The idea to test at stock settings is so that manufacturer cannot hide the good stuff behind second BIOS / manual adjustment / software required to activate. I still believe the vast majority of users will use the card at near stock levels. What do you propose?
This is a card $110 higher than MSRP of the FE. You must ask, why would someone pay the additional money? Who is the user of THIS specific card? Why would someone pay for a larger cooler and a third power pin?
The "vast majority" of people paying $810 for a GPU, will be doing so in order to overclock it, and I do not for a second believe that there is one person out there that would overclock a FTW3 without sliding the power slider to the right, without being willfully ignorant.
Your definition of "manual adjustment / software", already rules out overclocking entirely, so why do you even include it as a section? Why is it ok for you to adjust the core and memory sliders, but to ignore the other 3?
I didn't even bring up the fact that there is now another bios released officially by EVGA to raise the max wattage to 450w. That was released within the last few days, and I think it is reasonable to believe that bios flashing will actually be a more niche usage case of the card, but it would still be nice to have coverage of it. But I would happily concede any of that coverage, if the card was actually pushed to its limits. How about educating your readers about the fact that EVGA told potential buyers that it would ship with a 420w power limit, yet it only shipped with a 400w power limit?
Whether the user eventually decides to undervolt the card, or use it at stock, is irrelevant to an overclocking section. I disagree with the entire philosophy that someone would mess around with core and memory clocks, without touching power, voltage, temperature, or fans.
