I'm currently deciding on which brand I should go for. I heard that the ACX 2.0's heat pipes weren't directly touching the GPU thus making it hotter and it isn't a good overclocker like the MSI. And the MSI has better cooling, overclocking capabilities, and quiet. But I've just found out there was a ACX 2.0+. Is it as good as the MSI, or better?
[GTX 970] EVGA SSC ACX 2.0+ or MSI TWIN FROZR V
- Thread starter AuroraHD
- Start date
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,255
- 14
- 99,960
The SC had that problem.... the SSC fixes it but all the issues describes here remain.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2014/09/19/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review/3
The choice here is between the Gigabyte and the MSI.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2014/09/19/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review/3
The choice here is between the Gigabyte and the MSI.
fkr
Splendid
- May 24, 2009
- 2,646
- 0
- 21,460
the ssc 2.0+ with the plus being the most important thing.
the original non+ version did not have all of the above stated improvements.
I have a gtx970 ssc 2.0+ and I can overclock and bench up to 1560/8000 without any temp issues. I run them all day at 1510/7750 without any issues.
the MSI are good also and both companies have great support
the original non+ version did not have all of the above stated improvements.
I have a gtx970 ssc 2.0+ and I can overclock and bench up to 1560/8000 without any temp issues. I run them all day at 1510/7750 without any issues.
the MSI are good also and both companies have great support
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,255
- 14
- 99,960
Last time the issue came up here I went and looked .... with the SSC version, the extra S referred to improvements to the PCB, mainly fixing the heat pipe issue which they originally said was purposely designed that way. The 2 and 2+ AFAIK refers to the cooler itself, and does not reflect any PCB changes. Is there anything out there that we can read tat details any additional PCB improvements ?
fkr
Splendid
- May 24, 2009
- 2,646
- 0
- 21,460
they actually fixed everything since the first card was junk. I used the step-up program to go from a gtx970sc to the new ssc2.0+
here is the link:
http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=04G-P4-3975-KR
http://www.evga.com/products/Specs/GPU.aspx?pn=e62b059f-ead9-4f90-a4d1-49c3df7ed0b1
completely new pcb hence the no waterblock.
fans do turn off completely
dual bios
increased phase control to 6+2
power limit increased to the point that you can never max it out, i can set it at 115%
voltage limit increased to 1.215 if you increase voltage it will run at 1.243v
memory mosfet cooling plate that makes a nice difference
changed the heat pipe design to a straight pipe design that is much cooler, 5C or so
this is the card they should have originally made and it is identical to the ftw+ just without a backplate (you can buy that for $20)
here is the link:
http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=04G-P4-3975-KR
http://www.evga.com/products/Specs/GPU.aspx?pn=e62b059f-ead9-4f90-a4d1-49c3df7ed0b1
completely new pcb hence the no waterblock.
fans do turn off completely
dual bios
increased phase control to 6+2
power limit increased to the point that you can never max it out, i can set it at 115%
voltage limit increased to 1.215 if you increase voltage it will run at 1.243v
memory mosfet cooling plate that makes a nice difference
changed the heat pipe design to a straight pipe design that is much cooler, 5C or so
this is the card they should have originally made and it is identical to the ftw+ just without a backplate (you can buy that for $20)
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,255
- 14
- 99,960
I'm really not much interested in what EVGA (or any manufacturer for that matter) says because it's press release fluff; I'm looking for more detail. Another reason, they also said
Your links only conform what I said previously .... the PCB revisions came with the SSC not the 2+ ..... the 2+ addresses cooling issues. Comparing what EVGA says about the new models and what the original review says, we see nothing different.
-That's not new, they had a 6 phase VRM design from the getgo (4+2) with the original SC....MSI has 6+2.
-Also same old standard reference componentry as far as i can tell, no mention of Hi-c CAP and Solid CAP type capacitors and Super Ferrite Chokes, etc.
-Again, contact plate was in the original SC.
As you can see above, all these are mentioned in the quote from bit-tech for the original SC model
Your links only conform what I said previously .... the PCB revisions came with the SSC not the 2+ ..... the 2+ addresses cooling issues. Comparing what EVGA says about the new models and what the original review says, we see nothing different.
-That's not new, they had a 6 phase VRM design from the getgo (4+2) with the original SC....MSI has 6+2.
-Also same old standard reference componentry as far as i can tell, no mention of Hi-c CAP and Solid CAP type capacitors and Super Ferrite Chokes, etc.
-Again, contact plate was in the original SC.
As you can see above, all these are mentioned in the quote from bit-tech for the original SC model
fkr
Splendid
- May 24, 2009
- 2,646
- 0
- 21,460
my error it is a 6+2 phase control
the contact is now a full length so it is not the same
it also has a changed output setup
coil whine has been greatly decreased so I assume the chokes or something were improved
there is no reference pcb for the 970 but this pcb layout is completely different than the old sc or ssc or ftw
I have not read anything about the capacitors other than the 6+2 phase control (I confirmed with evga jacob) and the 133% increase in power limit so I would assume there are better capacitors. it also uses a 6+8 pin power connector instead of 6+6
http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/78613-evga-launching-new-improved-geforce-gtx-970-ssc-card/
I would have to search out some more ftw+ or ssc+ articles to find out more.
all i know is that I can push this card to 1620 on the core and that says something as my asic is not the greatest, so i figure it is drawing allot of power.
the contact is now a full length so it is not the same
it also has a changed output setup
coil whine has been greatly decreased so I assume the chokes or something were improved
there is no reference pcb for the 970 but this pcb layout is completely different than the old sc or ssc or ftw
I have not read anything about the capacitors other than the 6+2 phase control (I confirmed with evga jacob) and the 133% increase in power limit so I would assume there are better capacitors. it also uses a 6+8 pin power connector instead of 6+6
http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/78613-evga-launching-new-improved-geforce-gtx-970-ssc-card/
I would have to search out some more ftw+ or ssc+ articles to find out more.
all i know is that I can push this card to 1620 on the core and that says something as my asic is not the greatest, so i figure it is drawing allot of power.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,255
- 14
- 99,960
Like I said.... I can't put much trust in what a company says when:
1. They allow a card to go to market when 1 of the 3 heat pipes misses the GPU.
2. When they get called on it, they say it's fine and that the designed it like that on purpose
3. Then they contradict themselves and go and change it.
Why would they say 6 on the web site if it is actually 8 ? I was able to confirm that this is true however as well as adding thermal pads. But I have not seen a single thing published indicating that anything else is different other than the new cooler.....and plenty of things, including EVGAs web site that say everything else is the same. Just read extremerigs article; those guys are somewhat thorough and things like caps and chokes usually get commented on.
It would appear, given the new clock, that they are binning the GPUs.
The phases on the VRM have nothing to do with capacitors.
I don't see a 133% increase in power limit. That would mean that instead of setting 110% in Afterburner of precision, you could now set it to 256 % ????? Going from 110 to 115 is 4%
If they want to change hearts and minds, they should get one out to Bit-tech and they could do an update....for whatever reason, few appear to have have reviewed this card.
1. They allow a card to go to market when 1 of the 3 heat pipes misses the GPU.
2. When they get called on it, they say it's fine and that the designed it like that on purpose
3. Then they contradict themselves and go and change it.
Why would they say 6 on the web site if it is actually 8 ? I was able to confirm that this is true however as well as adding thermal pads. But I have not seen a single thing published indicating that anything else is different other than the new cooler.....and plenty of things, including EVGAs web site that say everything else is the same. Just read extremerigs article; those guys are somewhat thorough and things like caps and chokes usually get commented on.
It would appear, given the new clock, that they are binning the GPUs.
The phases on the VRM have nothing to do with capacitors.
I don't see a 133% increase in power limit. That would mean that instead of setting 110% in Afterburner of precision, you could now set it to 256 % ????? Going from 110 to 115 is 4%
If they want to change hearts and minds, they should get one out to Bit-tech and they could do an update....for whatever reason, few appear to have have reviewed this card.
fkr
Splendid
- May 24, 2009
- 2,646
- 0
- 21,460
I completely agree. the entire first release was junk
the 133% refers to the power limit being adjusted to 33% above the original 100%. so you can get 33% over the 100%.
it would be interesting to get some more sure fire specs on the cards. I know it is longer and has more display ports.
I am only assuming that the capacitors are better since it takes in more power with the 6+8 pins, higher set voltage and I have mine maxed out and the power limit being able to be set higher also. since i do not have issues and my original one would just fry itself with the power limit spiking ridiculously high right before a hard reset was needed. the original card would not even be recognized after a reboot, had to cut the power to the motherboard for it to work again.
I like MSI but when I bought my card originally it was the only 970 available and sstock was going fast. I like the ssc+ but the MSI is a safe rec also.
also I have no coil whine which is great, except folding at home core 15
the 133% refers to the power limit being adjusted to 33% above the original 100%. so you can get 33% over the 100%.
it would be interesting to get some more sure fire specs on the cards. I know it is longer and has more display ports.
I am only assuming that the capacitors are better since it takes in more power with the 6+8 pins, higher set voltage and I have mine maxed out and the power limit being able to be set higher also. since i do not have issues and my original one would just fry itself with the power limit spiking ridiculously high right before a hard reset was needed. the original card would not even be recognized after a reboot, had to cut the power to the motherboard for it to work again.
I like MSI but when I bought my card originally it was the only 970 available and sstock was going fast. I like the ssc+ but the MSI is a safe rec also.
also I have no coil whine which is great, except folding at home core 15
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
RTX 4070 vs RX 7900 GRE faceoff: Which mainstream graphics card is better?- Started by Admin
- Replies: 10
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram