Capsule Review: EVGA GeForce GTX 780 Superclocked ACX
by Ryan Smith on September 22, 2013 12:00 PM ESTOverclocking
Having taken a look at stock performance, let’s dive into overclocking quickly. Since the 780SC ACX is based on the reference board design it has the same limits as the reference GTX 780 when it comes to overclocking. The max TDP is just 106%, and the max voltage is 1.2v. As a result overclocking headroom won’t be very different from the reference GTX 780, with the ACX cooler and EVGA’s superclocked binning being the only significant differences from a reference card.
EVGA GeForce GTX 780SC ACX Overclocking | |||||
Stock | Overclocked | Ref GTX 780 OC | |||
Core Clock | 967MHz | 1042MHz | 1063MHz | ||
Boost Clock | 1020MHz | 1095MHz | 1102MHz | ||
Max Boost Clock | 1123MHz | 1215MHz | 1228MHz | ||
Memory Clock | 6GHz | 6.8GHz | 7GHz | ||
Max Voltage | 1.162v | 1.2v | 1.2v |
In the end even with binning in play the 780SC ACX isn’t capable of overclocking any higher than our reference GTX 780; in fact it’s a hair worse, with the 780SC ACX topping out at 19MHz less than the reference GTX 780. So from a clockspeed perspective this is a wash. Pushing any higher will require more TDP headroom and more voltage, which in turn will require a fully custom design.
At the same time given the fact that EVGA has already eaten into a lot of the GTX 780’s overclocking headroom with their factory overclock, this means there’s not as much overclocking headroom available for the end user. 967MHz to 1042MHz is still a free 8% increase in clockspeeds; the payoff just isn’t as great as relative to a stock GTX 780.
Moving on, as a result of their similar overclocks, overclocked performance is virtually indistinguishable from our overclocked GTX 780. Despite the ACX cooler keeping temperatures in the low 70s we’re primarily power constrained here, which isn’t something the ACX cooler can help with.
As was the case with overclocking the reference GTX 780, the payoff here is GPU performance that’s well ahead of the GTX 780 at stock, and performance that exceeds even GTX Titan by around 7%.
Finally, quickly taking a look at power, temp, and noise after overclocking we can see that the 780SC ACX maintains its strong cooling performance, with temperatures topping out in the low 70s and noise levels rising by just 1dB. The power cost of overclocking is fairly high however, thanks to the use of higher voltage boost bins.
All told, the 780SC ACX’s sweet spot is going to be at stock. While it’s as good an overclocker as any reference GTX 780, the fact that EVGA gives you so much of its overclockability out of the box with a trivial power cost means that the benefits of squeezing out the last bit of headroom don’t pay off quite as nicely here as with a stock card. The ACX cooler will have no problem keeping temperatures and noise levels down however, which means being able to reap the benefits of GTX 780 overclocking without the noise penalty.
Final Words
Wrapping things up, it’s clear that EVGA has put together an extremely solid card with their GeForce GTX 780 Superclocked ACX, both on the basis of performance and relative value. As we alluded to at the start of this article, EVGA is offering a sizable factory overclock for an absolutely tiny price premium, and as a result the 780SC ACX looks extremely good on a price/performance basis. For $10 more than a stock GTX 780 the 780SC ACX delivers 10% better performance, does so with just a trivial increase in power consumption, and ultimately closes the performance gap with GTX Titan. On this basis the 780SC ACX is a much better value proposition than your typical factory overclocked card, to the point where the stock card rarely makes sense. For all practical purposes the stock GTX 780 has been rendered redundant because of this.
Clockspeeds and prices aside, the other matter at hand is EVGA’s new ACX cooler. As yet another twin fan open air cooler the ACX cooler isn’t going to be groundbreaking, but that hasn’t stopped EVGA from taking the basic principles of the design and put together a very solid cooler. The build quality itself is quite good, and although this doesn’t match the metal madness that is the reference GTX 780, the ACX is as sturdy as any open air cooler can hope to be. Meanwhile in making the usual tradeoffs that come with the design, the ACX cooler offers notably better cooling than the GTX 780’s reference cooler, sustaining lower temperatures and less noise than its blower based counterpart. It goes without saying that for systems that can support this style cooler this is a very good tradeoff to make.
With that in mind, EVGA is off to a good start with their new cooler. If EVGA can sustain this level of quality and performance across their product tiers, then EVGA should have no trouble at all achieving their goals and broadening their reach into open air cooling.
40 Comments
View All Comments
cactusdog - Sunday, September 22, 2013 - link
Im not sure its a good time to buy a card like this, with the R9 290X coming in a couple of weeks.CiccioB - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Because you buy top of the performance with stable drivers and assured quality.If one is interested in these kind of gfx board would have just to wait for AMD to launch their new series for the price to lower a bit.
For someone good solid drivers available yesterday is something that is more valuable then 5 frames more tomorrow (and support for new games next month).
tackle70 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
Thanks for the review!I picked up a pair of these at launch to replace a pair of lightning 7970s... couldn't be happier with them. Ridiculously fast, cool, and quiet.
Now hopefully their price will drop by $100 or so as AMD's new cards come out and can finally offer up some competition.
bds71 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
it amazes me that reviewers still try to make titan out as a consumer gaming card. it's claim-to-fame is its number crunching ability (particularly FP). it's a monster!! it's not a gaming card, nor, i suspect, was it ever intended to be. i bought a 690 when they were released (OK, maybe it took me a few months to actually FIND one, but you know what i mean)....for the same price, it utterly defeats the titan to the point of rediculousness. i calculated my own numbers based on this review as well. on average, the stock 780 is 72% (performance) of the 690 for 65% of the cost - more what one would expect with their differences in arcitecture (104 vs 110). in addition to this, i also fold/crunch. as a cruncher, the 690 is STILL better than titan due to its two cores!! if any of you bought a titan (for gaming, or crunching) i just gotta ask: why? the 690 is 10-15% better in both respects. sure, i can see getting a 780 vs 690: $350 is nothing to sneeze at, and it is slightly better (7%) performance/cost ratio. but, titan? fail. (unless your one of those very few/limited folks who actually do use it for its FP operation)erple2 - Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - link
Interesting. According to anandtech's own bench, the titan obliterates the 690 in compute tasks. Which is really what I expect given the 680's relatively weak compute units. So I'm not quite sure which compute benchmarks you're running to demonstrate the superiority of the 690 over the Titan...bds71 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
and before anyone thinks to comment about OCing the 780 vs 690 (this being an article about an OC'ed 780) they both have about the same OCing potential - both can reach 1200 MHz without too much effort so i would say OCing is a wash between the two. that's why i did not use the numbers from the OCed version in this review (i used numbers from the stock)tackle70 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
OCing is absolutely not a wash between the two on average... 780 is quite superior *on average*http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/geforce_gtx_69...
http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/geforce_gtx_78...
JPForums - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
What's the point of all the ventilation in the back of the card when you set the fins vertically. Airflow won't directly exhaust out the back with a wall of fins blocking it. Half the heated air is directed at the motherboard. It only really serves to let noise out. The power side of the card doesn't make as much of a difference, but the bracket side of the card should have horizontal fins. Other than that, I've always like EVGA board design and customer support. It is good that they've been trying to expand their cooler designs for the 600 and 700 series. I hope they keep trying to improve.alkhanzi - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
The 7990 hugely beats both the Titan and EVGA 780 in each and every of the benchmarks, and costs the same(+ the game bundle).tackle70 - Monday, September 23, 2013 - link
The 7990 is, on average, a whopping 4% faster than this card at 1920x1080, and just 14% faster at 25601600...Given the heat/coil whine/driver issues that the 7990 has, I'll take the 780 ten times out of ten.