OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£570VRAM:3 GBMemory bus width:768 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):365 W

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 26 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590
5.3/10

Overall score

Score
5.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

40%

4.6

Technical score

25%

4.6

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

4.6

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 94% of graphics cards
6.0

Value for money

Value for money
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components

70%

5.3

Overall score

30%

7.5

Price

â–¼Worse than 98%
4.6

Technical score

Technical score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

44%

3.9

Performance

24%

3.6

Memory

12%

5.7

Power

11%

5.7

Features

5%

8.7

Design

4%

6.2

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 89%
4.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 92% of models

4.6

Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.1

Average grade

20%

9.2

Popularity

Grades by review (26)
16 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 10 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 92%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-590
nvidia-geforce-gtx-590
Where to buy
    N/A~ £570
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590

Based on 15 · 12

Reviewers like the quiet running and dual-GPU design, are split on gaming performance, and nearly all criticize the heavy power draw.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590

Based on 115 owners sharing their experience in online comments

51%positive12%mixed37%negative

Owners praise its strong gaming speed, though overheating, limited VRAM, and failures temper the appeal.

What owners dislike

  • Owners report the card failing or dying suddenly, sometimes at stock settings, sometimes after overvolting or heavy use.14
  • Owners say the card runs very hot under gaming loads, reaching 80–95°C, and needs extra fan speed or underclocking to stay stable.10
  • Owners find frame rates weak in newer games, often falling to around 30 fps at higher settings, and say performance is poor on Linux too.9
  • Owners say SLI stutters, causes microstutter, and often fails to scale, leaving one card doing most of the work.7
  • Owners say the 1.5 GB of usable VRAM runs out quickly in modern games, causing blurry textures at 1440p and higher.6
  • Owners report driver errors such as Code 43 on Windows 10, and crashes like D3D init errors, making the card hard to set up.5
  • Owners say the system freezes, locks up, or shuts down during gaming, needing a restart to recover.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590

Technical score
Technical score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components:

44%

3.9

Performance

24%

3.6

Memory

12%

5.7

Power

11%

5.7

Features

5%

8.7

Design

4%

6.2

Connectivity

4.6
Reviews score
4.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 98% of models
Score components:

70%

5.3

Overall score

30%

7.5

Price

6.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
684 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 684 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 99.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
3,341 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 3,341 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 96% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
1,154 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 1,154 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 96.7% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
2.49 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 2.49 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 92.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
3 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 3 GB of VRAM, which is less than 93.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
768 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 768 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 99.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
327.7 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 327.7 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 65.7% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
3,416 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 3,416 MHz, which is slower than that of 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2
This graphics card supports PCIe 2, which is older than on 98.4% of graphics cards and equal to 1.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
N/A
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
2560x1600
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 2560x1600, which is lower than that of 97.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal to 8.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.1
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.1, which is older than on 99.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
10.8 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 10.8 Gbps, which is slower than on 63.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
365 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 365 W, which is higher than that of 93.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
365 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 365 W under peak load, which is higher than 90.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
700 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 700 W PSU, which is higher than that of 60.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
365 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 365 W, which is higher than that of 87.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
365 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
279x 111x 40 mm
Length
279 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 279 mm long, which is shorter than 53.7% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Height
111 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111 mm tall, which is shorter than 83.6% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,034 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,034 g, which is heavier than 51.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 576 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (768 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    768 bit vs 192 bit
  • 32 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (96 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    96 vs 64
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 3 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    3 vs 0
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:8 vs 1:64).
    1:8 vs 1:64
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 32 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (96 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    96 vs 64
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:8 vs 1:64).
    1:8 vs 1:64
  • 576 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (768 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    768 bit vs 192 bit
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 3 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    3 vs 0
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 9 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (3 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    3 GB vs 12 GB
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (40 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    40 nm vs 5 nm
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 36.1% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 92% of models

    4.6

    Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.1

    Average grade

    20%

    9.2

    Popularity

    Grades by review (26)
    16 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 10 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.6 vs 7.2
  • 68.4% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (607 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    607 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 89.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (38.9 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    38.91 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 36.1% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 92% of models

    4.6

    Mark 7.5 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.1

    Average grade

    20%

    9.2

    Popularity

    Grades by review (26)
    16 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 7 estimated from the review. 10 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.6 vs 7.2
  • 41.0% lower sentiment score
    4.6 vs 7.8
  • 24% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.98 vs 7.4).
    5.98 vs 7.41
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 68.4% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (607 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    607 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 89.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (38.9 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    38.91 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 75.9% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (38.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    38.91 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 89% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (2.5 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    2.49 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 56 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (128 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    128 vs 184
  • 8 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    32 vs 40
  • 12 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2011 vs 2023).
    March 2011
    2011 vs 2023
  • 85.2% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (3,341 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    3,341 points vs 22,638 points
  • 95.4% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (684 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    684 points vs 14,779 points
  • 90.4% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (1,154 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    1,154 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 66.7% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.16 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 99.2% lower INT8 performance
    This graphics card has a lower INT8 performance than the average graphics card (1.9 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
    1.86 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
  • 3,328 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,024 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,024 vs 4,352
  • 9 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (3 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    3 GB vs 12 GB
  • 82% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (3,416 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    3,416 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 51.2% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (854 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    854 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 95.8% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (1 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    1 MB vs 24 MB
  • 26.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (327.7 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    327.7 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    64 KB vs 128 KB
  • 8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (40 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    40 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (2 vs 4).
    2 vs 4
  • No FSR support
    This graphics card does not support FSR, the average graphics card does.
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (1.1 vs 3).
    1.1 vs 3
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (5.1 vs 6.8).
    5.1 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 76.9% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (520 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    520 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 73.8% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (6,000 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    6,000 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1a).
    1.4a vs 2.1a
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.1 vs 1.4a).
    1.1 vs 1.4a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (2560x1600 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    2560x1600 vs 7680x4320
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 69.8% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (365 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    365 W vs 215 W
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 65.9% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (365 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    365 W vs 220 W
  • 17 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (84 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    84 °C vs 67 °C
  • 12.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (48 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    48 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 36 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (36 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    36 dB vs 0 dB
  • 3.5x higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (42 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    42 W vs 12 W
  • 65.9% higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (365 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    365 W vs 220 W
  • 7.7% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (700 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    700 W vs 650 W
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

5.0
DanielC
≈ estimated
17/08/2025
Hands-on benchmark · quad-card test with fan noise checks
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is fun for retro SLI games, but a newer card is the better buy.
7.0
DanielC
≈ estimated
04/08/2025
Hands-on review · fan noise, benchmarks and retro gaming
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 suits retro offline gaming, but it is loud and inefficient, so a more efficient card is the better choice.
6.0
zWORMz Gaming
≈ estimated
06/07/2024
Hands-on benchmark · GTA V at several resolutions
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 runs strongly at 1080p and is playable at higher resolutions, but it stutters at the highest setting.
5.0
TechLabUK
≈ estimated
11/01/2023
Hands-on review · game tests in old and new titles
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is not the best choice for modern games in 2023; it is only worth buying for older SLI titles or collectors.
4.0
Drop it!🎲
≈ estimated
12/02/2021
Hands-on review · single-GPU and dual-GPU game tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is hard to recommend in 2020, since a modern single card is the better choice.
4.0
RandomGaminginHD
≈ estimated
07/03/2020
Retro test · multi-GPU and single-GPU game performance
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is obsolete today and not recommended, except as a cheap card to tinker with.
9.0
OC3D TV
≈ estimated
25/03/2011
Hands-on review · noise, temperature and performance tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is a quiet, powerful dual-GPU card with good temperatures, though it is slightly slower than the Radeon HD 6990.
9.0
HiTechLegion
≈ estimated
24/03/2011
Hands-on review · high-resolution benchmark tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 delivers very playable frame rates at high settings, well ahead of a single GTX 580.
9.0
Motherboards.org
≈ estimated
24/03/2011
Hands-on review · performance and heat tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is a very fast dual-GPU card and an editor's choice, though it runs slightly hot under load.
8.0
Linus Tech Tips
≈ estimated
23/03/2011
Hands-on review · 3D Vision performance tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is very enjoyable for 3D Vision gaming at 1080p, though some games have frame-rate limits.
6.0
Linus Tech Tips
≈ estimated
24/03/2011
Head-to-head comparison · benchmarks at 2560x1600
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 trades blows with its Radeon rival, so the better pick depends on the games you play.
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
tomshardware.com
≈ estimated
24/03/2011
Lab test · Dual-GPU card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 is very quiet for a dual-GPU card, but it draws more power than any card tested and its lower clocks hold back speed.
8.0
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
24/03/2011
Early look · ASUS card
Verdict
The ASUS GeForce GTX 590 is Nvidia's reference design with ASUS packaging and overclocking software, but this is only an early look with no test results yet.
6.0
expertreviews.co.uk
✓ explicit
24/03/2011
Benchmark review · Multi-monitor gaming
Verdict
The Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 is quiet and fast on one screen, but for three-monitor gaming the Radeon HD 6990 is stronger.
7.0
tomshardware.com
≈ estimated
24/03/2011
Benchmark review · Quad-GPU setups
Verdict
The Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 is quiet enough to live with, but it isn't clearly faster than the Radeon HD 6990, so two single cards are a sounder choice.
7.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
24/03/2011
Hands-on test · First DirectX 11 card
Verdict
The Zotac GeForce GTX 590 is very fast, matching the Radeon HD 6990, which makes it more of an engineering showpiece than a must-buy.
8.1
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
24/03/2011
Benchmark test · Dual-chip card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 puts two GTX 580 chips on one board at lower clock speeds, but needs a 700W power supply and two 8-pin plugs.
6.0
chip.de
≈ estimated
31/03/2011
Lab test · Dual-GPU card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 is very fast and fairly quiet, but it draws a lot of power and will soon be outpaced by newer cards.
5.0
pcgameshardware.de
≈ estimated
24/03/2011
Lab test · Dual-GPU card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 is quiet for its power and overclocks well, but it falls further behind the Radeon HD 6990 as resolution and anti-aliasing rise.
7.0
clubic.com
≈ estimated
24/03/2011
Game benchmarks · Dual-chip card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 is quiet and solid for motherboards without SLI or for three-screen 3D Vision Surround, but it trails the Radeon HD 6990 in many games.
7.8
01net.com
✓ explicit
24/03/2011
Hands-on test · Zotac dual-GPU
Verdict
The Zotac GeForce GTX 590 is quiet and fast, aimed at 3D Vision Surround users and performance-minded buyers, though it draws a lot of power.
6.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
25/05/2011
Benchmark review · Nvidia dual-GPU
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 is the fastest 500-series card and quieter than expected, but it draws a lot of power and heats up the case.
7.0
xataka.com
≈ estimated
24/03/2011
Hands-on test · Overclocking card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 is a very quiet, cool card built mainly for overclocking, but it falls short of the Radeon 6990 on raw speed.
9.0
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
24/03/2011
Full review · Dual-GPU card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 is a powerful, fairly quiet dual-chip card, but it needs a 700W power supply and vents most of its heat into the case.
9.0
madboxpc.com
≈ estimated
17/06/2011
Hands-on review · Zotac edition
Verdict
The Zotac GeForce GTX 590 is a very fast dual-GPU card with a high-quality DVI-to-HDMI cable in the box, best suited to top-end gamers.
10
nexthardware.com
✓ explicit
24/03/2011
Design review · Reference card
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 has a clean reference design and a quiet center fan, but it has less memory than the Radeon HD 6990 and vents hot air into the case.
8.0
tweakers.net
✓ explicit
24/03/2011
Benchmark test · Dual-GPU comparison
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 590 is much quieter under load than the HD 6990 and nearly as fast, but AMD's card wins most benchmarks and costs less.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590

  • Excellent overall performance for high-end gaming and multi-monitor setups
  • Vastly quieter cooling system compared to contemporary dual-GPU competitors like the Radeon HD 6990
  • More compact physical footprint than rival cards, allowing it to fit into a wider variety of cases
  • Features multiple display outputs (three DVI and one mini DisplayPort) for easier multi-monitor connectivity
  • Strong performance in specific titles like Lost Planet 2 and H.A.W.X. 2

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590

  • High power consumption under load, earning it a reputation as an 'energy hog'
  • Significant thermal management issues, with some user and reviewer reports of cards failing or 'blowing up' during overclocking or high-voltage testing
  • Often surpassed in pure performance by the Radeon HD 6990, especially in certain DirectX 11 titles
  • Expensive launch price ($699) made it hard to justify over cheaper, faster dual-card (SLI/CrossFire) configurations
  • Heavy power requirements needing at least a 700W PSU and two eight-pin adapters

Verdict

The Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 is a flagship dual-GPU graphics card released in 2011, featuring two GF110 Fermi chips on a single PCB. Key specifications include 1024 CUDA cores (512 per GPU), 3GB of GDDR5 memory across dual 384-bit interfaces, and a core clock speed of 607 MHz. Main pros include its exceptional enthusiast-level performance for multi-monitor setups via its three DVI and one mini-DisplayPort outputs, and a dual vapor chamber cooling system designed for quieter operation compared to competitors. However, the card has significant cons, including a massive 365W TDP that requires a minimum 700W power supply and two 8-pin connectors, limited overclocking headroom due to strict power limits, and a lack of modern driver support as it is now discontinued.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found