MSI GTX 1080 GAMING Z 8GB Review
Share:
As I gradually whittle my way through the stack of GTX 1080’s I have in front of me, something is becoming increasingly obvious: for all their differences in branding, NVIDIA’s board partners have precisions little differentiating their GPU designs from one another. Everything from overclocking headroom to cooling performance to even out-of-box clock speeds seems to have quickly reached a plateau. Also, like underglow was all the rage with import car tuners during the Fast & Furious heydays, LEDs are everywhere now and no, they don’t add horsepower.
MSI has realized that even with such powerful graphics cards within NVIDIA’s stable, their little corner of the market runs the very real risk of stagnation. What could possibly set their wares apart from the G1’s, Superclockeds, AMPs and STRIXes of this world? As it stood last time around, not all that much and MSI’s market share took a small dip.
With the GTX 10xx-series they’re hellbent on doing things differently. Not only is MSI stepping up their game on the cooling technology front with a new sixth generation Twin Frozr heatsink design but they’re also introducing a brand new GPU control application and brand new product series that outperform many of their competitors’ offerings. As a matter of fact, with the GTX 1080 their Gaming series has now multiplied into three distinct products: the Gaming 8G, Gaming X and Gaming Z. The Gaming Z being covered here is meant to be a flagship within their lineup.
Dmitry and Eber actually covered these new Gaming-series cards at Computex and despite taking careful notes, they struggled to differentiate one from another. The reason for that is pretty simple: for all intents and purposes the 8G, Gaming X and higher end Gaming Z all share the same PCB design, components and heatsink. Meanwhile it is the core speeds and relative pricing which vary quite wildly.
The Gaming Z naturally sits atop its siblings with some of the highest frequencies I’ve seen on a GTX 1080 thus far. Like recent Gigabyte and ASUS cards it can operate in three different modes when MSI’s accompanying software is installed: Silent Mode with base / boost speeds that match a Founders Edition at 1733MHz / 1607MHz, Gaming Mode (1873MHz /1733 MHz) and finally the balls-to-the-wall OC Mode (1911MHz / 1771MHz) Both Gaming and OC also add a bit (100MHz to be exact) of memory overclocking into the equation as well.
On paper at least the MSI GTX 1080 Gaming Z is quite simply one of the fastest graphics cards on the planet but it has a suitably high price as well. At $749 it is a good $100 more than the Gigabyte G1 Gaming and EVGA Superclocked cards we recently reviewed but only $50 more than the Founders Edition. One would hope this premium will translate into some great overclocking headroom as well considering so many NVIDIA cards struggle with oddball (and unnecessary) power / voltage limits.
While $749USD may seem like a hefty price to pay when there are several alternatives –some from MSI’s own stable- there are some reasons for the cost as the Gaming Z looks, feels and acts like a premium product.
In my personal opinion, I think this is one of the best looking cards on the market. There’s a good balance between the shroud’s black areas and red highlights without looking gaudy and, unlike some of EVGA’s latest creations, there isn’t an overt industrial look either. To make matters even better the card shouldn’t have many problems fitting into compact chassis since its length is just 11”. One area you do have to take into account though is the PCB’s width; at about 5” this is a portly card but as you’ll see later, there’s good reason for that.
Perhaps the most important aspect of the new MSI GTX 1080 GAMING series is their thoroughly revised heatsink design. While it may not be that evident at first glance, thousands of engineering hours have been pumped into the Twin Frozr VI in an effort to make it quieter, higher performing and quite a bit more compact as well. That may sound like the Holy Trinity of unobtainium, I’ll get a bit ahead of myself and say that’s exactly what MSI has achieved. Incredible stuff.
So let’s talk a bit more about what went into the Twin Froze VI since there are a few things here which should allow MSI to pull ahead of their competitors. Unlike some, MSI decided to forego direct-contact heatpipes and is instead using a high efficiency solid nickel-plated copper baseplate. This was done since the GP104 core is quite small and an HDT-style base would make proper contact with it.
The baseplate is then topped by six squared-off 8mm heatpipes which run upwards and are eventually interspersed at strategic locations throughout the heatsink. MSI’s heatsink is a thing of beauty as well since it has been engineered to optimize airflow through the addition of minute air deflectors which not only accelerate air movement but also allow for more efficient cooling. As a result, the heatsink can be thinner without sacrificing its cooling potential.
In order to properly cool the mission critical components mounted to the Gaming Z’s PCB, there’s a large secondary heatsink that covers the GDDR5X memory modules and MOSFETS.
Topping off all of this technology are two second generation 92mm TORX fans. Along with double ball bearings for an increased lifespan, they utilize a patented mix of traditional blades and new dispersion blades (you’ll recognize those by the small indents). This is supposed to provide the maximum amount of incoming air without requiring high RPM levels.
Like many other cards these days, the GTX 1080 Gaming Z has the ability to completely shut off its two fans when in idle or low load scenarios.
Along the cards side there isn’t really much to see in the daylight but MSI has attempted to keep a relatively clean overall design language even though the heatpipes do require some additional space. You should also be aware that the MSI logo located here has a built-in LED.
Around back there’s a 6+8 pin power input setup which is supposed to grand upwards of 75W of additional overclocking headroom. That’s absolutely great from a marketing standpoint but if MSI decides to tow the NVIDIA Greenlight directives with this card by limiting voltages and the chip’s usable power, extra features like this will be pointless. I’ll go over this more in-depth within the overclocking section.
Pull off the various heatsinks and you can see why this is considered a truly premium product. MSI has used that additional PCB width to add a massive 10-phase PWM with their Military Class components. That means Hi-C CAPs for higher overall power efficiency and lower ripple, Super Ferrite cores for the suppression of inductor whine and Japanese capacitors.
The Gaming X’s underside is covered in a full-length backplate that gives a nice finished look to the card but it doesn’t provide any additional cooling capacity since it doesn’t make direct contact with the PCB. Like some other parts it too has an LED incorporated into it, though this time the MSI Gaming Series “shield” glows.
From an I/O perspective, there isn’t anything interesting going on here. The Gaming Z ships with a single DVI, four DisplayPort 1.4 connectors and a lone HDMI 2.0 output. MSI has decided to go with a slightly more distinctive design for the grille stamping but that really won’t affect performance one way or another.
So let’s talk LEDs since they’re everywhere these days and, being a premium GPU, the Gaming Z naturally includes several customizable zones. The first of these are the “shark gills” on either side of the rear fan. I’m never going to understand the phenomenon behind all these lights but they look pretty tasteful and are actually quite unique.
I’ve already mentioned the other two LED zones on the backplate and along the card’s side. That large shield-style one is exclusively on the Gaming Z. Unfortunately when this card is first installed, they quite simply don’t match the front area’s color but, with MSI’s Gaming App (more about this on the next page) that can easily be changed or they can be switched off. Unlike EVGA’s limited on/off option on their Superclocked series, these LEDs can be customized to any color under the rainbow to match your build.
A Closer Look at the MSI Gaming App
It seems like every graphics card manufacturer is launching their own controller software these days. Gigabyte has their new Xtreme Engine and EVGA has Precision, MSI’s approach has been a bit different. Instead of combining overclocking with more basic functionality, they have retained a two-prong approach by offering the Gaming App as a streamlined yet very complete application for control over basic GPU functions and features while their Afterburner software is treated as a separate entity for enthusiasts. For some this will feel a bit clunky but there’s something to say about separating one from the other.
Upon opening up the Gaming App, you are greeted with a very straightforward interface with numerous icons that indicate onboard features, a basic clock speed indicator, large tooltips for Performance Mode selection and finally a quartet of shortcuts to open up the software for any MSI-specific gaming peripherals you have installed.
In this section I’ll be going over the items which open in a separate window, of which the only one that doesn’t is that little snowflake symbol. That’s used for automatically boosting fan speeds to their “max cooling” mode. Let’s start from left to right on that top row.
The Eye Rest dialog box actually allows you to control your monitor’s color pallet with the click of a button. The main EyeRest setting is supposed to cut down on blue light output which, if studies are supposed to be believed, should go a long way towards eliminating some of the eyestrain that’s typically associated with looking at an LCD / LED display for hours on end.
There are also some other presets which modify onscreen colors to levels that MSI has predetermined should be optimal for both gaming and movies. However, since every monitor will need a different set of calibrations for optimal viewing, these will likely be of limited use if you have already used the panel’s OSD to customize it to your personal preferences.
The next stop on our little whirlwind tour of the MSI Gaming App is the LED control. Like every other section in this svelte program, it is simple, well designed and easy to understand. On the left side there’s a selection box which allows a user to either change the color of all the card’s LEDs to a single color or setting (Black is the “off” setting by the way) individual colors per zone. There are also additional options for different effects like pulsing or breathing or the ability to have the LEDs react to system sounds.
The OSD is basically the onscreen overlay that can come up in games to display various GPU-related statistics. Unfortunately, it won’t show up in DX12 games just yet but MSI is working on that as we speak. You will also need an MSI motherboard for CPU-related information.
The MSI Dragon Eye feature is arguably the most interesting addition to the Gaming App. It allows you to easily add YouTube or Twitch stream links and will then stream them directly into your game. A small portion of the GPU’s resources are taken to accomplish this accelerated task but it actually works quite well for podcasts. For example if you wanted to watch the DOTA finals from Dreamhack, it can be streamed silently (with some transparency if that’s necessary to insure continued immersion in your game) and then quickly brought to the forefront if there happens to be a play you want to see. I actually used it to stream a tennis match through YouTube while I played Warhammer: Total War and it worked perfectly.
Test System & Setup
Processor: Intel i7 5960X @ 4.3GHz
Memory: G.Skill Trident X 32GB @ 3000MHz 15-16-16-35-1T
Motherboard: ASUS X99 Deluxe
Cooling: NH-U14S
SSD: 2x Kingston HyperX 3K 480GB
Power Supply: Corsair AX1200
Monitor: Dell U2713HM (1440P) / Acer XB280HK (4K)
OS: Windows 10 Pro
Drivers:
AMD Radeon Software 16.5.2
NVIDIA 368.14 WHQL
*Notes:
– All games tested have been patched to their latest version
– The OS has had all the latest hotfixes and updates installed
– All scores you see are the averages after 3 benchmark runs
All IQ settings were adjusted in-game and all GPU control panels were set to use application settings
The Methodology of Frame Testing, Distilled
How do you benchmark an onscreen experience? That question has plagued graphics card evaluations for years. While framerates give an accurate measurement of raw performance , there’s a lot more going on behind the scenes which a basic frames per second measurement by FRAPS or a similar application just can’t show. A good example of this is how “stuttering” can occur but may not be picked up by typical min/max/average benchmarking.
Before we go on, a basic explanation of FRAPS’ frames per second benchmarking method is important. FRAPS determines FPS rates by simply logging and averaging out how many frames are rendered within a single second. The average framerate measurement is taken by dividing the total number of rendered frames by the length of the benchmark being run. For example, if a 60 second sequence is used and the GPU renders 4,000 frames over the course of that time, the average result will be 66.67FPS. The minimum and maximum values meanwhile are simply two data points representing single second intervals which took the longest and shortest amount of time to render. Combining these values together gives an accurate, albeit very narrow snapshot of graphics subsystem performance and it isn’t quite representative of what you’ll actually see on the screen.
FCAT on the other hand has the capability to log onscreen average framerates for each second of a benchmark sequence, resulting in the “FPS over time” graphs. It does this by simply logging the reported framerate result once per second. However, in real world applications, a single second is actually a long period of time, meaning the human eye can pick up on onscreen deviations much quicker than this method can actually report them. So what can actually happens within each second of time? A whole lot since each second of gameplay time can consist of dozens or even hundreds (if your graphics card is fast enough) of frames. This brings us to frame time testing and where the Frame Time Analysis Tool gets factored into this equation.
Frame times simply represent the length of time (in milliseconds) it takes the graphics card to render and display each individual frame. Measuring the interval between frames allows for a detailed millisecond by millisecond evaluation of frame times rather than averaging things out over a full second. The larger the amount of time, the longer each frame takes to render. This detailed reporting just isn’t possible with standard benchmark methods.
We are now using FCAT for ALL benchmark results in DX11.
DX12 Benchmarking
For DX12 many of these same metrics can be utilized through a simple program called PresentMon. Not only does this program have the capability to log frame times at various stages throughout the rendering pipeline but it also grants a slightly more detailed look into how certain API and external elements can slow down rendering times.
Since PresentMon throws out massive amounts of frametime data, we have decided to distill the information down into slightly more easy-to-understand graphs. Within them, we have taken several thousand datapoints (in some cases tens of thousands), converted the frametime milliseconds over the course of each benchmark run to frames per second and then graphed the results. This gives us a straightforward framerate over time graph. Meanwhile the typical bar graph averages out every data point as its presented.
One thing to note is that our DX12 PresentMon results cannot and should not be directly compared to the FCAT-based DX11 results. They should be taken as a separate entity and discussed as such.
Analyzing Temperatures & Frequencies Over Time
Modern graphics card designs make use of several advanced hardware and software facing algorithms in an effort to hit an optimal balance between performance, acoustics, voltage, power and heat output. Traditionally this leads to maximized clock speeds within a given set of parameters. Conversely, if one of those last two metrics (those being heat and power consumption) steps into the equation in a negative manner it is quite likely that voltages and resulting core clocks will be reduced to insure the GPU remains within design specifications. We’ve seen this happen quite aggressively on some AMD cards while NVIDIA’s reference cards also tend to fluctuate their frequencies. To be clear, this is a feature by design rather than a problem in most situations.
In many cases clock speeds won’t be touched until the card in question reaches a preset temperature, whereupon the software and onboard hardware will work in tandem to carefully regulate other areas such as fan speeds and voltages to insure maximum frequency output without an overly loud fan. Since this algorithm typically doesn’t kick into full force in the first few minutes of gaming, the “true” performance of many graphics cards won’t be realized through a typical 1-3 minute benchmarking run. Hence why we use a 10-minute warm up period before all of our benchmarks.
MSI makes a metric ton of claims about their heatsink’s capabilities but coupled with some of the highest clock speeds we have seen thus far from a GTX 1080, will it be enough?
Let’s start off with the usual temperature results since they are quite telling of how capable this heatsink really is. In all of the three modes (OC, Gaming and Silent) temperatures remain around the 70°C mark and aren’t allowed to move too far afield from that.
What is particularly incredible is the ultra-low fan speeds the Gaming Z was able to maintain relative to the Gigabyte G1 Gaming despite its higher frequencies and conceivably higher heat output. The Silent Mode idles the fans for a bit longer and tops out around 1275RPMs versus the Gaming / OC modes’ ~1400RPMs so there is a bit of acoustical savings there.
The GTX 1080 Gaming Z is a picture of clock speed stability regardless of which mode is being used. As can be seen, the Silent mode achieves its lower fan speeds and higher efficiency by adjusting clock speeds to a level that’s akin to that of NVIDIA’s reference design. Meanwhile, while there is an approximate 40MHz gap between the Gaming and OC modes, it that minor amount won’t account for all that much when it comes to framerates, as you can see below.
Ashes of the Singularity
Ashes of the Singularity is a real time strategy game on a grand scale, very much in the vein of Supreme Commander. While this game is most known for is Asynchronous workloads through the DX12 API, it also happens to be pretty fun to play. While Ashes has a built-in performance counter alongside its built-in benchmark utility, we found it to be highly unreliable and often posts a substantial run-to-run variation. With that in mind we still used the onboard benchmark since it eliminates the randomness that arises when actually playing the game but utilized the PresentMon utility to log performance
Fallout 4
The latest iteration of the Fallout franchise is a great looking game with all of its detailed turned to their highest levels but it also requires a huge amount of graphics horsepower to properly run. For this benchmark we complete a run-through from within a town, shoot up a vehicle to test performance when in combat and finally end atop a hill overlooking the town. Note that VSync has been forced off within the game’s .ini file.
Far Cry 4
This game Ubisoft’s Far Cry series takes up where the others left off by boasting some of the most impressive visuals we’ve seen. In order to emulate typical gameplay we run through the game’s main village, head out through an open area and then transition to the lower areas via a zipline.
Grand Theft Auto V
In GTA V we take a simple approach to benchmarking: the in-game benchmark tool is used. However, due to the randomness within the game itself, only the last sequence is actually used since it best represents gameplay mechanics.
Hitman (2016)
The Hitman franchise has been around in one way or another for the better part of a decade and this latest version is arguably the best looking. Adjustable to both DX11 and DX12 APIs, it has a ton of graphics options, some of which are only available under DX12.
For our benchmark we avoid using the in-game benchmark since it doesn’t represent actual in-game situations. Instead the second mission in Paris is used. Here we walk into the mansion, mingle with the crowds and eventually end up within the fashion show area.
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Another year and another Tomb Raider game. This time Lara’s journey continues through various beautifully rendered locales. Like Hitman, Rise of the Tomb Raider has both DX11 and DX12 API paths and incorporates a completely pointless built-in benchmark sequence.
The benchmark run we use is within the Soviet Installation level where we start in at about the midpoint, run through a warehouse with some burning its and then finish inside a fenced-in area during a snowstorm.[/I]
Star Wars Battlefront
Star Wars Battlefront may not be one of the most demanding games on the market but it is quite widely played. It also looks pretty good due to it being based upon Dice’s Frostbite engine and has been highly optimized.
The benchmark run in this game is pretty straightforward: we use the AT-ST single player level since it has predetermined events and it loads up on many in-game special effects.
The Division
The Division has some of the best visuals of any game available right now even though its graphics were supposedly downgraded right before launch. Unfortunately, actually benchmarking it is a challenge in and of itself. Due to the game’s dynamic day / night and weather cycle it is almost impossible to achieve a repeatable run within the game itself. With that taken into account we decided to use the in-game benchmark tool.
Witcher 3
Other than being one of 2015’s most highly regarded games, The Witcher 3 also happens to be one of the most visually stunning as well. This benchmark sequence has us riding through a town and running through the woods; two elements that will likely take up the vast majority of in-game time.
Ashes of the Singularity
Ashes of the Singularity is a real time strategy game on a grand scale, very much in the vein of Supreme Commander. While this game is most known for is Asynchronous workloads through the DX12 API, it also happens to be pretty fun to play. While Ashes has a built-in performance counter alongside its built-in benchmark utility, we found it to be highly unreliable and often posts a substantial run-to-run variation. With that in mind we still used the onboard benchmark since it eliminates the randomness that arises when actually playing the game but utilized the PresentMon utility to log performance
Fallout 4
The latest iteration of the Fallout franchise is a great looking game with all of its detailed turned to their highest levels but it also requires a huge amount of graphics horsepower to properly run. For this benchmark we complete a run-through from within a town, shoot up a vehicle to test performance when in combat and finally end atop a hill overlooking the town. Note that VSync has been forced off within the game’s .ini file.
Far Cry 4
This game Ubisoft’s Far Cry series takes up where the others left off by boasting some of the most impressive visuals we’ve seen. In order to emulate typical gameplay we run through the game’s main village, head out through an open area and then transition to the lower areas via a zipline.
Grand Theft Auto V
In GTA V we take a simple approach to benchmarking: the in-game benchmark tool is used. However, due to the randomness within the game itself, only the last sequence is actually used since it best represents gameplay mechanics.
Hitman (2016)
The Hitman franchise has been around in one way or another for the better part of a decade and this latest version is arguably the best looking. Adjustable to both DX11 and DX12 APIs, it has a ton of graphics options, some of which are only available under DX12.
For our benchmark we avoid using the in-game benchmark since it doesn’t represent actual in-game situations. Instead the second mission in Paris is used. Here we walk into the mansion, mingle with the crowds and eventually end up within the fashion show area.
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Another year and another Tomb Raider game. This time Lara’s journey continues through various beautifully rendered locales. Like Hitman, Rise of the Tomb Raider has both DX11 and DX12 API paths and incorporates a completely pointless built-in benchmark sequence.
The benchmark run we use is within the Soviet Installation level where we start in at about the midpoint, run through a warehouse with some burning its and then finish inside a fenced-in area during a snowstorm.[/I]
Star Wars Battlefront
Star Wars Battlefront may not be one of the most demanding games on the market but it is quite widely played. It also looks pretty good due to it being based upon Dice’s Frostbite engine and has been highly optimized.
The benchmark run in this game is pretty straightforward: we use the AT-ST single player level since it has predetermined events and it loads up on many in-game special effects.
The Division
The Division has some of the best visuals of any game available right now even though its graphics were supposedly downgraded right before launch. Unfortunately, actually benchmarking it is a challenge in and of itself. Due to the game’s dynamic day / night and weather cycle it is almost impossible to achieve a repeatable run within the game itself. With that taken into account we decided to use the in-game benchmark tool.
Witcher 3
Other than being one of 2015’s most highly regarded games, The Witcher 3 also happens to be one of the most visually stunning as well. This benchmark sequence has us riding through a town and running through the woods; two elements that will likely take up the vast majority of in-game time.
Ashes of the Singularity
Ashes of the Singularity is a real time strategy game on a grand scale, very much in the vein of Supreme Commander. While this game is most known for is Asynchronous workloads through the DX12 API, it also happens to be pretty fun to play. While Ashes has a built-in performance counter alongside its built-in benchmark utility, we found it to be highly unreliable and often posts a substantial run-to-run variation. With that in mind we still used the onboard benchmark since it eliminates the randomness that arises when actually playing the game but utilized the PresentMon utility to log performance
Hitman (2016)
The Hitman franchise has been around in one way or another for the better part of a decade and this latest version is arguably the best looking. Adjustable to both DX11 and DX12 APIs, it has a ton of graphics options, some of which are only available under DX12.
For our benchmark we avoid using the in-game benchmark since it doesn’t represent actual in-game situations. Instead the second mission in Paris is used. Here we walk into the mansion, mingle with the crowds and eventually end up within the fashion show area.
Quantum Break
Years from now people likely won’t be asking if a GPU can play Crysis, they’ll be asking if it was up to the task of playing Quantum Break with all settings maxed out. This game was launched as a horribly broken mess but it has evolved into an amazing looking tour de force for graphics fidelity. It also happens to be a performance killer.
Though finding an area within Quantum Break to benchmark is challenging, we finally settled upon the first level where you exit the elevator and find dozens of SWAT team members frozen in time. It combines indoor and outdoor scenery along with some of the best lighting effects we’ve ever seen.
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Another year and another Tomb Raider game. This time Lara’s journey continues through various beautifully rendered locales. Like Hitman, Rise of the Tomb Raider has both DX11 and DX12 API paths and incorporates a completely pointless built-in benchmark sequence.
The benchmark run we use is within the Soviet Installation level where we start in at about the midpoint, run through a warehouse with some burning its and then finish inside a fenced-in area during a snowstorm.[/I]
Ashes of the Singularity
Hitman (2016)
Quantum Break
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Thermal Imaging
This card does operate at some extremely high speeds so it likely puts out a good amount of heat too. However, it looks like the Twin Frozr VI heatsink is more than capable of reducing heat buildup in insuring all components run within spec.
Acoustical Testing
What you see below are the baseline idle dB(A) results attained for a relatively quiet open-case system (specs are in the Methodology section) sans GPU along with the attained results for each individual card in idle and load scenarios. The meter we use has been calibrated and is placed at seated ear-level exactly 12” away from the GPU’s fan. For the load scenarios, Rise of the Tomb Raider is used to generate a constant load on the GPU(s) over the course of 15 minutes.
We’ve already seen the Gaming Z is one of the coolest and more consistent running cards we’ve tested thus far. It is now also the quietest. Even in OC Mode it is noticeably quieter than the EVGA Superclocked and on another level when compared against the G1 Gaming. Switch things to Silent Mode and it is shockingly well behaved despite running at the same speeds as the Founders Edition. This is really incredible stuff.
System Power Consumption
For this test we hooked up our power supply to a UPM power meter that will log the power consumption of the whole system twice every second. In order to stress the GPU as much as possible we used 15 minutes of Rise of the Tomb Raider running on a loop while letting the card sit at a stable Windows desktop for 15 minutes to determine the peak idle power consumption.
Our Gaming Z sample exhibited some interesting results here which is likely why there was such a small frequency delta between the Gaming and OC clock speeds. Basically, this is one power hungry card relative to other GTX 1080’s we’ve tested. The difference is only a few watts but that could be all it takes to prematurely smash face first into NVIDIA’s Power Limit. On the other hand these numbers don’t do anything to sour our opinion that the GTX 1080 is a performance per watt leader.
Overclocking Results
Let’s set the stage here. Up until this point we’ve reviewed three GTX 1080’s: the Founders Edition, Gigabyte’s GTX 1080 G1 Gaming and EVGA’s Superclocked. Those achieved a core / memory frequency of 2167MHz / 11340MHz, 2050MHz / 10934MHz and 2113MHz / 11080MHz respectively. I can’t tell you how disappointing it has been to see some of the best custom cards fall short of a reference version when it comes to overclocking.
MSI’s GTX 1080 promises to be something different. Its onboard components are literally made for overclocking, the 10-phase PWM looks like something straight out of an enthusiast’s wet dream and the engineers were even so kind as to include an additional 6-pin input power connector for all the current this extreme overclocker is sure to pull. Unfortunately, as is becoming the sad norm with heavily upgraded and premium-priced NVIDIA cards, not one of the Gaming Z’s “overclocker friendly” features has any positive impact upon achievable clock speeds whatsoever.
If you were expecting something special, stop reading now since the rest of this section will consist of me spitting hate and bile at the screen over an otherwise awesome $750USD graphics card which has been castrated by NVIDIA’s ham-fisted attempt to better control their product segmentation.
I’ll be perfectly candid: a core clock speed 2075MHz and memory running at 11226MHz can’t be discounted as a particularly poor result. However, there’s obviously a lot left in this tank and it will go completely untapped due to an arbitrary “100%” voltage cap and a Power Limit that hasn’t changed one iota from the Founders Edition.
One has to wonder what’s left for board partners to distinguish their wares from the competition’s or, in MSI’s case, cards within their own lineup which have identical limits placed upon them? It also begs us to ask: in a world where massive PWM layouts, additional power input connectors and other features are all seen as marketable commodities, how does an end user cut through the crap and see that absolutely none of it matters anymore? Without a way to actually take advantage of all these cool add-ons, it all becomes window dressing with these massively endowed cards achieving overclocks that are consistently equal to or worse than a reference version.
As an enthusiast, I think this is unacceptable and it needs to stop right here and now. Board partners need to be given a free hand to design their cards around achievable overclocks rather than make empty marketing promises. For whatever reason, with NVIDIA’s partners there’s a serious holdup and we’re beginning to get the same indications from AMD’s side of the fence. A plateau in overclocking headroom is quickly becoming an endemic fact in the current graphics card market.
So you may be wondering at this point why I’ve gone off the deep end this time. It’s because I absolutely love this card. The Gaming Z is everything I could possibly want in a GPU and then some. This thing could have been something special. It has a huge amount of potential to be an overclocking beast and yet here we are, once again talking about overclocking mediocrity that leads to an awesome product being nearly indistinguishable from the likes of lower-priced cards. Am I frustrated, yes….yes I am but none of this can be laid directly at MSI’s feet.
Conclusion; Speak Quietly & Carry a Big Stick
MSI’s GTX 1080 Gaming Z is a study in contrasts and it goes directly against some tenets that are being set within today’s GPU market. These days vastly powerful graphics cards carry marketing slogans that scream their capabilities from the hills and features which do anything but boost actual performance. “For the Win!”, “Overclocked!”, “AMP Extreme!” and many other baseless but nonetheless entertaining catch phrases are meant to appeal to…someone. Meanwhile we’re seeing an increasingly hollow set of features that are supposed to enhance overclocking stability yet do absolutely nothing but add to the card’s BOM cost since the available voltage and input power overhead are governed by a set of nanny state-like limits. Let’s not even talk about the influx of LED lit logos that does more for subliminal marketing than anything else. From a press standpoint it is becoming increasingly hard to differentiate one card from the next.
So have we come to a time when “peak custom GPU” is a phrase that will become commonplace? With the Gaming Z, MSI is saying “Hell no!” Their flagship card may have a deceptively simple name but behind that simplicity lies what is currently one of the most capable and impressive GTX 1080’s around.
Many people who are currently looking at this card likely want two things: a plug and play GPU that can deliver amazing out-of-box framerates without any drama and the ability to overclock Basically, they want some intrinsic value attached to the titanic $100 premium they’ll pay over the likes of EVGA’s Superclocked and Gigabyte’s G1 Gaming. But does that happen? That really depends on how you look at things.
From a raw performance perspective the Gaming Z is a revelation when compared against the Founders Edition. Its high and very consistent frequencies deliver onscreen framerates that are noticeably improved. At just $50 more than NVIDIA’s “reference” design, this thing is a ridiculously good deal. However, the Gaming Z doesn’t live in its own little world and when placed head to head against the G1 Gaming and Superclocked its additional framerate overhead really doesn’t amount to much. As such, its true value quotient slides down a slippery slope quite quickly.
Where MSI delivers in spades is exactly HOW those frames are delivered. Despite the GTX 1080 Gaming Z being the fastest GTX 1080 we’ve come across it also happens to be the quietest and coolest. This amazing feat of black magic is accomplished through the use of a refined and obviously well executed Twin Frozr VI heatsink that puts offerings from EVGA and Gigabyte to absolute shame. And that’s in the card’s OC Mode too. Change things up to the slightly lower performing Gaming or Silent modes and the amount of noise (or lack thereof) put out is otherworldly. The GTX 1080 Gaming Z really does speak quietly and carry a big stick.
For those who still want a Christmas tree-like LED light show from their graphics card, MSI has you covered. Their Gaming App not only provides a stable launching pad for the Gaming Z’s intuitive tri-mode OC / Gaming / Silent performance customization but there are also a slew of LED control options. It is really well done but I do wish Afterburner was baked right into this platform so MSI could offer a holistic solution rather than two separate tools.
The most pressing question many of you will have about this card is how it overclocks and while that metric may be a moving target from sample to sample, there are certain expectations of a $750USD graphics card with extra power connectors, upgraded components and a 10-phase PWM. And let’s be clear here: you’re all hoping much of that premium over competitors and even alternatives in MSI’s own lineup is due to something other than the Gaming Z’s out of box clock speeds, right? Remember, this card has the exact same component selection, upgraded PCB and other features as the Gaming 8G and Gaming X, two cards that cost substantially less but admittedly don’t have the Z’s fancy lit backplate logo. Now while I haven’t tested either of those examples what I can say is our Gaming Z sample fell well short of expectations on the overclocking front.
On HWC there has been a pass given to many other GTX 1080 cards which are less expensive than the Founder’s Edition but couldn’t hit the same overclocks the reference board achieved. Despite somewhat limited clock speed overhead there’s a good amount of value on the table due to their sub-$699 price points. Not so with the MSI GTX 1080 Gaming Z; this thing commands a $50 premium over the FE and I’m struggling to understand why. All those very marketable (and expensive!) component upgrades that should support better overclocking are rendered absolutely meaningless when a card like this is saddled with nonsensically constrained Power and Voltage caps.
I’ve said it once and I will say it again: the blame for this situation seems to lie at the feet of NVIDIA. Their policy of foisting unto their board partners a “one size fits all” approach for certain critical overclocking metrics like power and voltage is starting to hurt the very companies they are supposed to help. As I mentioned earlier, because of this situation I’m struggling to understand why I should recommend the Gaming Z over the much less expensive but identically-equipped Gaming 8G and Gaming X.
There’s absolutely no denying the MSI GTX 1080 Gaming Z is a feat of engineering excellence. If you are looking for one of the quietest, coolest running high end graphics cards available and out-of-box performance supremacy then it should certainly be on your list. However, due to the limited amount of overclocking headroom it exhibits, many will have a hard time justifying the $100 premium over much less expensive MSI alternatives. The ultimate choice between the two directions will boil down to priorities above all else though.
