AngryGoldfish

It's so lush.

All this nonsense about red builds becoming tiresome... what BS. This is awesome.

Didn't Jay clock his MSI 390X at over 1200Mhz? I'm also almost sure I've seen 290X's over 1200Mhz without water cooling, but I could be mistaken. It's certainly not as common as a 980 at 1400Mhz. With that said, many were able to hit 1170Mhz with their 390X's, which is not far off from 1200Mhz.

4GB is enough. You will generally hit the GPU limit before you hit the VRAM limit. Only in older SLI configurations such as 680 2GB SLI does it pose a nuisance. 4GB of HBM may also cause a few frames less in Crossfire at 4K. It's not a big deal at all. VRAM is overhyped as being the be-all and end-all; it's really not. If at 1080p, a 980 or Fury would suffice. The temperatures will be lower and the card will run quieter. If your friend is just a plug in and play type of person, I don't recommend enthusiast cards like the Fury X or 980ti. They are hot and can be a little more trouble than simply upgrading more regularly. With that said, if I were to suggest a Fury X or 980ti without overclocking for 1080p right now, I'd suggest the 980ti by just a smidgen. I'd go for something like the EVGA SC+ for their extended warranty and support. The Fury X is roughly as powerful as the 980ti pound for pound, but games and benchmarks seem to flourish on Maxwell. The Fury X also has the issue of dealing with a radiator and a pump. It's not a solution I would trust for years of use. The Fury X will be quieter if your pump isn't the type to grind like a mother, but the EVGA 980ti should be quiet enough at temperatures around 75-80°C. I still suggest a 980 or Fury for 1080p though.

Not to be that 'he said; she said' guy, but I originally replied to this comment... ...which is by definition a blanket statement about brands. Again, using two media reviews as examples you're saying the MSI is one of the quietest. Whilst it is entirely true that many are experiencing solid temperatures with their MSI 6G Gaming, and I did cherry pick the worst, it was to bring to attention to the variables within the GM200 chip and not just the inadequacies of certain coolers. That was my point. This is why I brought about the point of there being no discernible winner besides the G1 Gaming, and even that has a few dodgy cases. You made a blanket statement and I disagreed. I have seen too many disappointed MSI 6G users to recommend that card for an enthusiast. I also would struggle to recommend the Strix. You can find poor examples with every card out there, absolutely, but realistically I've seen more poor MSI's than EVGA's or Gigabytes. This is my objective opinion. Initially I was set to purchase the MSI based on those two reviews, but I'm glad I didn't. It seems there is a temperature lottery as well as for overclocking performance.

I don't trust reviewers like that as I believe they are sent prime examples that do not reflect the consumers experience. If you visit OCN and the appropriate MSI thread you'll see many with average airflow at 80°C, sometimes with high fan speeds. While OCN generally houses people with unrealistic expectations, it's not just on OCN where I've seen folks disappointed. Users all over the web I've spoken to have noted disappointing temperatures. The most recent post when you search "80°C" in the MSI 6G thread on OCN is posted below, with a few other experiences as well. There is a video on YouTube of someone very disappointed, but I could be mistaken. 60% fan speed is not that loud on the MSI as their highest fan speeds are nowhere near that of the Strix or G1 Gaming. But the fans are quite large and it does produce noise, obviously. Many have ended up installing a G10, especially as it fits without any modifications. Here are a few more examples: There are many more cases such as those. Whilst I cannot corroborate its legitimacy, one user noted that MSI sent reviewers cards with a different BIOS. If MSI sent models with a lowered TDP, for instance, temperatures will be lower. If MSI sent out the best overclockers (it takes 10 minutes to check) that don't need a crazy amount of power or voltages to hit the elusive 1500/8000Mhz, that might equate to what we saw from guys like Guru3D. On another point, Guru3D's review of the ASUS Strix 980ti shows temperatures above 80°C. They give it a Top Pick award. That makes no sense to me. Other reviewers noted much lower temperatures from the same GPU. Again, doesn't make any sense beyond ambient temperature variables and airflow, something that should all be recorded and noted. This suggests the GM200 chip possesses too many variables to determine a definitive cooler. The only consistency seems to be the G1 Gaming. This is possibly due to Gigabyte's binning process and extremely efficient cooler.

If you are happy with around 1450/7200Mhz (stellar performance at those clock rates), any 980ti with a good water block will do fine. You can achieve those clocks on virtually any 980ti even with air cooling. Add a water block and you're almost guaranteed it. I have seen a couple 980ti's struggle to get 1450Mhz, but many if not all of those were air cooled. Water cooling inherently adds around 13-26Mhz additional boost, sometimes more, due to the lower temperatures on the core, memory modules and VRM. No overclock is 100% guaranteed, but 1450/7200Mhz is a highly realistic expectation if you're water cooling. Many would hope for much, much higher. 1550/8200Mhz is not uncommon from experienced overclockers with water cooling. That's winning the silicon lottery by a mile. For the most part that kind of overclock is purely for e-peen and benchmarking. At 1440p, a reference 980ti is enough. A 980ti at 1450/7200Mhz is almost unnecessary bar a few titles like GTA V and The Witcher 3.

MSI 6G Gaming is one of the hottest I've seen for the 980ti. The Lightning is definitely where it's at from MSI.

If you're water cooling, it doesn't matter that much which model you go for. Personally I suggest the EVGA as they offer superior support and aren't as picky about cards that have had their stock coolers removed. The Gigabyte G1 Gaming seems to have consistently higher overclocks so I would also consider them. I believe Gigabyte may be a little more strict with their binning process, especially for the price. Realistically, however, any of them will suffice. Just go with one that has the best water block and manufacturer customer support. I'm not sure LTT's forum will have enough experience with water cooling to know the differences or be able to offer an educated opinion. OCN might be better as they have more users water cooling. Sometimes blocks are rushed out and don't perfectly cool the card, or sometimes the card isn't as well suited for water cooling as another. edit: And don't worry about the stock speeds. We're talking 1-2 FPS difference between GPU's. It really isn't worth factoring in to your decision. Whatever one card has over another can be achieved on your own with a very small overclock. Virtually all 980ti's will hit 1450/7200Mhz under water. You'd have to have an absolute pig to not hit that. Applying the block, draining your loop and refilling will take longer than finding an overclock like that. Your card might even boost that high once you remove thermal throttling as a drawback. That's without any overclocks at all. All you have to do then is add 100-200Mhz on the memory and you have a more powerful 980ti than any other on the market.

The 980ti is an extremely hot GPU. The G1 Gaming is the only stock solution I've seen that can keep it under wraps with high overclocks. Otherwise you need liquid cooling, either from an AIO or a custom solution. My ASUS R9 Fury Strix DC3 (same cooler as 980ti) tops out at 70°C max at slightly audible noise levels. It mostly stays at around 68-69°C during GTA V. I have three intakes and three exhausts, with relatively low ambient temperatures #Irishweather. I can't give you an accurate fan speed as there is something not quite working with the current iteration of GPU-Z registering the new AMD cards. All I know is it's subjectively as quiet as my previous G1 Gaming 970. While the 980ti is a much more powerful GPU, the Fury is remarkably cool considering it's AMD's flagship minus one. Not as cool as the GM204 980, but it's theoretically more powerful and more advanced. My card is not overclocked. It won't overclock, not even a little bit. It's just a piss-poor example. Once AMD releases voltage control, I might be able to squeeze a little more performance out of it, but temperatures will increase and I don't know if it will be worth it. Back on topic, the 980ti Strix DC3 has been known to be slightly hotter than other coolers. However, I've seen a massive amount of variances in temperatures from 980ti users. Everything from 70°C to 82°C with the same GPU and cooler is not uncommon to see. The MSI 6G Gaming is an example of this. Many reviewers were stating 72°C under quiet conditions and 74°C with an overclock. Consumers sadly have not shared these experiences. Many were hitting 80°C or more with 80% fan speeds and a moderate overclock, which is too noisy for many. This was not expected, showing just how hot the GM200 chip can be if not binned right or used with an efficient cooler. Considering the demand for these GPU's, I imagine nVidia and AIB partners weren't quite as strict with their binning process. Some have noticed a temperature drop by reapplying the TIM, but some have noted no difference. This is another testament to the heat the GM200 core produces. It's truly a beast. 78°C at 50% fan speed is not terrible, but it's not great either. That's one of the reasons why I decided against the 980ti; it's just too hot for high overclocking. Ironically the Fury I picked up instead ended up being in the bottom 5% of chips. What is your speed at 50%? It's the speed that matters more than the percentage.

I think some of you are missing the point of my post. Sorry if I was a little convoluted. When you break down where TechPowerUp are getting their Performance Summary numbers from, it doesn't add up. AMD aren't gaining that much in the individual benchmarks.

Can anyone offer an opinion on the legitimacy of this report: http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-fury-x-performance-ahead-nvidia-980-ti-latest-drivers/ I have always relied on TechPowerUp for highly detailed graphs of performance. But are there are logical reasons for Windows 10 offering such a big performance gain on AMD? Maybe there is for the Fiji chip, but did AMD plan the 200 series 4-5 years ago with Windows 10 in mind? Surely Windows 10 was nothing more than a basic concept back then. I'm not into the wars between the two competitors; I don't care who's more powerful. I care whether the card I want is powerful enough for me and the games I play. If upgrading to Windows 10 sooner than I had planned results in such a performance boost, that's exciting. But I'm not sure where TechPowerUp is getting their Performance Summary from. For example, here is the 980ti Lightning review at 1440p with Windows 10: Here is the ASUS Fury review (my card) at 1440p with Windows 7: No performance gain. And in The Witcher 3, unless TechPowerUp have changed the settings of their benchmark, performance drops massively with Windows 10 on all both the 980ti and Fiji range: Windows 10: https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_980_Ti_Lightning/images/witcher3_2560_1440.png Windows 7: http://tpucdn.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_Fury_Strix/images/witcher3_2560_1440.gif Far Cry 4 with Windows 10: https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_980_Ti_Lightning/images/farcry4_2560_1440.png Far Cry with Windows 7: https://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Nano/images/farcry4_2560_1440.gif Again, no performance gain. Anyone know what's going on here? Is that article nonsense and TechPowerUp are losing it with their mathematics? I've gone through all the individual reviews that were shared between the Nano/Fury/Fury X and the Lightning 980ti. I saw virtually no performance gained going from Windows 7 to Windows 10. Am I missing something here?

Off-hand, do you know of any DAC/Amp's that have such a feature that aren't expensive?

Is it possible to improve headphone audio with cans that are harder to drive in my bedroom setup with my HDTV and Playstation? For instance: TV Digital Optical Toslink Out -> Amp/DAC (e.g. FIIO E10K) -> Headphones The audio from my TV's headphone out is not very good, and it's certainly not able to drive high impedance cans that are known to be source picky. I'd like to improve sound quality with something compact and affordable. Is it possible? If so, would I need any adaptors going from the televisions digital Toslink output to the FIIO E10K?

I've just migrated from nVidia to AMD and have not noticed any driver issues.

I agree.

OK, I getcha. My head is in bits today. I migrated to AMD. I feel they're the better of two evils. If I'm going to have to deal with liars and greedy thieves, I may as well go with the ones that will steal the least amount of my money.

Sorry, my brain is not with it today. Do you mean nVidia will nerf Maxwell performance in DX12 when Pascal comes out?

Anyone see the Fable Legends benchmark? The Fury X beats the 980ti at 720p and 1080p. It is ever so slightly behind at 4k. While that may be the case now, nVidia will soon respond with a driver update that increases the performance of the 980ti again. They always do. While AMD may be better equipped for DX12 in relation to its poor performance (relatively) in DX11 scenarios, nVidia will shift that balance back to them. Or the benchmark numbers are false. AMD are known to release bogus results that unfairly favour themselves.

What were your temperatures before the installation, ie. with the original ACX cooler? Does the EVGA require a copper "shim" (can't remember the proper term) for the heat to transfer effectively from the GPU itself to the water block? Some cards require this to properly seat the Asetek cooler. What are your voltages? Finally, have you tried holding the radiator/reservoir ABOVE the pump? Reservoirs should always be situated above the pump so that the pump has an easier job pumping the fluid. Gravity and all that.

I can't actually remember whether I phoned them up to activate the new motherboard and OS. I did phone up beforehand to confirm it was OK, though.

I thought about this. So I'd upgrade from Windows 7 to 10 on my current SSD, then clone it to the new m.2 drive?

Am I the only person who finds legal use of Windows highly complicated? I have an OEM version of Windows 7 and would like to eventually upgrade to Windows 10. But I'd like to install it on a new m.2 SATA 240GB SSD I'll be purchasing shortly. I have read that installing Windows 10 on a different computer and deactivating the old Windows 7 is not possible if it's an OEM version. I don't know how true this is because I was told the same thing when I recently purchased a new motherboard and used the same OEM version of Windows 7 without any problems. Microsoft themselves told me it would be fine. So what constitutes a new computer? A new hard drive? A new motherboard? I thought it was the motherboard, but I did not have any issues whatsoever reusing a genuine copy of Windows 7 OEM with a new motherboard. Any thoughts?

I would personally suggest a 390X. If you are experienced with overclocking, you can push a 390 to 390X performance at a cheaper price. You can also push a 970 to a reference 980. Either way I would say a 390X or 980 kind of performance level is what you should be aiming for, either by overclocking a 970 or 390, or by buying a 390X or 980. The 980 is still overpriced, but a second-hand MSI 4G Gaming would be a sensible option, as would a 290X. It depends on your budget and what kind of games you'll be playing.

The 970's should be fine for that price. The 390 might last a little longer, but not by a huge margin. You'll still probably hit your GPU limit before you hit a VRAM limitation.