I noticed this on some of their other cards from the 2000 series. And what in the hell were they thinking? Textured “e” logos all over the fan blades.
Maybe i’m thinking it would make more of an impact on fan performance than it actually would? Or is it actually just dumb? I can’t help but feel bothered by it. Someone decided to make the fan look “cooler” by adding their “e” logo on it all over the fan blades. Cumulatively wouldn’t that disrupt the ability of the fans to move air. Even if by a little?
Why are companies focusing on trying to make hardware look like a Hasbro toy? The fan design in question:
It wouldn’t negatively affect performance beyond statistical error. On high performance racing engines where they port and flow test things, if the port job is too smooth it will actually flow less. Typical PC fans have much lower airflow and it probably isn’t worthwhile to make textured surfaces to increase airflow and might increase noise. The side that pushes air is opposite the logos.
It is just plain dumb, but look at everything over the past 15 years that has come out for people building their own PC’s. We went from beige boxes with nothing to look at to windows in nearly every case and manufacturers trying to get their branding noticed. If you use a standard ATX case then you would never see the blades anyway. Case modding used to be a very unique art form and now it’s much more expensive yet essentially homogenized.
A less even surface can be more efficient than a perfectly smooth one. There’s a reason why golf balls have small dimples in them, it improves aerodynamics and allows the ball to fly further.
EVGA may have noticed during their testing that this fan design performed better with all these logos on them than they did without. That would explain why there’s so many of them rather than a couple per blade.
As pointed out above, it can be better. Like when Moctua demoed their Muppet fur fans that were flocked and fuzzy, it helped air flow and make them quieter.
Having very high flow near a flat surface will cause turbulance. As it has to do with fluids (air = fluid), increasing with the square of velocity.
Drag coefficent formula:
I don’t know why they’re doing this but I can state that empirically the Turing cards are running cooler than Pascal at the same Power Draw. Granted there are process improvements moving to 12nm but chip manufacturers tend to use those improvements to clock higher.
With a similar cooling solution, at similar clocks and fan speeds I’m seeing reduced GPU core temperatures on Turing versus Pascal when running Folding@Home. Granted I’m not taking advantage of any of Turings Ray Tracing under this workload nor does the F@H client appear to take advantage of the better dual-Precision or Integer parallel pipelines but the improvements in Single Precision results appear to make them still a better value than Pascal even at the higher prices.
I wonder what we’ll be looking at in terms of power draw/requirements for Nvidia GPUs in the next 2 architectures. What an 8-tier or 8-Ti will draw in 2 generations. I might just be able to run one on my 750 Watt PSU.
