DragonTamer1

By referencing how much the i7 6900K costs in their head to head demos, it made it sound like AMD was planning on undercutting Intel on the enthusiast line.

It runs as an exe, you should just double click it. It might not work if you have a newer driver installed.
 
Use this program to uninstall all drivers from your system and try again.

I use and optical drive for Blu-rays and DVDs as well as ripping music off CDs that I'm given.
 
Even if I didn't do these things I would still have an optical drive because my system just feels empty without it.

I thought it was terrible

Sounds like you didn't select the option for 3x1 configuration while you were setting up surround.

You should be able to get a decent overclock out of it. It's far from the worst cooler on the market.
 
No, do not use a second fan for push pull as it will make no difference with a cooler this small. Push pull will only see gains on coolers that are very thick where air doesn't always travel through the length of the cooler.

I FUCKING LOVE GUMMIES!!!
 
My new graphics card came the other day. It's pretty kick ass, I'm impressed (so are my NVidia fanboy friends).
 

 
Old and new side by side.
 

 
Don't know why it's upside down.
 

 
Dat sexy backplate.
 

In World of Warships it has a hard time hitting a steady 60FPS. It also does this in GTA V. I'm pretty sure it is the 2500K struggling to keep it fed. I can't overclock the i5 any further on this board so I can't be sure.
 
I'm in the process of upgrading so if the problem persists then I will make another thread about it.

That was the delivery mans way of telling you not to use a 212 evo in your build.

You should be able to get a decent overclock out of it. It's far from the worst cooler on the market.
 
No, do not use a second fan for push pull as it will make no difference with a cooler this small. Push pull will only see gains on coolers that are very thick where air doesn't always travel through the length of the cooler.

In that case go with the 1050. You can always upgrade it later when you have more money to put towards it.

Agreed had a similar problem with my MSI P67 board and it worked just fine after updating.
 
If you are trying to adjust the graphics settings in the BIOS then change the setting on the integrated graphics. Once you save the changes shut the system down and then install the card. If neither the GPU or the onboard graphics work after this you should clear the CMOS. You can then go back in and try the dual setting and try again but I doubt that would make a difference.

That was the delivery mans way of telling you not to use a 212 evo in your build.

It runs a little warmer than some of the other cards but is still very cool. I personally like the looks of this card over the looks of a lot of other cards.

Nah. 12 months ago people were recommending the 390 over the 970.

I know, I have not intention of running it at those settings full time. But coming from a 760 to a RX 480 I just wanted to see how the other half lived.

The guy in the video compromised the GPU for the purpose of making it fail in such a way.
 
In the original video he says "yep, knew it" and was not at all surprised when it caught fire. He knew that not connecting power would cause it to burn up (most likely because he had already done it once) or he compromised the board in such a way that it would fail. It's also possible that it is a very good video edit.

Uh, Linus... IR radiation doesn't travel through glass, so all of those nice photos you took are invalid. Only the headspreader on the back of the case doesn't have a pane of tempered glass between it and the camera.

update Nov 02: http://www.evga.com/thermalmod/
 
cards affected:

 
cards not affected: Founders Edition, blower type, HYBRID and HYDRO COPPER

Because the of the amount of current available. The current always does take the easiest path, but any given path will only allow so much current to flow through it. There is always going to be more current available than any single device can allow to pass through itself safely so other devices will always have more to work with.
 
As an example, a heater may pull 10 amps from the wall while a light will only pull 4 amps. There are hundreds of amps available for the circuits but because of Ohms law they will not pull more than what they are rated for.

Hey... they listened... they retested ... they offered solution for those that want it ... they work with the people that reported it.
 
Whats not to love?    Many many many companies don't do anywhere near as much.

The MOSFET drivers used in the EVGA FTW 1080 cards are ON Semiconductor NCP81282 integrated drivers (the MOSFET and control circuit are in one package). They are rated for an absolute maximum temperature of 150*C. The VRMs are operating within their limit but they are getting much closer to the limit than I would like to see.
 
EVGA disclosed their method for testing and mentioned that they used thermal probes which explains how this issue got past them. A thermal probe can only measure a single point of heat and it is a very small point at that. Its advantage is that it can measure temperatures behind other heat generating components such as a heatsink. The thermal probe is not capable of showing heat propagation away from the component to other areas of the board unless additional probes are used to measure this propagation. Using that many probes is very impractical and still would not paint a complete picture of what is going on.
 
The thermal camera that THW used is specifically designed to show heat prorogation but is not designed to give high accuracy pin point temperature readings which is probably why EVGA didn't use it during testing (I'll come back to this point in a second). The thermal camera is also not capable of looking past other heat generating components such as the heat sink. If they had used this while looking down towards the board through the heat spreader they would have seen a slightly warmer area but would not have seen just how hot the VRMs were getting. At the same time if they viewed it from the rear the back plate would have blocked heat from radiating way from the board and would also have shown a warmer area on the board but would not have shown such a high temperature.
 
Back to my point about the thermal camera, while it would not have offered the most accurate readings, it should have still been used in tandem with the thermal probes to see how the heat was radiating away from the components and testing should have been done with and without the heat sink on both front and back (using a modified heat sink to pull heat away from the GPU core for this part of testing).
 
As for the issue with using thermal pads to cool the VRMs along the back plate, this is a perfectly viable option. While its cooling performance is not as good as it would be making contact with the heat sink by itself, it is still pulling heat away from the VRM area on the PCB and allowing the heat to be dissipated elsewhere. Even if the back plate is showing high temps, this means that it is doing its job in cooling the VRM. Combining that with using the heat sink will further increase the effectiveness of this cooling. Cooler VRMs mean better power delivery.
 
Not sure what is going on with the issue of the new thermal pads not fitting. Maybe the guy used the wrong thermal pad in the wrong place? We'll have to wait and see if anyone else has a similar issue and what new solution is offered. I haven't seen the thermal pads offered for replacement but I'm willing to bet that one is thicker than the other.
 
 

The MOSFET drivers used in the EVGA FTW 1080 cards are ON Semiconductor NCP81282 integrated drivers (the MOSFET and control circuit are in one package). They are rated for an absolute maximum temperature of 150*C. The VRMs are operating within their limit but they are getting much closer to the limit than I would like to see.
 
EVGA disclosed their method for testing and mentioned that they used thermal probes which explains how this issue got past them. A thermal probe can only measure a single point of heat and it is a very small point at that. Its advantage is that it can measure temperatures behind other heat generating components such as a heatsink. The thermal probe is not capable of showing heat propagation away from the component to other areas of the board unless additional probes are used to measure this propagation. Using that many probes is very impractical and still would not paint a complete picture of what is going on.
 
The thermal camera that THW used is specifically designed to show heat prorogation but is not designed to give high accuracy pin point temperature readings which is probably why EVGA didn't use it during testing (I'll come back to this point in a second). The thermal camera is also not capable of looking past other heat generating components such as the heat sink. If they had used this while looking down towards the board through the heat spreader they would have seen a slightly warmer area but would not have seen just how hot the VRMs were getting. At the same time if they viewed it from the rear the back plate would have blocked heat from radiating way from the board and would also have shown a warmer area on the board but would not have shown such a high temperature.
 
Back to my point about the thermal camera, while it would not have offered the most accurate readings, it should have still been used in tandem with the thermal probes to see how the heat was radiating away from the components and testing should have been done with and without the heat sink on both front and back (using a modified heat sink to pull heat away from the GPU core for this part of testing).
 
As for the issue with using thermal pads to cool the VRMs along the back plate, this is a perfectly viable option. While its cooling performance is not as good as it would be making contact with the heat sink by itself, it is still pulling heat away from the VRM area on the PCB and allowing the heat to be dissipated elsewhere. Even if the back plate is showing high temps, this means that it is doing its job in cooling the VRM. Combining that with using the heat sink will further increase the effectiveness of this cooling. Cooler VRMs mean better power delivery.
 
Not sure what is going on with the issue of the new thermal pads not fitting. Maybe the guy used the wrong thermal pad in the wrong place? We'll have to wait and see if anyone else has a similar issue and what new solution is offered. I haven't seen the thermal pads offered for replacement but I'm willing to bet that one is thicker than the other.
 
 

Have you checked your core voltage yet. If you are at stock your voltage should be no higher than 1.2V.
 
It sounds to me like there is poor contact between the CPU and the cooler or there is more voltage being pushed through the processor than there should be.

I'm not a fan of speculating about the possibility future sales on an item unless they are known about. If you're in the market for a GPU and there are no known imminent new card releases pick what fits your price best, your performance need best and your own preference best and go for it.
 
I would say I personally feel that the card is a good buy as it is now.