Aorus’ GeForce GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G graphics card reviewed

If you’ve followed Intel’s Kaby Lake launch, you’ll already be familiar with Gigabyte’s Aorus sub-brand. Much as Asus’ Republic of Gamers products are meant to put a more gamer-friendly face on products like motherboards, laptops, peripherals, and more, Aorus is where builders will find Gigabyte’s flashiest and highest-performance products. The Aorus eagle already appears on laptops, motherboards, and peripherals, and now Aorus is adding a graphics card to its lineup: the GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G.

Readers feeling déjà vu on first sight of the XE 8G (as we’ll call it from here on out) are justified, since most of the underpinnings of this card come from the already-superb Gigabyte GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming we reviewed last year. The card’s cooler and the fans that move air through it are unchanged from the Xtreme Gaming card. That’s a good thing, since Gigabyte’s trio of 100-mm overlapping fans is both quiet and effective. Like any respectable modern graphics card, the XE 8G stops its fans at idle for silent running.

At least from the fan side, the differences of the XE 8G are all skin-deep: an RGB-LED-backlit Aorus logo on the side of the card, a cooler shroud that’s a couple centimeters deeper than the XG card, a restyled quartet of light pipes above the central fan, and subtle gunmetal-and-orange accents. The taller cooler shroud means the XE 8G is a true triple-slot affair, but its 11.5″ (293 mm) length should be plenty ingestable by most modern cases. Builders looking to double up on these cards will want plenty of expansion slots at the ready, though.

Flip this beast over, and the two biggest changes to the XE 8G become obvious. Aorus’ engineers weren’t content just to cool the GPU from the die side. Instead, the XE 8G comes with what may be a first: a copper heatsink coupled to the back of the card’s PCB using a thermal pad. Aorus claims this copper plate can reduce GPU temperatures by 3° C.

Since this is the age of the RGB LED, Aorus also embedded a Technicolor-backlit version of its logo on the XE 8G’s backplate.

The XE 8G keeps its forebear’s twin HDMI outputs on its front edge for use with Gigabyte’s front-panel breakout box for VR headsets. Around back, it offers three DisplayPort 1.4-ready outputs, one HDMI 2.0b output, and one DVI-D output. Pair it with the $30 VR Extended Front Panel (not included with this card), and the XE 8G will end up with three DisplayPort 1.4-ready outputs and three HDMI outputs.

Stripping the XE 8G to its bones reveals the same PCB design as the Xtreme Gaming before it. Gigabyte kept that card’s glorious 12+2 power phase design, and it continues to be fed by two eight-pin PCIe auxiliary connectors. Each power plug has an LED above it that’ll light up in solid white if a PCIe power connector isn’t plugged in. They’ll also blink if the card detects a problem with the quality of the power source it’s hooked up to. In regular operation, these LEDs stay off.

To carry heat away from the GP104 GPU, the XE 8G’s heatsink uses the same large slab of copper from the Xtreme Gaming. This plate makes full contact with the graphics chip and its surrounding GDDR5X memory. This plate doesn’t extend to the power-delivery circuitry, but a group of thermal pads ensure those components are still transferring heat to the aluminum fins of the heatsink. Instead of the straight, uniformly tall fin design of many graphics card coolers, the Xtreme Edition’s fins have a zig-zaggy shape that’s claimed to increase the surface area and potential heat-transfer ability of the heatsink.

Remove a few more screws, and the XE 8G’s backplate lifts away to reveal more thermal pads for the power-delivery hardware on the back of the card and the RGB LED hardware for the backlit logo. The copper cooling plate behind the GPU remains attached by way of a beefy thermal pad, and a gentle prying motion is all that’s needed to lay the PCB fully bare.

Strangely enough, the thermal pad makes contact with everything but the most prominent circuitry behind the GPU, so far as we can tell. The plate itself is milled thinner in areas where it would otherwise seem to make contact with that circuitry. We’ll have to see whether this plate makes any difference to GPU temps during our thermal tests.

  GPU base

core clock

(MHz)

GPU boost

clock

(MHz)

Memory

clock

(MHz)

Memory

size

(MB)

GTX 1080 Founders Edition 1607 1733 2500 8192
Aorus GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G (gaming mode) 1759 1898 2551.5
Aorus GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G (OC mode) 1784 1936 2600
Gigabyte GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming (gaming mode) 1759 1898 2553
Gigabyte GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming (OC mode) 1784 1936 2600

Given how many similarities we’ve just observed between the GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G and the GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming, it’s no shock that the clock speeds of these cards are nearly identical, as well. We wouldn’t put too much stock in these numbers, though, since our experience with GPU Boost 3.0 on Nvidia’s Pascal chips has shown that the chip will more or less do what it wants with regard to actual clock speed, given enough cooling hardware strapped on top. We’ll observe GPU Boost 3.0’s actual clock speeds in a moment.

The Aorus GeForce GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G will sell for $679.99, and it’s already listed at Newegg as of this writing. Let’s see if its performance is a dead ringer for its Gigabyte sibling’s.

 

Our testing methods

As always, we did our best to deliver clean test numbers. Our test system was configured as follows:

Processor Intel Core i7-6950X
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-X99-Designare EX
Chipset Intel X99
Memory size 64GB (4 DIMMs)
Memory type G.Skill Trident Z DDR4-3200
Memory timings 16-18-18-38
Chipset drivers Intel Management Engine 11.0.0.1181
Audio Integrated X99/Realtek ALC1150

Realtek 6.0.1.7727 drivers

Hard drive Intel 750 Series 400GB NVMe SSD

2x Kingston 480GB SATA SSDs

Power supply Corsair RM850x
OS Windows 10 Pro

 

  Driver revision GPU base

core clock

(MHz)

GPU boost

clock

(MHz)

Memory

clock

(MHz)

Memory

size

(MB)

Aorus GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G GeForce 378.49 1759 1898 2551.5 8192
Gigabyte GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming 1759 1898 2553 8192
Nvidia GTX 1080 Founders Edition 1607 1733 2500 8192
Asus ROG Strix GTX 1080 OC Editon 1759 1898 2503 8192

We’re pitting the Aorus XE 8G against three other graphics cards today: the Gigabyte GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming, the Asus ROG Strix GTX 1080 OC Edition, and the GTX 1080 Founders Edition straight from Nvidia. All of the cards were run on an open bench with a low-speed 140-mm fan directed over their backplates. We took noise measurements 18″ from each graphics card. The temperature of our testing environment was maintained as close to 72° F (22.2° C) as we could keep it. For each of our benchmark runs, we performed the test three times and took the median of the results to avoid outliers.

Our testing methods are generally publicly available and reproducible. If you have any questions about our methods or results, be sure to leave a comment on this article or join us in the TR forums.

 

Out-of-the-box performance

If you’re looking for an in-depth idea of how the GTX 1080 performs in our “Inside the Second” testing, be sure to head over to our original GTX 1080 review. We won’t be repeating that in-depth testing here. Instead, we’ll be relying on the built-in benchmarks in Rise of the Tomb Raider and Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor. The average-FPS numbers these simple tests produce are more than sufficient for revealing any performance differences between these custom cards.

Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor

To put Shadow of Mordor to the test, we used the game’s Ultra preset at a variety of resolutions. Click on the buttons beneath the plot to see how our test stable fared at each one.


Well, no great surprises in this older (but still demanding) title. The Aorus card comes out on top, but the differences between these stock-clocked GTX 1080s are only a few frames per second.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Rise of the Tomb Raider is a recent, quite demanding title from our current graphics testing suite. We ran the game’s built-in benchmark on our test suite of cards with the following settings:


Rise of the Tomb Raider doesn’t do much to set our test suite apart, either. Let’s see if some non-gaming performance measures can put some light between them.

Noise levels

Now that we’ve seen how each of the GTX 1080s in the TR labs performs, let’s take a look at how loud they get while doing it. Since all of the cards we have on hand (even the Founders Edition) are semi-passive, we’re only reporting load numbers. The noise floor in my testing area is about 31 dBA.

The GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming was already one of the quietest graphics cards we’ve ever tested in the TR labs, but the Aorus Xtreme Edition turns in an even better result. One of the reasons for that roughly two-dBA decrease is that the Xtreme Gaming card has a prominent coil whine, while the Aorus only has a mild hint of high-frequency power-switching hardware doing its thing. That buzz was my only complaint about the GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming’s noise signature, and it’s nice that the company was able to dampen it this time around. As expected, the Asus card is slightly louder than both the Gigabyte and the Aorus, and the Founders Edition card is the loudest of them all.

Thanks to its reduced coil whine, the XE 8G only emits a hint of fan noise even on a test bench. We may have gotten an especially good sample in this regard, but it’s still quite impressive to get as much gaming power as the XE 8G offers with as little noise as it produces. The Xtreme Gaming card doesn’t exhibit much fan noise, either, but its coil whine mars an otherwise fine performance. The Asus Strix cooler produces a buffety, moving-air noise character, while the GTX 1080 FE emits a noticeable hiss. If you want quiet, the Aorus card is the way to go in this group.

Power consumption


At idle, our X99 platform is responsible for the vast majority of the power draw we measured, and there are only small differences between the custom graphics cards we have on hand. Fire up the Unigine Heaven benchmark, however, and clear differences emerge between the custom cards we have on hand. The Founders Edition card draws the least power of our stable, but the difference between it and the power-hungry Xtreme Gaming card is still just over 30W. Given the slightly greater performance the custom cards offer, we think that’s a fair enough trade.

GPU temps and observed clock speeds

As I noted in the intro of this review, Nvidia’s GPU Boost 3.0 feature makes the back-of-the-box clock speeds on these cards somewhat misleading. The latest gen of Nvidia’s dynamic-voltage-and-frequency-scaling tech will happily push clocks nearly to the limits of what can be achieved with a given chip and cooler, even approaching the limits of what’s possible through manual overclocking.

The GPU Boost 3.0 algorithm tends to push clocks to an extreme peak speed before settling on a lower frequency after sustained use, so we ran the Unigine Heaven benchmark for 10 minutes before observing clock speeds and taking temperature measurements.

Since the Aorus and the Gigabyte cards share essentially the same cooler, it’s no surprise that they settled on the same clock speed under sustained load: a solid 1987 MHz. The Asus Strix settled at 1974 MHz. Thanks to its 82° C thermal limit, the Founders Edition card cycled between an 1885 MHz low and a 1923 MHz high, with occasional short bursts to 1949 MHz. All of these speeds are far in excess of their manufacturers’ specifications, but the custom cards have an easier time of sustaining their boost speeds compared to the Founders Edition.

Surprisingly, though, the Aorus card runs a few degrees hotter than its Gigabyte Xtreme Gaming counterpart. The Gigabyte card is the unquestioned leader of the pack, while the Aorus and the Asus cards are trading blows. Given Aorus’ claims about the spiffy copper backplate on the Xtreme Edition 8G, we were expecting better cooling performance than the card delivered here. The XE 8G’s clock speeds don’t seem to suffer for the extra heat, though.

Now that we’ve seen how each of these cards performs at stock settings, let’s see how much performance remains to be tapped from each one through manual overclocking.

 

Overclocked performance

Even though GPU Boost 3.0 is pretty good at wringing most of the potential clock speed headroom out of a given Pascal chip, we can still usually find a little extra speed through manual tweaking. To get there, we used the proprietary utilities provided by Gigabyte for the GTX 1080 XG and Aorus for the GTX 1080 XE 8G. To overclock the Founders Edition card, we used MSI’s tried-and-true Afterburner utility. The Asus Strix card is sitting this section of the review out, thanks to our sample’s nonexistent overclocking headroom.

  GPU

base

clock

(MHz)

GPU

boost

clock

(MHz)

Memory

speed

(MT/s)

Heaven

GPU

voltage

Heaven

GPU

clock

(MHz)

Nvidia GTX 1080 Founders Edition 1152 1733 10000 1.031 ~1923
Gigabyte GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming 1759 1898 10206 1.050 1987
GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming (OC Mode) 1784 1936 10400 1.050 2012
Aorus GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G 1759 1898 10206 1.043 1987
GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G (OC Mode) 1784 1936 10400 1.043 2012

The easiest way to overclock either of the Gigabyte cards in our test suite is to click on the built-in OC mode profile in each card’s utility software. Both the Xtreme Gaming card and the Aorus Xtreme Edition 8G dutifully boosted up to 2,012 MHz in this mode, a nice increase over the claimed 1,936 MHz from both cards’ spec sheets. Easy, but not exciting.

To really get the clocks ticking, I maxed the power and temperature limits in the Aorus Graphics Engine and the power, temperature, and voltage limits in the Gigabyte Xtreme Gaming Engine. Strangely, the Aorus card doesn’t offer voltage tweaking—a definite plus for the GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming. With those safeties loosened as much as possible, I got to pushing up some sliders. I double-checked my work with the Heaven benchmark and some play time in Doom.

Here are the stable settings we determined for each card. The “Boost clock with offset” figure in the table below isn’t an observed value. Instead, that figure represents the boost clock each tuning utility displays (if it’s available).

  GPU

clock

offset

(MHz)

Boost clock

with offset

Memory

speed

(MT/s)

Heaven

GPU

voltage

Heaven

GPU

clock

(MHz)

Heaven

GPU

temp. (°C)

Nvidia GTX 1080 Founders Edition +212 N/A 10302 1.031 2012 80
Gigabyte GTX 1080

Xtreme Gaming (manual OC)

+50 1948 10868 1.094 2063 68
Aorus GTX 1080

Xtreme Edition 8G (manual OC)

+177 2075 10860 1.043 2075 70

Despite its lack of voltage adjustments, the Aorus card sustained a 2,075-MHz boost speed with our chosen settings, a small increase over the Xtreme Gaming’s voltage-assisted 2,063 MHz. Still, it’s a record for a GP104 GPU in the TR labs. The GDDR5X chips on the Aorus card had about as much headroom as those on the Xtreme Gaming card did, as well. I was able to reach a 10,860 MT/s effective memory clock, compared to 10,868 MT/s on the Xtreme Gaming.

To put those numbers into perspective, our manual tweaking efforts got us another 3.13% of clock speed and 4.4% of memory speed over the card’s baked-in OC mode profile. Once again, GPU Boost 3.0 got us most of the way there, but every little bit helps. Not every Aorus GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition will reach these numbers, thanks to the silicon lottery. Still, we achieved impressive absolute clock and memory speeds, and Aorus’ utility software made the process quick and easy. That’s really all we can ask for when we overclock a graphics card.

For reference, we were able to push the Founders Edition GTX 1080 to a 2,012-MHz sustained boost clock and a 10,302-MHz memory clock using MSI’s Afterburner, with a minor increase in temperatures and fan noise. We observed 85° C load temps and a 46.5 dBA noise level from that card under those settings. While the FE’s clocks aren’t too far off what we achieved with the Aorus card, Gigabyte’s custom cooler is a lot nicer to live with when we push the GP104 silicon to its limits. The Aorus GTX 1080 only reaches 71° C under our overclocked load, and it only produces 39.2 dBA.


If you were hoping for big differences in performance between the two overclocked Gigabyte cards, we’re sorry to let you down. This duo reached nearly the same settings after our overclocking exercises, and their performance in Rise of the Tomb Raider is practically identical. The GTX 1080 Founders Edition didn’t reach the same heights, so it trails the other cards a bit. No surprises here.

Of course, overclocking causes all of our cards to consume more power. The Founders Edition and Aorus cards only need modestly more power to do their thing, since we didn’t push up the voltages beyond the baked-in scaling curves on each card. The GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming can push more voltage than any other card on the bench, and therefore it consumes the most power to achieve its boost clocks.

 

The Aorus Graphics Engine

Much like the Xtreme Gaming Engine that ships with the Gigabyte GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming, the Aorus GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition gets its own companion utility for tweaking and bedazzling called the Aorus Graphics Engine.

Upon launch, the AGE presents a clean and simple interface with the basic clock speed profiles one can choose for the card: OC mode, gaming mode, silent mode, and any saved profiles under user mode. Shortcuts for an Afterburner-like monitoring mode, the semi-passive and active fan modes, and the card’s LED lighting options can all be found in the lower-right-hand corner of the interface.

Clicking into the advanced mode interface using the icon in the bottom-right-hand corner reveals another clean and simple screen for adjusting core and memory speeds, plus fan speed, the power target, and the temperature target. Exacting tweakers can open up a custom voltage-and-frequency-scaling curve for more precise tuning here, as well.

The LED icon leads to the now-standard RGB LED configuration interface. Gigabyte offers three levels of tweakability here: several preset colors for quick-and-dirty switching, a slider for more granular tuning, and RGB entry fields for even more precise color-picking. The Aorus GTX 1080 supports the standard range of animations we’ve come to expect from RGB LED-equipped hardware, like cycling, breathing, and flashing. It can also change the color of its LEDs in response to changes in certain operating parameters, like fan speed, GPU temperature, and GPU utilization. Folks with rainbows on the brain shouldn’t find any reason for displeasure with the Aorus GTX 1080 XE.

 

Conclusions

The Aorus name couldn’t have made a splashier entrance into the world of graphics cards than to ride in on a GTX 1080, and the Xtreme Edition 8G card uses the DNA of a well-proven steed to get there. What’s more, Gigabyte promised even better cooling performance than its previous effort thanks to the Aorus card’s copper-covered backside—an impressive claim, given the GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming’s excellent cooler.

Despite those claims, we actually observed higher GPU temperatures from our card than we did with its GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming stablemate. In fact, the XE 8G’s load temps were on par with those of the more compact Asus ROG Strix GTX 1080. Those higher temps didn’t seem to impact the XE 8G’s ability to hit sky-high boost clocks, but hey—we were promised lower temperatures, and we didn’t get ’em. Given that the extra heat has no impact on the card’s delivered performance, we’re neutral about the value of the extra copper. At least it looks cool.

Aside from the copper slab, Aorus’ changes to make Gigabyte’s Xtreme Gaming card its own are mostly positive ones. I enjoy the Aorus card’s prominent RGB LED eagle logo on its backplate, and the broader light pipes on the cooler’s X-brace look sharper than the Xtreme Gaming’s more spindly tubes. Aorus’ gunmetal-and-orange accents sit well with me, too. This is a graphics card that will stand out from any angle.

Most importantly, the Xtreme Edition 8G’s Aorus bodywork doesn’t sully the things I enjoyed most about its Gigabyte predecessor. Since it uses the same cooler as its stablemate, the Aorus GTX 1080 is delightfully quiet under full load, and its performance is beyond reproach. Gigabyte even found a way to kill most of the coil whine that was my only point of concern with the GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming in its Aorus refresh. As a victory lap, the Aorus hit the highest overclocked speed we’ve seen so far from a GTX 1080, although Pascal’s GPU Boost 3.0 and Aorus’ OC mode profile got us most of the way there without touching a single slider.

Aorus GeForce GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G

February 2017

All told, Gigabyte couldn’t have picked a better graphics card to kick off the Aorus brand’s expansion. The Xtreme Edition 8G isn’t an automatic pick over its Gigabyte progenitor, though. The GTX 1080 Xtreme Gaming Premium Pack sells for $679.99, and it includes an HB SLI bridge and Gigabyte’s handy VR front panel, a $30 extra for the Aorus GTX 1080. The Aorus card sells for the same $679.99, and it includes fewer extras, more copper and more RGB LEDs.

Really, though, picking between these two graphics cards is like being asked which color of Lamborghini you’d like to drive on a given day. The Aorus GTX 1080 Xtreme Edition 8G is an exquisite graphics card, and it’s an easy pick for another TR Editor’s Choice award.

Comments closed
    • BIF
    • 3 years ago

    Has anybody done any folding with this card?

    I still want to see F@H info added to hardware reviews, hint hint.

    • Chrispy_
    • 3 years ago

    Thanks for the thorough writeup Jeff – Impressively capable hardware with an eye-watering price tag.

    I think if I were spending that much cash on a GPU I would want it to not look ridiculous; Something about the design and the Aorus logo just makes me cringe on so many levels. The mascot is plastered all over this thing, and the interface too. But what is it?

    [quote=”AORUS Gaming”<] To answer the question - the name AORUS stems from the Egyptian patron god Horus and was known for being a symbol of kingship in ancient Egypt. We picked Horus because we strive to be on top. We did replace the "H" with "A" to represent our philosophy of striving for grade A product and collectively as a company being the striving to better ourselves and be the "A-Team". As far as the logo it is a Falcon head just like Horus had, and the arm is supposed to symbolize performance.[/quote<] I think I died a little inside reading that. Now I need to go and shower for three straight hours to wash away the cheezy, chintzy, corny afterthought!

      • K-L-Waster
      • 3 years ago

      On the “it could be worse” side, if you’re using a grown-up person’s case the only time anyone will actually see this is on the rare occasions you need to work on the hardware. The rest of the time the case will be closed up and no one will see it.

      Of course, if for some inexplicable reason you have a case with a clear side panel… scratch that, only people who like bling bother with those 🙂

      • Mr Bill
      • 3 years ago

      AORUS, a Horus of a different color.

    • Shobai
    • 3 years ago

    Jeff, could you comment on fan speeds at all? Given the similarity between the Gigabyte cards, what explains the differences seen in temps, in noise at load, etc? It just seems that there is a missing piece to the puzzle.

      • VincentHanna
      • 3 years ago

      Fan speeds should be the same for testing purposes when possible. If they aren’t, imo, that’s something to add to the checklist when doing a review.

        • Jeff Kampman
        • 3 years ago

        Fan profiles are always left on their manufacturer-default settings for custom card reviews. Given the Cambrian variety of fans and heatsinks out there, trying to normalize them somehow would be maddening.

          • chuckula
          • 3 years ago

          +3 for use of Cambrian.

      • Jeff Kampman
      • 3 years ago

      The Gigabyte Xtreme Gaming card has substantial (and I mean substantial) coil whine that this Aorus card doesn’t. That would go most of the way toward explaining the 2-dBA or so drop in noise levels.

      The temperature differences are harder to pin down. I was initially inclined to say that the copper plate and thermal pad assembly on the back of the card was retaining heat instead of channeling it away, but the folks at TechPowerUp found a way to mount the heatsink without the plate and it made no difference to temperatures.

      Best I can figure, Gigabyte changed the temperature target on this Aorus card a bit versus its earlier effort. I applied some fancy Cooler Master TIM I have laying around when I reassembled the thing and it actually started boosting a clock bin higher (~2000 MHz vs 1987) at the same 70° C load temp, which is not what I’d expect from past experience repasting Pascal cards.

        • Shobai
        • 3 years ago

        Thanks for the replies, Jeff.

        In my limited experience, a move to potted chokes [or better potting] would knock most of the coil whine issue on the head – hopefully Gigabyte have modified the BOM for the current crop of XG cards when they did for the XE card.

        Apart from that, given that a card with an otherwise physically identical cooling configuration runs warmer than the XG [despite a reduced core voltage, and disregarding the piece that TPU found to make no difference despite Gigabyte’s claim] the one remaining variable would appear to be fan speed – at any rate, this is the variable you’d modify to adjust a temperature target. We would assume a reduced fan speed would also have some effect on noise, albeit minor in this case, of course.

        I agree with your reply to Vincent above, that it makes the most sense to review the card out of the box. It’d be great if you could make a point of reading the reported fan speed at load to add to your load temp graphs or blurbs in future. Although it’s probably academic at this point, given the Xtreme similarity between the two cards in question in this review I remain interested to know how they did what they’ve done.

        Thanks again for the review!

    • ultima_trev
    • 3 years ago

    This thing’s “OC” BIOS out of the box is a bit faster than the maximum stable OC I can achieve on my MSI GamingX 1080.

    I’m also digging those LED crossbars over the fans.

    I’m tempted to upgrade albeit I’m not sure it’s worth it with the 1080 Ti just over the horizon.

      • VincentHanna
      • 3 years ago

      You are talking about upgrading from a 1080 to a different 1080.

      If 1080 was the last GPU that was going to ever be made before the machines rose up against us, that would still not be “worth.”

      Put your money in a 401k or something.

    • JosiahBradley
    • 3 years ago

    I think the specs on the overclocking page for the FE 1080 are maybe a 980Ti instead it says like 1100Mhz clock speed.

      • Jeff Kampman
      • 3 years ago

      Rats, I fixed it.

    • dodozoid
    • 3 years ago

    Hey Jeff, are you realy sure this halo product with halo-tax is realy worth Editors Choice Award? Wasson’t Editors Choice Award reserved for some unexpected victors or exquisite value? This is just an expensive part that performs accordingly.

    [i<]Edit: As a reply to significant amout of downvotes: I didn't mean to sound rude or disrespectfull in any way and I fully respect Editor's sovereign right to award Editor's Choice badge. I still had this definition [/i<] [quote<] If we were buying a PC for ourselves right now, we'd splurge on nicer components than those found in the Sweet Spot and Econobox. However, we still wouldn't want to waste hard-earned cash on needlessly expensive parts. [/quote<] [url<]https://techreport.com/review/25250/tr-back-to-school-2013-system-guide/6[/url<] [i<]of Editor's Choice stuck in my mind. [/i<]

      • drfish
      • 3 years ago

      It’s pretty traditional to give Editor’s choice to best in class performance. Take this 980 Ti round up as an [url=https://techreport.com/review/28685/geforce-gtx-980-ti-cards-compared/7<]example[/url<].

        • dodozoid
        • 3 years ago

        Ok then, my apologies. I understood the meaning of the award differently – as something reasonable what the editor would in fact buy for himself with his hard earned cash (edit: which might or might not be the case as it is a matter of taste).

        • derFunkenstein
        • 3 years ago

        Also makes sense that the editor gets to choose what gets an Editor’s Choice. Otherwise it’s “that other guy’s choice” and that’s a weird award.

          • chuckula
          • 3 years ago

          Do I detect a new TR award?

            • the
            • 3 years ago

            We already have the “Krogoth is not impressed” award to the most mundane and overhyped.

            • dodozoid
            • 3 years ago

            Does it have an oficial logo?

            • NovusBogus
            • 3 years ago

            It needs one. I might have to get artistic later this week.

            • drfish
            • 3 years ago

            I’d start with [url=http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/mckayla-is-not-impressed<]this[/url<]. 😀

            • VincentHanna
            • 3 years ago

            I agree. [url=http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/372/923/b53.png<]this [/url<] even looks like an award. Although, there is a small part of me who would feel bad for mcaylah if you did this.

    • Meadows
    • 3 years ago

    I still don’t get that logo in the frontpage image.

    It looks like an eagle with an arm pointing at itself. “You looking at me?”

      • RAGEPRO
      • 3 years ago

      Affectionately termed Biceps Bird.

      • Firestarter
      • 3 years ago

      u wont sum?

        • morphine
        • 3 years ago

        u wot m8?

      • drfish
      • 3 years ago

      [url=https://www.mariowiki.com/Mask_Gate<]This[/url<] is what it reminds me of the most. That never made any sense either though!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This