs in Europe. Been around for a long time. The reviews of the Phantom are decent enough, but comments on the internet say the cooler is loud/hot and to stay away. Shame, I love those removable fans  It's 2.5 slots high and uses mini HDMI/Display ports, don't expect too much manual overclocks with that cooler. The mesh over the fans also uh, looks kinda stupid. sauer kraut fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Benchmarks and blogging has nothing to do with this - we're talking about simple misinformation Benchmarks, tech sites and blogs have everything to do with this because Nvidia never published the incorrect information themselves. From the Anandtech article on the debacle, quote:...while NVIDIA does publish the specifications of their cards on the GeForce website and in other places (e.g. partner product pages), those are less-detailed high level specifications suitable for a wider audience, not unlike NVIDIA’s initial statement. The deeper technical specifications we get, such as the number of ROPs, transistor count, and L2 cache size, comes from NVIDIA’s reviewer’s guide, which outlines for us the specifications of the card, the major new features that NVIDIA is focusing on, and some examples of benchmark numbers they’re seeing. The incorrect information was only disseminated through the technical press, who presented the data at the start of their reviews before moving on to benchmarks. I don't believe anyone reading reviews would read the first page of technical specs and base their purchasing decision on that information alone. The bad numbers were always presented alongside the real, valid benchmarks. As for letting the incorrect information stand for months, eh. People have a deep-rooted mistrust of corporations and that's healthy and good, but as I've already said I can one thousand percent see this situation arising out of dodgy assumptions, subpar QA and the inherently difficult nature of multi-discipline communication without any malice or conspiracy needed to explain it. Daviclond fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:That said, I'm pretty sure there's case law about reporting maximal performance being OK, but I'm thinking of something from like the 70s related to gas consumption, and I can't find it now. I'm not a law-knower, but when Hyundai overstated their MPG stat, they wound up cutting checks to make up the difference in people's real life gas costs. It isn't unimaginable to think that someone is ray tracing on a 970 for their job where they're actually affected in $ terms by the VRAM, so I could see the class action having some merit even when it doesn't affect me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:Never heard of them, their site has some of the worst english I've seen on a tech manufacturer's website (and claiming to be Nvidia's number one partner), and I can't find anything about them on any of the major tech sites at all except for one anecdotal forum post about their 570s. http://www.anandtech.com/show/910 edit: there you go vvv future ghost fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
cisco privilege posted:Gainward's been around since at least the 4000-series cards: I didn't think they were an obscure brand. I think this is just one of those things where some people haven't heard of a particular OEM because retailers/distributors in their area don't carry it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:It isn't unimaginable to think that someone is ray tracing on a 970 for their job where they're actually affected in $ terms by the VRAM, so I could see the class action having some merit even when it doesn't affect me. If you ask for priority service from an ISP because your home business is down and you're on a consumer plan, they'll tell you to fork over for the business plan before they give a poo poo. Likewise if someone tried to make a claim that the 970 actually notably affects their income nVidia would be right to ask them why the hell they aren't using a Quadro.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
Safetyland posted:This might be better suited to the monitor thread, but can you run three monitors with different refresh rates in-game? Google says probably not. Ok, as someone who has used mixed monitors and matching monitors with both AMD and Nvidia surround I'll take this one. Neither company supports mixed refresh rates. All monitors will display at the lowest refresh rate. That being said, if all 3 monitors were not manufactured on the same day by the same robot under a blood moon after sacrificing a goat to Xenu, the Nvidia card won't even allow you to span them. Amd cards don't really care what monitors you use as long as they are all the same resolutions. Amd actually supports mixed resolutions now, so you can have a 30" monitor in the middle and 2 smaller monitors but the middle monitor will only display at the lowest resolution. So, unless you have 3 monitors that match, Nvidia is right out. With AMD, you want to at least have the monitors be the same size to keep things looking simple.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Does anyone in this thread know anything about integrated graphics? According to one of the many OPs, Intel's HD chips have supported GPGPU computing since 2012-13. Where can I find out more information about what that means in terms of, e.g. number of threads to use, or using OpenMP/OpenCL/????? I've asked Google, and all I got was a bunch of people asking the same question back around May of 2012.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:Does anyone in this thread know anything about integrated graphics? According to one of the many OPs, Intel's HD chips have supported GPGPU computing since 2012-13. Where can I find out more information about what that means in terms of, e.g. number of threads to use, or using OpenMP/OpenCL/????? I've asked Google, and all I got was a bunch of people asking the same question back around May of 2012. Ivy Bridge GPUs (aka gen 7 HD Graphics) and newer support OpenCL1.2. Check the wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_graphics_processing_units#Seventh_generation
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
veedubfreak posted:Ok, as someone who has used mixed monitors and matching monitors with both AMD and Nvidia surround I'll take this one. Neither company supports mixed refresh rates. All monitors will display at the lowest refresh rate. Wow. I didn't know nvidia was so finicky. I was planning to get the Gigabyte 970 G1 which has 3 display ports, and hook them up to three monitors. I guess I should prepare for some agony down the road. Thanks for the reply!
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
Safetyland posted:Wow. I didn't know nvidia was so finicky. I was planning to get the Gigabyte 970 G1 which has 3 display ports, and hook them up to three monitors. I guess I should prepare for some agony down the road. It's so finicky in fact, that I had 3 monitors that were all the same resolution and refresh, but it wouldn't span. Apparently the polarities weren't all the same.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 22:20
|
|