Skip to navigation

Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 review


Doesn’t flag even at the most extreme settings, and by remaining relatively cool and quiet it takes the dual-GPU crown from AMD

Review Date: 24 Mar 2011

Reviewed By: Mike Jennings

Price when reviewed: £475 (£570 inc VAT)

Overall Rating
5 stars out of 6

Features & Design
5 stars out of 6

Value for Money
3 stars out of 6

6 stars out of 6

PCPRO Recommended

Only a handful of people have the cash to invest in dual-GPU graphics cards, but manufacturers still place plenty of stock in their success thanks to the “halo effect” they have on the rest of their ranges. AMD’s recent Radeon HD 6990 is today followed into the Labs by the GeForce GTX 590, Nvidia’s wallet-busting rebuke.

Just like the HD 6990, the GTX 590 comprises two modified GPUs – in this case the GTX 580 – soldered onto a real slab of a circuit board. Nvidia has tweaked clock speeds to fit: the 772MHz cores have been reined in to 607MHz, the 1,544MHz shader clock to 1,224MHz, and the combined 3GB of GDDR5 memory from 4,008MHz to 3,420MHz.

Nvidia has retained its familiar stream processor architecture, with 32 clusters across both cores, each containing 32 stream processors. It’s a proven system but, when stacked against the HD 6990, sounds relatively weak: AMD’s card contains 3,072 stream processors alongside 5.2 billion transistors, with the GTX 590 offering 1,024 processors and “just” 3 billion transistors.

The Nvidia card lagged slightly behind in our less demanding benchmarks. An average of 60fps in our 1,920 x 1,080 Very High quality Crysis test with 8x anti-aliasing is 3fps slower than the HD 6990, and this pattern was repeated in the equivalent Just Cause 2 test, where the Nvidia card scored 90fps to the AMD chip’s 96fps.

But when we really cranked up the settings to enthusiast levels – aided by a triple-monitor setup with a resolution of 5,760 x 1,080 – the GTX 590 showed its strength. It averaged a playable 32fps in our Very High Crysis benchmark at this extreme resolution; the HD 6990 managed 30fps. Adding 8x anti-aliasing widened the gap: the GTX 590’s 23fps average was a massive 10fps quicker than the struggling HD 6990.

Nvidia GeForce GTX 590

Just Cause 2 saw similar results at this huge resolution: the GTX 590 was 6fps quicker than the HD 6990. Only in Stalker: Call of Pripyat did the AMD card maintain its lead at the highest resolutions; the HD 6990 was 5fps faster at its stock speed and 7fps quicker with its boosted BIOS enabled.

The GTX 590 evidently has more legs in the most crushingly demanding tests, then, and other attributes mean it’s easier to live with than the HD 6990. It’s around an inch shorter, which shouldn’t be sniffed at – it actually fit into our Cooler Master CM 690 II Advanced test rig without the need to remove hard disk cages and try different PCI-Express x16 slots. The GTX 590 also seemed barely louder than the single-chip GTX 580, whereas the HD 6990 was an incredibly noisy card under load.

There was less to choose between the two cards when it came to power consumption. The GTX 590’s peak power draw in our test rig was 466W; the HD 6990 drew a peak of 423W when using its stock BIOS, with this rising to 477W with its overclocked mode enabled. For either you’ll need two eight-pin power connectors.

Last but absolutely not least, there’s the issue of price. At £570 inc VAT, the GTX 590 is mere pounds more expensive than the HD 6990, so price really shouldn’t sway you either way. Instead, the buying decision comes down to other factors, and the GTX 590 has the edge. It held on for longer as we upped the quality and resolution settings in our tests, and its smaller size and more bearable noise make it easier to live with. There’s not a lot in it, but this generation's bragging rights go to Nvidia.

Author: Mike Jennings

Subscribe to PC Pro magazine. We'll give you 3 issues for £1 plus a free gift - click here
User comments

Six Hundred Quid.

I'm confident I could build a respectable gaming pc, monitor and all, for the same money.

Still, if you want the best I guess.

By rozman on 24 Mar 2011


Well 2 x 580's = around £760
one 590 = £575.

Same cuda cores 1024 but slower stock speed for the 590.£200 though cannot be sniffed at.Especially if you do not have a lot of PCIE X16 slots on your motherboard.

By Jaberwocky on 25 Mar 2011


Doesn't it have 6 billion transistors, not 3? It is 3 billion per core?

By jcc124 on 31 Mar 2011


Paying 600 quid for a Graphics card is madness,especially when the directX 11 performance will dwindle with time.This card has no benefits especially with your pocket.Rich people only need apply.

By reo1471 on 6 Apr 2011


Well since the 6990 is now available in multiple stores for £430 and talking to a few of the distributor freinds I know they reckon it'll drop to £295 by June / July ish , making it in line with what top end prices have been for years, ill ditch my dual Gtx set up for this and see what's what.

But as to the other reply's £600+ for a card is like way to much for most, especially in the current economic climate.

By Rhamesis on 9 Apr 2011

Leave a comment

You need to Login or Register to comment.


Latest Category Reviews
Compare reviews: Graphics cards


Most Commented Reviews
Latest News Stories Subscribe to our RSS Feeds
Latest Blog Posts Subscribe to our RSS Feeds
Latest Features
Latest Real World Computing


Sponsored Links


Your email:

Your password:

remember me


Hitwise Top 10 Website 2010

PCPro-Computing in the Real World Printed from

Register to receive our regular email newsletter at

The newsletter contains links to our latest PC news, product reviews, features and how-to guides, plus special offers and competitions.