Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Majestic

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

Recommended Posts

Posted · Original PosterOP
2 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

Quote, directly from the article:

 

"We skipped long-term overclocking and overvolting tests, since the Radeon RX 480’s power consumption through the PCIe slot jumped to an average of 100W, peaking at 200W. We just didn’t want to do that to our test platform. "  200w peak through the pci-e slot.  Not sure how much more simple i can make that. 

That is overclocking, meaning the average and peak went up from 82/155 to 100/200. Still don't understand why you fail to understand this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

The GTX 970 uses 170-175W, so 165W on the 480 is a little less, not more.

Not according to Guru3D's measurements:

hiOsAeQ.jpg

 

original image:

Spoiler

hiOsAeQ.png

 

Edited by Ryan_Vickers
that image was death on dark theme

My system

CPU: Xeon E3-1231v3  Board: MSI Z97S SLI Krait Edition  GPU: EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0

RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3-2400 CAS 11  SSD: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB  HDD0: HGST Deskstar NAS 4TB 7200RPM

HDD1: Seagate 1TB 7200RPM  HDD2: WD Black 1TB 7200RPM  CASE: Phanteks Enthoo Pro  PSU: Antec Neo Eco 620C

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Nobody is talking about electricity bills. It's a very specificly defined issue, this strawman is utterly pointless.

 

@Trixanity I expect AMD to know how to fix it, but I'm pretty sure it will hurt performance as it has to throttle more. But ofcourse, that will be after all the reviews are out. 3,5/4 stars AMD *golfclap*

I just looked at a few different reviews. It really seems like Tom's has a dud in hand. 300W on the card itself seems like something has gone very wrong in either the card or the equipment. Anandtech says 300W total at peak (wall measurement I guess). TPU measured 166W maximum with a similar methodology from the card. TPU measured at both bus and 6-pin. PCPer says 150-160W from the card.

 

It's becoming clear that Tom's is so far the only source to measure the freakish 155W bus draw or 300W total card draw.

 

Something's fishy. And no I'm not saying Tom's being shady. I'm saying that there is something wrong with either the card or their equipment. Such an increase in power draw from the card is not normal. A card doesn't just spike from 160W to 300W even intermittently.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Crazy Ginger said:

It draws that power through the power connectors, NOT THE PCIE SLOT.  there's a reason why you have to plug in those wires coming straight from the PSU to your gpu

And the PCIe slot*, 75W from it too.

4 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Not with 95% of your statements being logical fallacies, no.

My fantastic flawed logic showing through. I need to learn how to argue logically.

3 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I know you're being sarcastic but it certainly isn't the first time.  We can all help try to make it the last time though by sending a message about them doing this.  Maybe companies lie because every time they do, the product sells anyway and people move on and just expect it to happen again?

Maybe companies lie because it makes their products sell better therefore they generate a larger profit. That's the whole point of a company, right? To make a product to generate as much money as possible, therefore sustain said company. They may do this is whatever way they want, be it lying or some other dodgy tactic that I can't think of.


Spoiler

Remember to quote me or tag me to get my attention in a post!

Spoiler

Yukuru (Main rig): R5 2400G | Noctua L9a | VTX R9 Nano 4GB | 2x8GB G-Skill Ripjaws DDR4-2800 (@2400MHz) | ASRock A300M-STX | 128GB Plextor M6s + 2TB Seagate FireCuda 2TB 5400RPM SSHD | Delta 120W Power brick (Thanks @iamdarkyoshi) | Custom Case (Build log| MSX

Spoiler

Blast From the Past (Disassembled and decommissioned as of the 7th of December, 2016, you will be missed): Asus A8Js | C2D T7200 @ 2GHz | Nvidia Go 7700 512MB DDR2 | 2x1GB DDR2-667 Kingston RAM | Hitachi TravelStar 5K160 160GB 5400 HDD | Win7 Pro

Spoiler

Laptop: MacBook Pro 13.3 inch late 2013 model i7-4558U (2C/4T @ 3.3GHz Turbo) Intel Iris 5100 graphics (1200MHz boosts) 8GB DDR3-1600 Soldered on 2560 x 1600 display (Looks very nice) Win7 Pro

Spoiler

Box (Brother's Rig): R5 1500X | Stock AMD Cooler | ASRock B450 Pro4 | Asus HD 7970 3GB Matrix Platinum | 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-2666 | Crucial BX200 240GB | Aerocool Strike-X 500W | Win7 Home Premium

Spoiler

Spiky Box (Sister's Rig): G3258 | Cooler Master Seidon 120V V2 | Asus Z97 Sabertooth Mark I | Sapphire R9 290X 4GB Vapor-X | 2x4GB Crucial Ballistix DDR3-1600 | 1TB Seagate Barracuda | Corsair CX600 | Aerocool Xpredator X3 Red/Gold edition (My old case) | MSX 

USEFUL LINKS:

PSU Whitelist | PSU Tier List F@H stats | Mining Ethereum

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

Not according to Guru3D's measurements:

Which are inaccurate. Hence the "calculated TDP".

 

Tom's Hardware has much better measuring equipment. As you can see in OPs link, the RX 480 draws 164W where the GTX 970 draws 171W.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Majestic said:

That is overclocking, meaning the average and peak went up from 82/155 to 100/200. Still don't understand why you fail to understand this.

I still don't understand how you fail to understand that I don't believe the numbers are accurate until they are reproduced...The numbers make no sense, i showed you why i think they make no sense.  The idea that the card is using over 345 watts...(that is, if the previous 300W was 155 from mainboard, 145 from 6 pin.  200W+145W=345W) is unbelievable to me. If it is true, I will be amazed, and will certainly not buy a 480 until it is resolved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Which are inaccurate. Hence the "calculated TDP".

 

Tom's Hardware has much better measuring equipment. As you can see in OPs link, the RX 480 draws 164W where the GTX 970 draws 171W.

OK, so it's a slightly less power hungry GTX 970. Still pretty disappointing to have pretty much the same performance per watt as a 21 month old 28 nm card.


My system

CPU: Xeon E3-1231v3  Board: MSI Z97S SLI Krait Edition  GPU: EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0

RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3-2400 CAS 11  SSD: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB  HDD0: HGST Deskstar NAS 4TB 7200RPM

HDD1: Seagate 1TB 7200RPM  HDD2: WD Black 1TB 7200RPM  CASE: Phanteks Enthoo Pro  PSU: Antec Neo Eco 620C

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
2 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

I just looked at a few different reviews. It really seems like Tom's has a dud in hand. 300W on the card itself seems like something has gone very wrong in either the card or the equipment. Anandtech says 300W total at peak (wall measurement I guess). TPU measured 166W maximum with a similar methodology from the card. TPU measured at both bus and 6-pin. PCPer says 150-160W from the card.

 

It's becoming clear that Tom's is so far the only source to measure the freakish 155W bus draw or 300W total card draw.

 

Something's fishy. And no I'm not saying Tom's being shady. I'm saying that there is something wrong with either the card or their equipment. Such an increase in power draw from the card is not normal. A card doesn't just spike from 160W to 300W even intermittently.

They are measuring at very high polling rates (100khz -> 500mhz). Any equipment that is slower either misses the peaks or uses a moving average filter. Meaning it more resembles the average load.

 

The 300W is a very minute peak, averages are on par with other outlets. Don't mistake different results as an assured error on the person who measures them. Unless all outlets were using the same equipment, that is a grossly erronenous assumption.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Maybe companies lie because it makes their products sell better therefore they generate a larger profit. That's the whole point of a company, right? To make a product to generate as much money as possible, therefore sustain said company. They may do this is whatever way they want, be it lying or some other dodgy tactic that I can't think of.

I think if a company really cares about long term sales and image, they will choose consumer trust that leads to lasting, repeat customers over high initial sales of a product.  That is, unless they can count on us to all just "take it", in which case they can do whatever they want because we'll just buy their stuff anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

OK, so it's a slightly less power hungry GTX 970. Still pretty disappointing to have pretty much the same performance per watt as a 21 month old 28 nm card.

Arguably, yes. But at least it's a major improvement over AMD's previous generation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheRandomness said:

I think I'm the only one here who has the mentality of 'who cares?'.

Oh no, a company lied. That's a first.

If you have a PCIe SSD and an RX 480, you put your money in the wrong places. Also, with the SMCs on the motherboard they have their own specs, meaning that it's possible for certain components to run even with the increase power draw and whatnot. Kinda like how VRMs can go to 125C whilst the GPU itself has a separate thermal limit.

 

I should stop arguing, I'm never going to win.

I only use the NVME drive as an example for argument's sake, and because I have one so it was one of the first things to come to mind (it was on sale and I couldn't resist, don't tell me I wasted money I could have used on getting a gpu) and sure, you could get away with running slightly over spec, but that doesn't change the fact that because it is running over the specs of pcie, it adds unnecessary risk.  That's why people are uneasy about this.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the PCIe connector and the molex connector will able to provide a bit extra without problem of the maximum amp for the connector, although, it is the best if they just follow the power limit of the connector by using 8 pin or dual 6 pin connectors, just for overhead.

 

Just wait for AIB cards, I am quite sure they will include those extra connectors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
3 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

I still don't understand how you fail to understand that I don't believe the numbers are accurate until they are reproduced...The numbers make no sense, i showed you why i think they make no sense.  The idea that the card is using over 345 watts...(that is, if the previous 300W was 155 from mainboard, 145 from 6 pin.  200W+145W=345W) is unbelievable to me. If it is true, I will be amazed, and will certainly not buy a 480 until it is resolved.

You find it hard that I don't understand your belief in something not being true? U wot mate. They are minute peaks, not averages. It's not drawing 345W continuously. Whatever....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
1 minute ago, dlink377 said:

I believe the PCIe connector and the molex connector will able to provide a bit extra without problem of the maximum amp for the connector, although, it is the best if they just follow the power limit of the connector by using 8 pin or dual 6 pin connectors, just for overhead.

 

Just wait for AIB cards, I am quite sure they will include those extra connectors.

Maybe, but that's why the post is only to serve as a warning against the reference design. Just like Club3D started issueing out better manuals for power supply selection with the 295X.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Majestic said:

You find it hard that I don't understand your belief in something not being true? U wot mate. They are minute peaks, not averages. It's not drawing 345W continuously. Whatever....

Yes, i find it hard that you don't understand that I don't believe the results until they are reproduced. It should never, ever be drawing 345W, peak or otherwise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Crazy Ginger said:

I only use the NVME drive as an example for argument's sake, and because I have one so it was one of the first things to come to mind (it was on sale and I couldn't resist, don't tell me I wasted money I could have used on getting a gpu) and sure, you could get away with running slightly over spec, but that doesn't change the fact that because it is running over the specs of pcie, it adds unnecessary risk.  That's why people are uneasy about this.  

Offtopic: I really should give more shits about my computer then, currently have a radiator sat onto of the CPU heatsink because I had nowhere else to put it. Also, threw 1.46V at my 290 because 1200MHz pls.

Ontopic: The R9 295x2 ran over the specs of PCIe by quite a lot. People didn't exactly bitch so hard about that though, did they? They just got the message that they should have a very good PSU system for it. Might give some people wanting the RX 480 a similar message, if you're running on a $30 mobo maybe you should prioritise something else to upgrade instead.


Spoiler

Remember to quote me or tag me to get my attention in a post!

Spoiler

Yukuru (Main rig): R5 2400G | Noctua L9a | VTX R9 Nano 4GB | 2x8GB G-Skill Ripjaws DDR4-2800 (@2400MHz) | ASRock A300M-STX | 128GB Plextor M6s + 2TB Seagate FireCuda 2TB 5400RPM SSHD | Delta 120W Power brick (Thanks @iamdarkyoshi) | Custom Case (Build log| MSX

Spoiler

Blast From the Past (Disassembled and decommissioned as of the 7th of December, 2016, you will be missed): Asus A8Js | C2D T7200 @ 2GHz | Nvidia Go 7700 512MB DDR2 | 2x1GB DDR2-667 Kingston RAM | Hitachi TravelStar 5K160 160GB 5400 HDD | Win7 Pro

Spoiler

Laptop: MacBook Pro 13.3 inch late 2013 model i7-4558U (2C/4T @ 3.3GHz Turbo) Intel Iris 5100 graphics (1200MHz boosts) 8GB DDR3-1600 Soldered on 2560 x 1600 display (Looks very nice) Win7 Pro

Spoiler

Box (Brother's Rig): R5 1500X | Stock AMD Cooler | ASRock B450 Pro4 | Asus HD 7970 3GB Matrix Platinum | 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-2666 | Crucial BX200 240GB | Aerocool Strike-X 500W | Win7 Home Premium

Spoiler

Spiky Box (Sister's Rig): G3258 | Cooler Master Seidon 120V V2 | Asus Z97 Sabertooth Mark I | Sapphire R9 290X 4GB Vapor-X | 2x4GB Crucial Ballistix DDR3-1600 | 1TB Seagate Barracuda | Corsair CX600 | Aerocool Xpredator X3 Red/Gold edition (My old case) | MSX 

USEFUL LINKS:

PSU Whitelist | PSU Tier List F@H stats | Mining Ethereum

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
6 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

Yes, i find it hard that you don't understand that I don't believe the results until they are reproduced. It should never, ever be drawing 345W, peak or otherwise. 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pascal,4572-10.html

 

GTX 1080 also can draw 311W. Power consumption is always this erratic, it's just never brought up. The difference is, out of that 311, only 62W is out of the PCI-E, well within limits. Not 155W.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
4 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Ontopic: The R9 295x2 ran over the specs of PCIe by quite a lot. People didn't exactly bitch so hard about that though, did they? They just got the message that they should have a very good PSU system for it. Might give some people wanting the RX 480 a similar message, if you're running on a $30 mobo maybe you should prioritise something else to upgrade instead.

But you can't optimize your PSU for something that is drawn through the damn mainboard. Please just practice what you preach and stop arguing. You're defending it just to defend it. Never making any valid points.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Majestic said:

But you can't optimize your PSU for something that is drawn through the damn mainboard. Please just practice what you preach and stop arguing. 

Seriously, you're defending it just to defend it. Never making any valid points.

I don't- what?

The little connectors on the top of the GPU. You see them? They also have power drawn through them. Yes, I know you explained what you mean on the previous page, but still...


Spoiler

Remember to quote me or tag me to get my attention in a post!

Spoiler

Yukuru (Main rig): R5 2400G | Noctua L9a | VTX R9 Nano 4GB | 2x8GB G-Skill Ripjaws DDR4-2800 (@2400MHz) | ASRock A300M-STX | 128GB Plextor M6s + 2TB Seagate FireCuda 2TB 5400RPM SSHD | Delta 120W Power brick (Thanks @iamdarkyoshi) | Custom Case (Build log| MSX

Spoiler

Blast From the Past (Disassembled and decommissioned as of the 7th of December, 2016, you will be missed): Asus A8Js | C2D T7200 @ 2GHz | Nvidia Go 7700 512MB DDR2 | 2x1GB DDR2-667 Kingston RAM | Hitachi TravelStar 5K160 160GB 5400 HDD | Win7 Pro

Spoiler

Laptop: MacBook Pro 13.3 inch late 2013 model i7-4558U (2C/4T @ 3.3GHz Turbo) Intel Iris 5100 graphics (1200MHz boosts) 8GB DDR3-1600 Soldered on 2560 x 1600 display (Looks very nice) Win7 Pro

Spoiler

Box (Brother's Rig): R5 1500X | Stock AMD Cooler | ASRock B450 Pro4 | Asus HD 7970 3GB Matrix Platinum | 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-2666 | Crucial BX200 240GB | Aerocool Strike-X 500W | Win7 Home Premium

Spoiler

Spiky Box (Sister's Rig): G3258 | Cooler Master Seidon 120V V2 | Asus Z97 Sabertooth Mark I | Sapphire R9 290X 4GB Vapor-X | 2x4GB Crucial Ballistix DDR3-1600 | 1TB Seagate Barracuda | Corsair CX600 | Aerocool Xpredator X3 Red/Gold edition (My old case) | MSX 

USEFUL LINKS:

PSU Whitelist | PSU Tier List F@H stats | Mining Ethereum

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Majestic said:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pascal,4572-10.html

 

GTX 1080 also can draw 311W. Power consumption is always this erratic, that's why we look at averages, because for those we can build. The difference is, out of that 311, only 62W is out of the PCI-E, well within limits. Not 155W.

While I'll admit the peaks on the 1080 are suprisingly high, I still am waiting to see another reviewer have similar results before any conclusion can be reached. It's possible, maybe even probable that nobody goes to the lengths tom's does, so they found what nobody else would have and now everyone will find the same problem. It's also possible it was a testing error.  
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

While I'll admit the peaks on the 1080 are suprisingly high, I still am waiting to see another reviewer have similar results before any conclusion can be reached. It's possible, maybe even probable that nobody goes to the lengths tom's does, so they found what nobody else would have and now everyone will find the same problem. It's also possible it was a testing error.  
 

Not everyone have equipment like Tomshardware and do power consumption test extensively. Many reviews use crappy Watt meter.


| Intel i7-3770@4.2Ghz | Asus Z77-V | Zotac 980 Ti Amp! Omega | DDR3 1800mhz 4GB x4 | 300GB Intel DC S3500 SSD | 512GB Plextor M5 Pro | 2x 1TB WD Blue HDD |
 | Enermax NAXN82+ 650W 80Plus Bronze | Fiio E07K | Grado SR80i | Cooler Master XB HAF EVO | Logitech G27 | Logitech G600 | CM Storm Quickfire TK | DualShock 4 |

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
13 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

I don't- what?

The little connectors on the top of the GPU. You see them? They also have power drawn through them. Yes, I know you explained what you mean on the previous page, but still...

18-Gaming-Bars.png

 

The bars on the graph, do you see them?  PCI-E 12V is the connector, Mainboard 12V is the pci-E slot.

 

8 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

While I'll admit the peaks on the 1080 are suprisingly high, I still am waiting to see another reviewer have similar results before any conclusion can be reached. It's possible, maybe even probable that nobody goes to the lengths tom's does, so they found what nobody else would have and now everyone will find the same problem. It's also possible it was a testing error.  
 

That testing error is then a systemic error, because it's present on multiple cards and reviews. Also, that requires all outlets to ditch their Kill-A-Watt and get professional kit. Which not all of them will. I assume AMD will fix it by making the card throttle. But it's unsure if tests will be redone afterwards. That said though, their averages are not really any different. They just have more extensive datasets.

 

I'm also nowhere claiming it to be infallible proof. Only arguing against misrepresentations or flatout denials of the issue.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

Yes, i find it hard that you don't understand that I don't believe the results until they are reproduced. It should never, ever be drawing 345W, peak or otherwise. 

No offense to Luke and well most other reviewers out there, but apart from the 2 sites that tested this how many you honestly think even test this?

 

As they said themselves most durable motherboards will run into no issues and most reviewers have good motherboards and fairly clean in terms of other pci-e cards and such since well, it's a test bench. It could have honestly gone by them.

 

Last but not least, let's not forget how a very slight overclock on Tech of Tomorrow's review shot up GPU temps to 94c and such. To me this would indicate his card is probably also drawing too much power as well maybe we should contact him and ask him to test wattage again he could replicate.

 

Edit: Also @Slick I'd be great if you could try to replicate this

 


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Majestic said:

Because it peaks 155W over a bus designed for 75W. Meaning it will stress the mainboard momentarily for double it was designed for.

They note it won't catch fire, but it will cause perhiperal issues like sound or add-in cards.

 

But who knows when someone is using a cheap board and is overclocking it. Meaning it will average 100W over something designed for 75W. It could cause damage.

But it's AMD, so they are forgiven in advance!


 

Spoiler

CPU:Intel Xeon X5660 @ 4.2 GHz RAM:6x2 GB 1600MHz DDR3 MB:Asus P6T Deluxe GPU:Asus GTX 660 TI OC Cooler:Akasa Nero 3


SSD:OCZ Vertex 3 120 GB HDD:2x640 GB WD Black Fans:2xCorsair AF 120 PSU:Seasonic 450 W 80+ Case:Thermaltake Xaser VI MX OS:Windows 10
Speakers:Altec Lansing MX5021 Keyboard:Razer Blackwidow 2013 Mouse:Logitech MX Master Monitor:Dell U2412M Headphones: Logitech G430

Big thanks to Damikiller37 for making me an awesome Intel 4004 out of trixels!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×