I would have to clarify just a bit on all cards "perform equally. Yes, Boost 3.0 is sort of a bottleneck for all cards but a) when (or if) the BIOS gets busted and folks can edit card BIOSs, the relative difference in componentry will come more into play, b) some still manage significant improvements (or perhaps some cards just do badly) and c) The 9xx was intentionally gimped so as to give the 1080 a greater performance advantage... I suspect the same is going on here.
But to get to the main point, the EVGA FTW and SC cards certainly don't fit in the same category given their original design flaws, now since corrected. And performance includes more than fps but also noise and temps.
TPU tested six (6) 1070s...and rated all of them at 9.8 ... however ....
1. All of the 1070s were with 1 dbA of one another, except of course the FE card which was 6-7 dbA louder.
2. Temps ranged from 69 to 73C ... except and again of course, the FE card which was throttling. All things being equal, I'd take the 4C ... 6% cooler
3. In the overclocking test, the FE card provided 133.7; the EVGA managed just a hair more at 134.0; and the fastest managed 6% more at 142.0 To my eyes, a 6% difference is by no means insignificant. That difference should have made us all aware that something was amiss with this card long before they started going up in smoke, especially when the EVGA 970 SC design was even worse.
Thanks guys. The msi gaming x might be a good choice as well
The Gaming Z is a tweaked version of the Gaming X which I normally wouldn't bother with but it has been priced cheaper than the X sometimes of late.