Thursday, September 27th 2018

MSI Intros GeForce RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 Ti SeaHawk X Series Graphics Cards

MSI today rolled out the SeaHawk line of liquid-cooled graphics cards based on GeForce RTX 2080 Ti and GeForce RTX 2080 graphics processors. The lineup includes two key sub-variants - SeaHawk X and SeaHawk X EK. The former features a factory-fitted all-in-one closed loop liquid cooler; while the latter features a factory-fitted full-coverage water block by EK Water Blocks, which you plumb to your own liquid cooling loop. Custom-designed for MSI, this block features a nickel-plated copper primary material, mated to an acrylic top with MSI branding all around. Both come with aluminium back-plates.

The RTX 2080 Ti SeaHawk X and SeaHawk X EK are factory-overclocked with a GPU Boost frequency of 1755 MHz (vs. 1545 MHz, or a 13.5% OC). The RTX 2080 SeaHawk X and SeaHawk X EK series, on the other hand, ship with 1860 MHz boost clocks (vs. 1710 MHz, or an 8.8% OC). The cards could attract $200-250 premiums over SEP prices.
Add your own comment

22 Comments on MSI Intros GeForce RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 Ti SeaHawk X Series Graphics Cards

#2
zo0lykas
Thats what iam waiting for, gpu from factory with water block..

Time to replace 1080 sea hawk for a new toy
Posted on Reply
#3
looniam
oh boy, can't wait to see the price -- galax want $1,800 for their blocked HOF card - i about pooped myself seeing that.

and i've been eating a lot of cheese lately . . :fear:
Posted on Reply
#4
erixx
Check the size, and if you have room for it in your case, it is extra-wide
Posted on Reply
#5
Vayra86
Well these are a new level of hideous, holy crap.

Did they ask Inno3D to design this for them or?
Posted on Reply
#6
techy1
these things are overrated. I had Seahawk X on gtx 1080 (non ti times): 1) it is loud in idle any air cooler (except blower) on minimum fan speed are inaudible (and most air coolers have 0 fan at idle mode), but Seahark is clearly more loud than my case silent fans. 2) in is basic (founders) PCB with (it is not gaming X or any "pimped out" after market pcb). 3) yes Seahawk is more slient under load - but I can only compare it to my gtx 1080 pallit jetstream (one of the worst of the big air coolers - in techpowerup reviews), I bet that one of the best air coolers (like Asus or MSI gaming X) could be as silent as Seahawk and cool even under load
Posted on Reply
#7
zo0lykas
Thats a reason why peoples build water cooling setup
Silent and efficient

Btw when i bought 1080 seahawk ek, with water block, price tag £499

And 1080 with air cooler from msi was £570.

So i win win win

techy1, post: 3912362, member: 146421"
these things are overrated. I had Seahawk X on gtx 1080 (non ti times): 1) it is loud in idle any air cooler (except blower) on minimum fan speed are inaudible (and most air coolers have 0 fan at idle mode), but Seahark is clearly more loud than my case silent fans. 2) in is basic (founders) PCB with (it is not gaming X or any "pimped out" after market pcb). 3) yes Seahawk is more slient under load - but I can only compare it to my gtx 1080 pallit jetstream (one of the worst of the big air coolers - in techpowerup reviews), I bet that one of the best air coolers (like Asus or MSI gaming X) could be as silent as Seahawk and cool even under load
Posted on Reply
#8
Valantar
What is up with these misshapen waterblocks? Is the NVLink connnector actually so large as to prevent proper inlet placement, forcing them to make that weird Z-shape around the core (and thus also add to the height of the card to fit the ports)? Or did EK just really botch this design job?
Posted on Reply
#9
thekaidis
Valantar, post: 3912392, member: 171585"
What is up with these misshapen waterblocks? Is the NVLink connnector actually so large as to prevent proper inlet placement, forcing them to make that weird Z-shape around the core (and thus also add to the height of the card to fit the ports)? Or did EK just really botch this design job?
My guess is Nvidia mandates a trace length spec from the core to the NVLink connector.

Also, ribbed tubing? What is this, 2008?
Posted on Reply
#10
Valantar
thekaidis, post: 3912594, member: 148220"
My guess is Nvidia mandates a trace length spec from the core to the NVLink connector.
Probably. Also, the NVLink connector is wider than two SLI fingers, forcing the ports to go further "down" the length of the card to avoid obstructing it than previous models. And then there's more VRM, with some between the GPU and the I/O, requiring water flow in that area too. This makes me think that water blocks for FE-board 20XX cards might end up having rather weird flow patterns.
Posted on Reply
#11
thekaidis
Valantar, post: 3912606, member: 171585"
Probably. Also, the NVLink connector is wider than two SLI fingers, forcing the ports to go further "down" the length of the card to avoid obstructing it than previous models. And then there's more VRM, with some between the GPU and the I/O, requiring water flow in that area too. This makes me think that water blocks for FE-board 20XX cards might end up having rather weird flow patterns.
You can see the flow pattern in the 2 blocks. 2080Ti routes coolant over the rear VRM first, then GPU jet plate, then presumably over the front VRM. 2080 uses what looks like a more conventional core-first flow pattern. The VRM phases near the PCIe slot have no flow.
Posted on Reply
#12
peche
Thermaltake fanboy

Zipties? WTF msi, your customers need more respect.... lol
Posted on Reply
#13
Valantar
thekaidis, post: 3912630, member: 148220"
You can see the flow pattern in the 2 blocks. 2080Ti routes coolant over the rear VRM first, then GPU jet plate, then presumably over the front VRM. 2080 uses what looks like a more conventional core-first flow pattern. The VRM phases near the PCIe slot have no flow.
Yes, exactly. This (on the Ti specifically) is what I guess made them go for this absurd humpback whale-style design with the ports placed way off the PCB, as the current routing would have been impossible without it, forcing them to either not cool the rear VRM, or cool it with some sort of split flow channel between the die and the front VRM. The latter would be sensible (I've seen it before on earlier designs) but the package/die size might make it impossible for these new cards.
Posted on Reply
#14
MEC-777
These look terrible. The odd angles and random shapes, there's no continuity to the designs. RGB aside, these look rushed, over-cluttered and like they put very little thought into aesthetics at all, IMO.
Posted on Reply
#15
Razrback16
looniam, post: 3912322, member: 155085"
oh boy, can't wait to see the price -- galax want $1,800 for their blocked HOF card - i about pooped myself seeing that.

and i've been eating a lot of cheese lately . . :fear:
lol.

Ya, the reference 2080 Ti is about $450 over what I would even consider paying for it given its performance, so I imagine the AIB cards with WBs will be another $200-300 on top of that...lol. Hope they aren't planning on selling very many of them. I mean even for me, money is not even close to an issue, but I just flat out refuse to give in to corporate greed. That $hit can stay right on the shelf and rot for all I care. Utterly absurd pricing.
Posted on Reply
#16
John Naylor
I hope US starts adopting the Euro model pricing like VAT where we can see cost of the product, cost of the tariff and taxes if any.

The one with the CLC is just like any other CLC ... a complete waste of time, money and effort, along with a whole lotta extra noise. When they 1st came out with the Seahawk EX X idea, I thought it would be great for those using CPU AIOs that weren't CLCs. However, instead of using one of their premium PCBs (I.e Gaming X) , they mimicked EVGA and used the cheaper reference PCB. I guess the idea was to maintain the $100 - $125 additional cost of adding a EK Block without the time and effort.... but frankly, if I'm going to water cool, I want to work on a platform (custom beefed up PCB) that makes it worth the investment. Any indication here ? What PCB is being used this time around.
Posted on Reply
#17
loki1944
John Naylor, post: 3912781, member: 156078"
I hope US starts adopting the Euro model pricing like VAT where we can see cost of the product, cost of the tariff and taxes if any.

The one with the CLC is just like any other CLC ... a complete waste of time, money and effort, along with a whole lotta extra noise. When they 1st came out with the Seahawk EX X idea, I thought it would be great for those using CPU AIOs that weren't CLCs. However, instead of using one of their premium PCBs (I.e Gaming X) , they mimicked EVGA and used the cheaper reference PCB. I guess the idea was to maintain the $100 - $125 additional cost of adding a EK Block without the time and effort.... but frankly, if I'm going to water cool, I want to work on a platform (custom beefed up PCB) that makes it worth the investment. Any indication here ? What PCB is being used this time around.
Um, no. F@ck VAT and ridiculous European price inflation.
Posted on Reply
#18
John Naylor
You should go back and try an undestand how you drew the wrong conclusion from what was actually posted. No change is pricing is being proposed. "Truth in advertising". In Europe they are required to show ALL charges up front ... why shouldn't there be parity here in US ?

In US, "pre tariff" I look at a price tag in a store and it says $499.99. That's not what I pay. I'm also going to pay $43.12 in sales tax + $12:00 in shipping. So what is your actual beef with informing the consumer what they actually must pay as what they pay won't change at all ?

Now post-tariff .. what i see as the price on the vendor web site will be $549.99 but the bill on my credit card will be $609.43 ... why can't I be given that information BEFORE I fill my shopping cart ? Why can't I know what that tariff is costing me ? Here's what I an going to see after the holidays:

Price: $649.99

But when the bill comes it will be $718.05. So why can't I know that up front just like consumers in Europe ?

Here's what I hope vendors do w/ these tariffs.

Pre-Tariff Price $ 499.99
Tariff $ 150.00
Subtotal $ 649.99
Tax $ 56.06
Subtotal $ 706.05
Shipping $ 12.00
Total $ 718.05

So your way, one pays $718.05, my way you pay $718.05 ... so again, what exactly is your issue with the customer getting this information pre-purchase ?
Posted on Reply
#19
Valantar
John Naylor, post: 3915647, member: 156078"
You should go back and try an undestand how you drew the wrong conclusion from what was actually posted. No change is pricing is being proposed. "Truth in advertising". In Europe they are required to show ALL charges up front ... why shouldn't there be parity here in US ?

In US, "pre tariff" I look at a price tag in a store and it says $499.99. That's not what I pay. I'm also going to pay $43.12 in sales tax + $12:00 in shipping. So what is your actual beef with informing the consumer what they actually must pay as what they pay won't change at all ?

Now post-tariff .. what i see as the price on the vendor web site will be $549.99 but the bill on my credit card will be $609.43 ... why can't I be given that information BEFORE I fill my shopping cart ? Why can't I know what that tariff is costing me ? Here's what I an going to see after the holidays:

Price: $649.99

But when the bill comes it will be $718.05. So why can't I know that up front just like consumers in Europe ?

Here's what I hope vendors do w/ these tariffs.

Pre-Tariff Price $ 499.99
Tariff $ 150.00
Subtotal $ 649.99
Tax $ 56.06
Subtotal $ 706.05
Shipping $ 12.00
Total $ 718.05

So your way, one pays $718.05, my way you pay $718.05 ... so again, what exactly is your issue with the customer getting this information pre-purchase ?
I remember having a very weird exchange with a pharmacy clerk the first time I visited the US as an adult, concerning pricing not matching what it said on the shelf. The concept of sales tax not being included in the advertised price had never even occurred to me, so I had quite a hard time understanding why I was suddenly supposed to pay more than sticker price. I mean, it is downright false advertising, and entirely hostile to consumers. What on earth does anyone gain from sales tax being added after the fact, outside of infinitesimally small cost savings for multi-state businesses and general consumer annoyance towards fair taxation?

Here in Norway, not only is VAT (obviously) included in every sticker price, but receipts are required by law to include the total without VAT, VAT amount, and final price. Makes everything easy to understand and keep track of, just like your example.
Posted on Reply
#21
John Naylor
Still no sign of them anywhere... no interest for the CLC job but the Seahawk EK with the full cover water block is a nice option. My guess is it's the MSI Duke OC as EK sells a full cover block for that card ... with the 1080 Ti Seahawk EK X it was about $100 over the cost of the card for the longest time... well less than buying card, block and backplate separately. But... will it ever come out ?
Posted on Reply
#22
Razrback16
John Naylor, post: 3962377, member: 156078"
Still no sign of them anywhere... no interest for the CLC job but the Seahawk EK with the full cover water block is a nice option. My guess is it's the MSI Duke OC as EK sells a full cover block for that card ... with the 1080 Ti Seahawk EK X it was about $100 over the cost of the card for the longest time... well less than buying card, block and backplate separately. But... will it ever come out ?
Good question. While I wouldn't be in the market for these based on the absurd pricing, I would imagine a number of AIB partners are skeptical of creating really expensive cooling option SKUs simply because the base cards are already not selling all that well due to how bad the pricing is. If you're dead set on a 2k series card with a WB, you may have to bite the bullet and buy a stock card and install the block yourself.

I did that with my 1080 Ti cards last year as I got tired of waiting on EVGA & MSI to release the pre-blocked versions.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment