Skip to main content

K|ngp|n Sets Three New 3DMark World Records With EVGA 980 Ti K|ngp|n Edition

When EVGA announced its GTX 980 Ti K|ngp|n graphics card, we naturally got quite excited, because it really looks to be one beast of a card. To build it, EVGA teamed up with Vince Lucido (aka "K|NGP|N") and set out to build an overclocker's dream of a GTX 980 Ti graphics card. Vince himself has been frolicking around with the card, and he managed to set three new 3DMark world records.

The records are quite straightforward: three levels of Fire Strike tests in 3DMark, run on a single graphics card. On the Standard test, K|ngp|n scored 25,233 points; on Extreme, he hit 13,091 points; and on the Ultra-level test, he scored 6,988.

Vince used an EVGA X99 motherboard paired with an EVGA power supply, along with the EVGA PrecisionX 16 overclocking software and liquid nitrogen to reach frequencies of up to 2098 MHz on the GPU core.

The GTX 980 Ti K|ngp|n edition comes with a custom PCB design, a cherry-picked GPU, and a huge cooler with exposed copper. It also has a cooling plate between the PCB and the heatsink to cool the memory and VRMs, with a backplate on the rear for added protection. The card sips (read: gulps) its power from a grand total of three PCI-Express power connectors -- one six-pin and two eight-pin connectors. An LN2 mode switch enables heating circuitry throughout the card to ensure that no condensation forms on the bulk of the PCB when liquid nitrogen is used.

Follow Niels Broekhuijsen @NBroekhuijsen. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

  • Xivilain
    Wicked stuff right there.

    When are they going to use Ghz measurements instead of Mhz? I think it sounds better to have a 2.1Ghz overclock rather than 2098Mhz... just my preference!

    EDIT: For marketing purposes. Not records.
    Reply
  • clonazepam
    Here I am mostly happy with a graphics score of 20K on standard. I see he's using the 353.30 drivers. Any newer probably sees a drop in performance.
    Reply
  • Bartendalot
    I wouldn't mind hearing a walk through of how he got there....
    Reply
  • TechyInAZ
    Wicked stuff right there.

    When are they going to use Ghz measurements instead of Mhz? I think it sounds better to have a 2.1Ghz overclock rather than 2098Mhz... just my preference!

    Because it's a bigger number, two thousand and ninety eight sounds so much cooler than two point 1 gigaherz. Jking.
    Reply
  • skit75
    16356638 said:
    Wicked stuff right there.

    When are they going to use Ghz measurements instead of Mhz? I think it sounds better to have a 2.1Ghz overclock rather than 2098Mhz... just my preference!

    Because it's a bigger number, two thousand and ninety eight sounds so much cooler than two point 1 gigaherz. Jking.

    Also, you don't round or shave numbers when it comes to records. You want marketing numbers? Don't worry, there are plenty out there.
    Reply
  • Xivilain
    16357041 said:
    16356638 said:
    Wicked stuff right there.

    When are they going to use Ghz measurements instead of Mhz? I think it sounds better to have a 2.1Ghz overclock rather than 2098Mhz... just my preference!

    Because it's a bigger number, two thousand and ninety eight sounds so much cooler than two point 1 gigaherz. Jking.

    Also, you don't round or shave numbers when it comes to records. You want marketing numbers? Don't worry, there are plenty out there.

    I should have clarified that I meant in marketing terms. For world records, yes, it matters all the way down to a decimal place or two, such as 2098.21Mhz for example.

    Bring on the downvotes I guess.
    Reply
  • skit75
    16357143 said:
    16357041 said:
    16356638 said:
    Wicked stuff right there.

    When are they going to use Ghz measurements instead of Mhz? I think it sounds better to have a 2.1Ghz overclock rather than 2098Mhz... just my preference!

    Because it's a bigger number, two thousand and ninety eight sounds so much cooler than two point 1 gigaherz. Jking.

    Also, you don't round or shave numbers when it comes to records. You want marketing numbers? Don't worry, there are plenty out there.

    I should have clarified that I meant in marketing terms. For world records, yes, it matters all the way down to a decimal place or two, such as 2098.21Mhz for example.

    Bring on the downvotes I guess.

    lol.... here I will zero you out real quick!:D
    Reply
  • Mr Soup
    Congratulations to K|NGP|N.

    There is definitely some serious skill involved in something like this but what does this mean in real world terms?

    I will never own a GPU that costs as much as this one, much less use liquid nitrogen to cool something, but I still find the benchmarking and pushing of technology interesting. Beyond the cool factor, bragging rights, etc. what would this do for performance. In other words a score of 25,000 vs. 18,000 for example. Would there be any noticeable difference in anything as an end user?

    I'm always curious about the extreme measures sometimes taken that seem to only yield a few FPS in real world application.
    Reply
  • TallestJon96
    Cool stuff. It seems to me the frequency of graphics cards is going to drive performance in the future more than core count, largely because it is more economical. Why have 2000 cores at 1ghz when you can have 1000 cores at 2ghz?
    Reply
  • littleleo
    What were the old records? And how many guys use liquid Nitro for cooling that is sick, lol.
    Reply