AMD once again violating power specifications? (AMD RX-480)

[zMeul]

6 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

It was probably at a lower clock speed to pass.

remember when [H] said Polaris 10 had issues with clocks above 800Mhz? could it be because it broke the 150W power limit AMD was aiming for

it's quite possible AMD sent the original design to PCI SIG for certification but the end retail card ended up differently

[FatalityDiablo]

6 minutes ago, zMeul said:

-

alright, I thought it would simply allow more power draw electrical engineering is not my speciality (Y)

 

ps: I hope after the the board partners release their models it will be all fixed, because I crave for a new gpu and this one seems just right

[patrickjp93]

15 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

also the rx 480 had to pass the PCI-SIG's own testing to be released to market and apparently it did so both amd and PCI-SIG messed up their testing?

No, it passed AMD's internal testing.

[spartaman64]

4 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

No, it passed AMD's internal testing.

and PCI-SIG's testing https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4qfwd4/rx480_fails_pcie_specification/d4sy0c3

[patrickjp93]

2 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

and PCI-SIG's testing

No, it passed AMD's PCI-SIG testing, not any from the standards consortium.

[Trixanity]

4 minutes ago, zMeul said:

remember when [H] said Polaris 10 had issues with clocks above 800Mhz? could it be because it broke the 150W power limit AMD was aiming for

it's quite possible AMD sent the original design to PCI SIG for certification but the end retail card ended up differently

lol. He's still throwing HardOCP around like it's the Bible (well, it is for him).

Going from 150W to 165W average use. Bad, right? 800 MHz clock speed @ 150W vs 1266 MHz @ 165W. That's fucking impressive. So yeah, that makes no sense.

 

And the card has been approved and at the reference clock speed, so it's certified. However, how reliable and thorough is this certification? Probably not very, so it wouldn't surprise me if AMD and Nvidia can do whatever they want as long as they pay up.

[zMeul]

2 minutes ago, FatalityDiablo said:

alright, I thought it would simply allow more power draw electrical engineering is not my speciality (Y)

the PCIe 6pin can deliver more power if need be, but the spec is 75W

it would put a strain on the wiring depending on the quality of the PSU - it's not that uncommon for melted wiring in extreme situations

 

 

[spartaman64]

4 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

No, it passed AMD's PCI-SIG testing, not any from the standards consortium.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4qfwd4/rx480_fails_pcie_specification/d4sy0c3

[Sintezza]

Ah AMD has launched a decent performing budget oriented card.

On which Nvidia has no aswer asof yet.

And we allready see things like this showing up.

To me its very unlikely, and i think this is blowing out of porportion.

 

[laminutederire]

26 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Why Prysin, why the sneer. Anyway, 

 

 

Average 150W, it's a 8pin. No violation. It's also during OC. No OC it's about 130-ish

It still does peak at more than 300W.

You can't compare apple and oranges.

That remark clearly talks about the fact that people blame AMD for endangering motherboards with short spikes at 300W on the total package, which clearly the graph above shows the 1080 is doing the exact same thing.

Only thing then if we are to blame amd and not nvidia is to say that on average the 480 does go above 150W. The debate around here have been more about the spikes than the average draw.

[Trixanity]

2 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

It still does peak at more than 300W.

You can't compare apple and oranges.

That remark clearly talks about the fact that people blame AMD for endangering motherboards with short spikes at 300W on the total package, which clearly the graph above shows the 1080 is doing the exact same thing.

Only thing then if we are to blame amd and not nvidia is to say that on average the 480 does go above 150W. The debate around here have been more about the spikes than the average draw.

The difference is that the 1080 does it primarily over the auxiliary connector(s) and the 480 does a mostly equal split between auxiliary connector and the pcie bus. The latter being the key word here. The bus is more sensitive. So the RX 480 should never have exceeded 75W (although less would be even better) and instead have drawn more from the auxiliary connector. So it would have been better if it took 50W over the bus and whatever else it needed from the cable.

 

Although I'm uncertain why neither (but particularly Nvidia) isn't getting shit for these power spikes. Maybe I'm just not an engineer but it seems that these spikes are too big despite also being so short that it probably doesn't do much harm.

[ace_cheaply]

10 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

No, it passed AMD's PCI-SIG testing, not any from the standards consortium.

So when AMD_Robert says

 

Quote

The RX 480 meets the bar for PCIe compliance testing with PCI-SIG and interop with PCI Express. This is not just our internal testing. I think that should be made very clear.

He doesn't really mean it?

[Majestic]

11 minutes ago, Sintezza said:

Ah AMD has launched a decent performing budget oriented card.

On which Nvidia has no aswer asof yet.

And we allready see tons of BullShit like this showing up.

 

 

> acuses people of fanboyism

> Is the biggest zealot

> Calls emperically proven tests bullshit to justify brand bias

 

Smooth operator as always.

[zMeul]

back in 2011 when 1st major cases on PCI-SIG standard were broke by AMD's HD6990, PCI-SIG did not had power compliance testing

not only they didn't test power compliance but at that time, HD6990 wasn't submitted by AMD for PCIe certification!

source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4209/amds-radeon-hd-6990-the-new-single-card-king/5

 

but! AMD's Robert posted on reddit that they submitted the RX480 to PCI-SIG for certification

after 5y, PCI-SIG still doesn't do power compliance testing?!

[Hunter259]

8 minutes ago, Sintezza said:

Ah AMD has launched a decent performing budget oriented card.

On which Nvidia has no aswer asof yet.

And we allready see tons of BullShit like this showing up.

 

 

So facts are bullshit? TIL.

And the 970 is as good at a similar price and the 1060 is coming. AMD has fucked up yet again.

[Majestic]

10 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

It still does peak at more than 300W.

You can't compare apple and oranges.

That remark clearly talks about the fact that people blame AMD for endangering motherboards with short spikes at 300W on the total package, which clearly the graph above shows the 1080 is doing the exact same thing.

Only thing then if we are to blame amd and not nvidia is to say that on average the 480 does go above 150W. The debate around here have been more about the spikes than the average draw.

On the PEG connector, which falls on the PSU, which won't have any issues dealing with it unless it exceeds a certain average value.

It does not spike to 155W on the mainboard causing interferrence, also can't be accomodated for with better PSU. Big difference.

[Sintezza]

3 minutes ago, Majestic said:

> acuses people fanboyism

> Is the biggest zealot

> Calls emperically proven tests bullshit to justify brand bias

 

Smooth operator as always.

 

lol what is proven then?

- did they measure the power draw directly from the pci-e slot solder points?

- Are there any motherboard with burned out pci-e slots because of this issue yet?

- Who makes those claims?

 

I can tell you one thing, the additional power needed for the cards eventual overshoot will be deliverd by the psu.

 

 

[Majestic]

1 minute ago, Sintezza said:

 

lol what is proven then?

- did they measure the power draw directly from the pci-e slot solder points?

- Are there any motherboard with burned out pci-e slots because of this issue yet?

- Who makes those claims?

 

I can tell you one thing, the additional power needed for the cards eventual overshoot will be deliverd by the psu.

 

 

Yes

Lets not wait for that...

Read the OP maybe

[patrickjp93]

17 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4qfwd4/rx480_fails_pcie_specification/d4sy0c3

That's still internal testing.

[spartaman64]

4 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

That's still internal testing.

not internal at amd i guess its internal at PCI-SIG

Quote

This is not just our internal testing.

 

[Sintezza]

2 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Yes

Lets not wait for that...

Read the OP maybe

I dont have to.

Nobody has to tell me one single thing about motherboards power deliveries for that matter.

 

[patrickjp93]

2 minutes ago, Sintezza said:

 

lol what is proven then?

- did they measure the power draw directly from the pci-e slot solder points?

- Are there any motherboard with burned out pci-e slots because of this issue yet?

- Who makes those claims?

 

I can tell you one thing, the additional power needed for the cards eventual overshoot will be deliverd by the psu.

 

 

Yes

yes, Tom's hardware went back and tried overclocking. It took out the test bench Asrock OC board.

Tom's Hardware, TechReport, a French review site, and 2 German ones.

[zMeul]

17 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

It still does peak at more than 300W.

You can't compare apple and oranges.

That remark clearly talks about the fact that people blame AMD for endangering motherboards with short spikes at 300W on the total package, which clearly the graph above shows the 1080 is doing the exact same thing.

Only thing then if we are to blame amd and not nvidia is to say that on average the 480 does go above 150W. The debate around here have been more about the spikes than the average draw.

the problem is the power draw from the PEG slot

 

and no, the GTX1080 does not do the same thing:

 

 

compared to RX480 at stock:

[patrickjp93]

2 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

not internal at amd i guess its internal at PCI-SIG

 

It's AMD covering its ass. No one sends things directly to the consortium for testing. They have the equipment to do it in-house.

[Majestic]

2 minutes ago, Sintezza said:

I dont have to.

Yeah, you do actually. It's how forums work, you read the OP and partake in the discussion based on that.

What you're doing is trying to incite a flamewar.