Discussion in 'Reviews' started by W1zzard, Dec 24, 2013.
To read this review go to: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_780_Ti_Direct_Cu_II_OC/
How is this one rated 9,4/10 while the Palit is rated at 9,2/10?
The Palit has 7% more overall performance than the stock.
it does 37 dB(A) under load at 65°C (possible to do a different fan setup in msi afterburner or so to make it less loud & bit hotter)
overclocking performance is at +10,9%
max power consumption is 271W (avg: 229W)
The Asus has 6% more overall performance than the stock one.
it does 39 dB(A) under load at 80°C
overclocking performance is at 8,1%
max power consumption is 328W (avg: 230W)
That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.. Great review, weird overall score.
Considering the differences with the EVGA superclocked w/ acx cooler & the asus one, the palit should be 9,5/10 aswell.
Here's your conclusion in a nutshell:
Very disappointing to see from ASUS.
Runs as hot as reference Design from NV.
Doesn't overclock as good as the reference design or any other partner design.
Blows dissipated heat inside the enclosure.
Costs 30 bucks more.
Worse than all: noisier at idle, same acoustic footprint under load.
This is a piece of junk. Much rather have the EVGA or Palit.
It's loud, hot and power hungry. 9.0 at best.
One does not try to understand the scoring system of TPU. No offense, guys.
All scoring systems are 'subjective' from most sites that offer an 'overall' score. Only sites with verbal conclusions and pure performance metric can avoid this pitfall.
There may be other factors at play too - included back plate, good overclocking potential, custom PCB with better components.
TPU's scoring system is a handy quick reckoner to gauge a product by - who said it was a gauge against another product? You can't really compare a GTX 780Ti against a GTX 760 but they all have the same scoring framework. If you want to get the knowledge, read around and use TPU as just one metric but it's churlish to criticise W1zzard for his scoring when it is obviously not an empirical figure but more a 'subjective' one. There are 27 pages of review before the conclusion - that is where the scoring is.
I honestly dont understand WHY the gold sticker
I am pretty sure this will fall off after a while, the heat will do it.
golden sticker... gold???? I am not Flavor Flav
Besides the reasons that are mention before, this VGA score should be 9, at top.
Gold is asus's main colour these days on their motherboards, from H81 to X79
I'd buy the palit over this, 30 dollars cheaper and has better cooling(memory is cooled on the palit and evga vs asus's air), but just as loud, components aside, for what it is the palit is probably under priced though(in nvidia land at least).
It would make sense to me that graphics cards of the same series are compared to each other. You shouldn't compare a gtx 760 to a gtx 780 ti in overall score. But you should be able to compare a gtx 780 ti from asus to a gtx 780 ti from palit..
That's most likely why you are reading the review.. to see what the best gtx 780 ti (in this case) is.
If it doesn't have this meaning then why is there even an overall score + "recommended logo / some other logo.." added to the review?
Like you said, the 27 pages before the conclusion is where the review is at. To end it with a wrong overall scores is just silly.
I really like the reviews on TPU but this is a bit weird.
Palit is triple slot, so I expected better from the cooler, that's why the score is relatively reduced. There is no fixed mathematical system for our scoring, it's based on my well educated subjective feeling for a product.
The reason we have a numeric score and award logos is because some readers want to decide with one look whether reading the review is worth their time.
If you don't like it, ignore it. Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the feedback.
It's not a wrong score. It's just a score. I think people are being unreasonably picky here.
Palit 9.2 (due to triple slot cooler not being in W1zz's good books)
EVGA SC 9.5
Why are people even making a fuss?
Here's my feedback - in your OC results comparison it would be good if you put in the overclock results of the other cards too. Gives a better balance for overclocked results rather than sifting through your previous reviews (yes - I do that )
I for one like to compare my own 670 vs any review made by Wiz... I know 670 cant even be compare to any of these new GPU.
However, it give me a clear indication whether upgrading GPU will give me a massive boost in gaming experience while keeping the cost of owning it relatively cheap.
Have you tried messing with the fan speed vs temperature settings?
Then it's probably a 9,4-5/10 card all of a sudden by your books. -> the fan profile could still change in a bios update,.
Well, the Palit outperforms the asus in every way. That's why..
Yes, it has a triple slot cooler but I still don't see how that lowers the score by that amount.. it cools incredibly well. (= just a fan profile focused on cooling instead of noise, you can easily adjust that yourself)
and i'm making a fuss about it because it doesn't make any sense to me. and people will be taking a possible wrong choice by this. ("why even look at the palit when it's worse than the stock gtx 780 ti & asus one & evga one" although it's just as good as the evga one..)
I for one don't give one bit about it being a triple cooler (heck, it even has a better x-factor to it) and would've picked the wrong one if I only looked at the score & final conclusion.
I do that too, but I don't know if you were referring to what I said or not but:
I was talking about the overall score ^.^
Where's the review of 290x/ non x with custom cooler and non reference design from sapphire or asus or gigabyte?
nice review anyway
It's NOT a wrong choice. It's A choice. Stop being silly
You read the review and you say - oh - why has he scored 'x' lower than 'y' when I (me, the self referencing noun) think that 'x' is better than 'y'. You didn't do the review. You didn't handle the card. Here's how the benchmark process works.
Initial card scores 'x'
Next review card is awesome, gets 'x+5'
Next card not so awesome in the reviewers mind, gets 'x-2'
Next card feels better to the reviewer and gets 'x' again.
I will grant you one thing though - I dont see how the Palit scores lower than reference....
But regardless - the Asus is NOT a bad or wrong choice. Anything over '9' is a very good thing on TPU.
It's a wrong* choice in my book if you could've gotten a better one that doesn't cost more. The Asus one even costs more than the palit one.
You are right, I didn't do the review. What I did do was analyse the results from this review and come to a different conclusion. It outperforms the asus one with ease. (and loads of people don't care that it's a triple slot cooler, I guess you should only care when you need that space on your motherboard?)
So basicly the score could be:
9,5/10 if you don't care about it being a triple slot cooler & don't mind tweaking the fanprofile which takes like 2 minutes.
9,2/10 if you do care that is a triple slot cooler and don't care that it performs better than the asus. (but don't like that it didn't do well enough for it being a triple slot cooler)
*'wrong' as less good is still wrong
PS: I'll leave this here, -reviews either way.
Couldn't agree more
That's the only page I don't read in here though
I get what you're saying but it could start to get ridiculous ( and long) with different scoring depending on personal preferences.
For example, maybe the Asus has 3 year warranty vs the Palit with 2 year warranty? So should we have a different score for that? Maybe the Asus has better software/support and bios updates compared to the Palit so we might need a different score for that?
It could go on forever, you're never going to keep everyone happy because different people have different preferences. I'm happy enough with the way Wizzard scores the cards. I don't always agree but I can read the review in detail and see what is important to me.
Anyway, Still waiting for 290X non reference reviews.......I know Wizzard must have some by now!!
I've never had a problem with your reviews and have always found them clear and helpful with easy to see graphs and I refer to them often.
So, about that numerical score. What you said there explains it perfectly and covers any "anomalies" that people may find with them. Therefore, I suggest adding that, or a version of it, to the end of every review to help people understand where you're coming from with the score. It would help to reduce people going off on one overanalyzing what doesn't need to be analyzed, helping members to concentrate more on what the card is actually like instead and therefore having a more useful forum thread for anyone interested in reading about the product or buying it.
Finally, I think it's important for everyone to realize that seeing any number of reviews cannot give you the whole story about a product. Experiencing it for yourself will give you an impression of it that you can't get from any review, due to all the little subtleties that one notices which can't necessarily be gotten across in the review, along with the performance and feel of the product. This is where the reviewer is coming from, so bear this in mind when looking at the score.
I do understand that it's a subjective appreciation for the product, but how much more did you expect from the Palit model? It's 15 degrees cooler than the Asus, almost 20 below the reference. It's quieter, overclocks more and uses less power. All that at the cost of an extra slot, which won't make any difference to 99 percent of the users that will be buying these cards.
Don't get me wrong, I love your reviews, but people do have a point in complaining about the scoring system. In the case of the Palit it appears to be more bias than a well educated subjective evaluation.
I leave here a screenshot of my temperatures after being 15 minutes playing crysis.
The graphics card at idle is about 26 degrees and after playing about 15 minutes as you can see has not passed 66. The tests I have done in a Lancool PC-K62 Case closed.
Review at Guru3D showed why this card has all these thermal and overclocking "issues". Thermal imaging shows that card sensors read 5-6 degrees lower temperatures than the real ones (70 C was read from sensors). Also VRM area reaches almost 100 C at load (no airflow though) which limits overclockability.
I'm looking forward to TPU's own thermal imaging reviews ... soon I hope
Separate names with a comma.