Intel Core i9-7980XE Hits 845W at 4.9GHz

[Syntaxvgm]

Just now, HKZeroFive said:

I'll concede if he said two R9 295X2s, which amounts to four GPUs. The discussion was about one. Meaning that you can run it on a good 650W unit if you ever needed to.

.

bull fucking shit. A 295x2 draws over 500 watts, just the card not the CPU and other components. A 650 watt is not enough for that and you know it. 

[Bananasplit_00]

16 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

We are moving towards generic multi gpu not sli xfire. FOr a while, I expect that 3 and 4 way will contiue to die, but eventually come back, dependent on how well games support multi gpu in like dx12 and stuff. I would LOVE crazy 4 gpu setups to actually have gains, even if not near perfect scaling. Hell, it's possible, not saying it will happen, but since AMD is doing mGPU or whatever and NVIDIA is no longer pushing SLI as much, that when games start supporting multi gpu outside of xfire and sli we could see more than 4. Imagine that, people trying to make crazy case solutions and crazy PSU setups because they have money to waste. I might browse build logs again if that were the case. 

It'd be like mining but not budget oriented and slapping 8 gpus in a milk crate with zip ties or something.

Imagine it- 6 or more gpus, some of them mixed, enough radiators to cool an electric stove top, all for 10 extra fps in Assassins Creed: Dead Horse.  

id love to see that tbh

 

2 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

I'll concede if he said two R9 295X2s, which amounts to four GPUs. The discussion was about one. Meaning that you can run it on a good 650W unit if you ever needed to.

 

Besides, I'm not talking about the crazy people who have four R9 290Xs in their PC. That's a different discussion altogether.

Hard drives and a custom loop isn't going to require 150W of power. You'd be fine with running that system on a 850W unit... they're not going to be running torture tests 24/7.

a fan is about 5w, so say you have the same amount of rad space i have, a 360 and a 240 rad, thats 5x5w so 25W, the pump should be around the same so 30W. its an enthusiast system, and i tend to count for about 100W of other shit power draw, motherboard, SSDs, HDDs, sound cards, USB stuff and seeing as its an ENTHUSIAST system i would expect lots of all of it, id almost say 150W is conservative for the rest of the system

[Klovnious]

I'm just sitting here waiting for RGB VRM maglev fan coolers

[HKZeroFive]

Just now, Syntaxvgm said:

bull fucking shit. A 295x2 draws over 500 watts, just the card not the CPU and other components. A 650 watt is not enough for that and you know it. 

Do the math. 650W is plenty for the CPU and the other components, on top of the R9 295X2.

 

Tom's Hardware agrees: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/graphics-card-power-supply-balance,3979-5.html

Quote

If the 430W average power consumption measurement from our gaming test proves correct, then an available maximum of 600W should be enough for the graphics card, a decent motherboard, a Core i7-4770K at stock speed, 8GB of RAM and an SSD.

 

[Bananasplit_00]

3 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

bull fucking shit. A 295x2 draws over 500 watts, just the card not the CPU and other components. A 650 watt is not enough for that and you know it. 

and thats at STOCK clocks, throw an OC on that and it will go up segnificantly. dont have a number on that though

 

Just now, HKZeroFive said:

Do the math. 650W is plenty for the CPU and the other components, on top of the R9 295X2.

 

Tom's Hardware agrees: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/graphics-card-power-supply-balance,3979-5.html

 

and when the 4770 launcehed the 4790X was the king, with 6 cores and a 130W TDP. im talking about the high end enthusiasts here, not the general consumer because this CPU isnt made for the every day joe that wants to play CS:GO...

[Syntaxvgm]

8 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

Do the math. 650W is plenty for the CPU and the other components, on top of the R9 295X2.

 

Tom's Hardware agrees: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/graphics-card-power-supply-balance,3979-5.html

 

295x2, let's round that down to 500 watts. 

Lets put in a 8350. That's a 125 w cpu with no overclock. 

We're at 625 watts. You left 25 watts for memory, drives, fans, anything else. 

 

Overclock that cpu. Add well over 100 watts for a conservative overclock. 

The ONLY reason that would work is because good PSUs are often built to work well above their rated capacity for people like you who think you can run a 295x2 and an 8350 on a 650 watt psu, which you should never do. 

Oh yea and capacitors age so have fun scraping by with running you PSU at well above capacity in this scenario

 

. 

[Dabombinable]

Well. there is also a reason now to use the really low power graphics cards in an enthusiast rig.

[Uzume]

It is good to over spec your PSU so you have some room to grow into with future upgrades.

[Syntaxvgm]

4 minutes ago, zzrhardy said:

It is good to over spec your PSU so you have some room to grow into with future upgrades.

it's good to have one period, upgrades or not. 

[MageTank]

3 hours ago, HKZeroFive said:

I think I'll give Intel credit where it's due. For a eighteen-core chip, managing to hit 4.9GHz stable is no small feat.

It's also a feat that LegitReviews could not achieve. 

Quote

While we could get 4900 MHz stable for most benchmarks, it wasn’t stable for video editing or long periods of gaming. For that we had to drop it down to 4.4 GHz.

As for the people talking about the cooling solution, a 240mm AIO is not enough to handle real heat at 4.9ghz. Anyone that believes so, may need to take another look at how physics works in general. 

[HKZeroFive]

34 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

a fan is about 5w, so say you have the same amount of rad space i have, a 360 and a 240 rad, thats 5x5w so 25W, the pump should be around the same so 30W. its an enthusiast system, and i tend to count for about 100W of other shit power draw, motherboard, SSDs, HDDs, sound cards, USB stuff and seeing as its an ENTHUSIAST system i would expect lots of all of it, id almost say 150W is conservative for the rest of the system

Again, you're heavily overestimating the power consumption figures for the other parts. The reason you never see anyone on this forum calculate other components other than the CPU and GPU is because they don't consume that much power in the first place.

 

If we did, then that "550W is enough for a system with a single GPU" saying would be an inherent falsehood.

28 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

and thats at STOCK clocks, throw an OC on that and it will go up segnificantly. dont have a number on that though

 

and when the 4770 launcehed the 4790X was the king, with 6 cores and a 130W TDP. im talking about the high end enthusiasts here, not the general consumer because this CPU isnt made for the every day joe that wants to play CS:GO...

So the i7-4770K is hardly an enthusiast CPU, but rather a general consumer one that's intended for the "everyday joe"? I must disagree on that front.

25 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

295x2, let's round that down to 500 watts. 

Lets put in a 8350. That's a 125 w cpu with no overclock. 

We're at 625 watts. You left 25 watts for memory, drives, fans, anything else. 

 

Overclock that cpu. Add well over 100 watts for a conservative overclock. 

The ONLY reason that would work is because good PSUs are often built to work well above their rated capacity for people like you who think you can run a 295x2 and an 8350 on a 650 watt psu, which you should never do. 

Oh yea and capacitors age so have fun scraping by with running you PSU at well above capacity in this scenario

That's not my point...

 

I'm sure, if you had a power-hungry CPU (be it a HEDT i7 or a FX octacore) and a R9 295X2, overclocked both of them to their absolute limits, put them through a torture test that represents a worst case scenario, then yes, you would be seeing power consumption figures that far surpass the 650W threshold. I'm not dumb enough to contest that.

 

But you could very well run a stock/moderately overclocked R9 295X2 with a mainstream i7 under normal gaming loads on a good 650W unit. Could =/= recommended.

[Syntaxvgm]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

It's also a feat that LegitReviews could not achieve. 

As for the people talking about the cooling solution, a 240mm AIO is not enough to handle real heat at 4.9ghz. Anyone that believes so, may need to take another look at how physics works in general. 

I had some doubts about this too, but I'm just gonna wait and see how this plays out. I know a 240m aio will hold a lot of crazy overclocks for shit like the 7900x, 140w TDP

And while on paper, the 7980xe is 165w TDP, either 845 watts from the wall or the cooler doesn't line up. 

[HKZeroFive]

10 minutes ago, MageTank said:

It's also a feat that LegitReviews could not achieve. 

As for the people talking about the cooling solution, a 240mm AIO is not enough to handle real heat at 4.9ghz. Anyone that believes so, may need to take another look at how physics works in general. 

*Stable enough for benchmarking Cinebench

 

I'll hold my reservations for now. People have achieved some insanely high overclocks with their custom loops with the i9-7900X. Of course, it could very well be an error.

[MageTank]

7 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

I had some doubts about this too, but I'm just gonna wait and see how this plays out. I know a 240m aio will hold a lot of crazy overclocks for shit like the 7900x, 140w TDP

And while on paper, the 7980xe is 165w TDP, either 845 watts from the wall or the cooler doesn't line up. 

TDP is worthless once OCing is involved. Jay had a custom loop 360mm rad, EK pump, push/pull vardar fans, and still hit 77C at 4.8 under Cinebench. Are we seriously going to humor Legitreviews claiming they only hit 63C at 4.9 using a 240mm AIO? Voltage scales quadratically. Jay used roughly 1.3v, while LR used 1.35v (1.4v at 5.0). I refuse to believe Jay's loop is inferior to a 240mm AIO. Either jay got a leaky chip, or LR is benching in a freezer.

 

1 minute ago, HKZeroFive said:

*Stable enough for benchmarking Cinebench

 

I'll hold my reservations for now. People have achieved some insanely high overclocks with their custom loops with the i9-7900X. Of course, it could very well be an error.

Custom loops are custom loops. I certainly expect them to go much further than a measly AIO. That being said, there is no report of these reviewers delidding their 7980XE (aside from GamersNexus) so they are still bottlenecked by transfer from the die to the IHS in that regard. My point is, 600w of heat (from just the CPU itself) cannot be handled by a 360mm rad on a custom loop, let alone an AIO. 63C on an AIO just does not seem physically possible. My delidded 7700k at 5ghz gets hotter than that on a 280mm CLC, and it has liquid metal on the die. 

[Bananasplit_00]

Just now, HKZeroFive said:

Again, you're heavily overestimating the power consumption figures for the other parts. The reason you never see anyone on this forum calculate other components other than the CPU and GPU is because they don't consume that much power in the first place.

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/wDFM9W

PCPP claims 160W for motherboard, RAM and stoarage, and then lets say that custom loop again, thats abot 30W. like i said, i was being conservative. its like you havent understood we are talking about high end enthusiast systems, HEDT ones.

8 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

If we did, then that "550W is enough for a system with a single GPU" saying would be an inherent falsehood.

it is though, get that Vega 64 and an I7 7890XE and run that off the 550W, have fun when it either power throttles or just shuts down.

9 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

So the i7-4770K is hardly an enthusiast CPU, but rather a general consumer one that's intended for the "everyday joe"? I must disagree on that front.

no its not, its a consumer CPU. its not the one for the avrage joe, but its not what i would call an enthusiast grade CPU. im talking HEDT, not the consumer platform.

13 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

That's not my point...

 

I'm sure, if you had a power-hungry CPU (be it a HEDT i7 or a FX octacore) and a R9 295X2, overclocked both of them to their absolute limits, put them through a torture test that represents a worst case scenario, then yes, you would be seeing power consumption figures that far surpass the 650W threshold. I'm not dumb enough to contest that.

that is exactly what you are doing though because we are not talking about the consumer platform, we are talking about the enthusiast one, HEDT

[Simon771]

63°C at 850W power usage?

Even custom water loop with 20x 480mm rads couldn't keep in that cold. 

[HKZeroFive]

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/wDFM9W

PCPP claims 160W for motherboard, RAM and stoarage, and then lets say that custom loop again, thats abot 30W. like i said, i was being conservative. its like you havent understood we are talking about high end enthusiast systems, HEDT ones.

I suppose PCPP is now an accurate measure of power consumption? (hint: it's not).

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

it is though, get that Vega 64 and an I7 7890XE and run that off the 550W, have fun when it either power throttles or just shuts down.

Okay, eighteen-core CPU aside, you could very well run a HEDT i7 with a RX Vega 64 on a 550W unit. The total power consumption of the entire rig would be about 450W, give or take a few watts.

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

no its not, its a consumer CPU. its not the one for the avrage joe, but its not what i would call an enthusiast grade CPU. im talking HEDT, not the consumer platform.

Eh, definitions, definitions. I'm not prepared to go into a whole other argument of what the term "enthusiasts" should be defined as. I personally think that if you're prepared to invest $300+ into a CPU, that's basically enthusiast grade.

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

that is exactly what you are doing though because we are not talking about the consumer platform, we are talking about the enthusiast one, HEDT

The R9 295X2 on a 650W unit is a different discussion altogether.

[Bananasplit_00]

13 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

I suppose PCPP is now an accurate measure of power consumption? (hint: it's not).

 

no, its not. no PSU calculator is, but it gives you a rough number. LEDs dont draw 0Ws, nor does your PCH and rest of the motherboard. the 100W it estimates is generous but that was with ONE SSD and ONE HDD, not the two or three of each i would expect form a high end build here. what i said was that there has been reasons to get 1KW PSUs before, and then i limited myself to even just 2 GPUs and said there were builds that need them.

14 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

Okay, eighteen-core CPU aside, you could very well run a HEDT i7 with a RX Vega 64 on a 550W unit. The total power consumption of the entire rig would be about 450W, give or take a few watts.

the Vega 64 draws 300W alone, have fun with say the 16 core chip instead at stock, or even the last gen 10 core, or hell even its predecessors back on Ivy. 

 

20 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

Eh, definitions, definitions. I'm not prepared to go into a whole other argument of what the term "enthusiasts" should be defined as. I personally think that if you're prepared to invest $300+ into a CPU, that's basically enthusiast grade.

yes but i didnt say "the lowest end enthusiast chip", i said the highest core count I7, which hasent been a quad core since early first generation Core I when they hadnt launched the hexacores.

 

oh and look at this too:

 

thats total system power from when the 480 launched, look at the 480 SLI, sure you could run that on a 870W PSU i guess, but thats on a first gen I7, the I7 920, and CPUs and GPUs have gotten more powerfull if you look at the top of the line ones, performance per watt has shot up, but the draw per card has increased as well, and now lets throw that custom loop on there, thats another 30W, so 880W, do you really want to run that off a 900W PSU? 20W spare? nope. 

 

http://www.overclockers.com/intel-skylake-x-i9-7900x-and-kaby-lake-x-i7-7740k-cpu-review/

 

Overclockers are seeing a 400+ W power draw from the 7900x even, pair that with a 295x2 and bam, 900W for just the GPUs and CPU.

 

There have, like i said, been reasons to get 1KW PSUs for ages, this 18c chip dosent bring us much more then another one. Systems needing 1KW PSUs have been around for absolute ages, and this is when we are talking just desktop systems, for bench systems and extreme overclocking 2KW ones can be too little, a 980TI can draw 500W alone with ease once you put it under LN2, and so can an R9 Fury or 780 TI

[Bananasplit_00]

34 minutes ago, Simon771 said:

63°C at 850W power usage?

Even custom water loop with 20x 480mm rads couldn't keep in that cold. 

the problem would be getting the heat away from the CPU, not the rads, i would suspect. but the die is quite a bit larger then the one in the 7900x

[Syntaxvgm]

hold on ltt screwed up my post

 

[Simon771]

3 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

the problem would be getting the heat away from the CPU, not the rads, i would suspect. but the die is quite a bit larger then the one in the 7900x

That's exactly the problem.

And doesn't Intel still use TIM inside that CPU, so it's not soldered? Because if that's the case, there are plenty of other problems.

 

Anyway ... 850W power draw from single CPU is just unpractical. Sure it's fun for benchmarking, but that's the only case for someone to use CPU like that.

[Drak3]

6 minutes ago, Simon771 said:

Anyway ... 850W power draw from single CPU is just unpractical. Sure it's fun for benchmarking, but that's the only case for someone to use CPU like that.

I can run 3 hexacore VMs off of one physical machine. I have a use case that could benefit from it.

[Syntaxvgm]

1 hour ago, HKZeroFive said:

 

I'm sure, if you had a power-hungry CPU (be it a HEDT i7 or a FX octacore) and a R9 295X2, overclocked both of them to their absolute limits, put them through a torture test that represents a worst case scenario, then yes, you would be seeing power consumption figures that far surpass the 650W threshold. I'm not dumb enough to contest that.

 

But you could very well run a stock/moderately overclocked R9 295X2 with a mainstream i7 under normal gaming loads on a good 650W unit. Could =/= recommended.

LTT fucking deleted half my post, think one of the links had something that the editor didn't like, so I hop I got everything I had in order. It's got typos and spelling problems I need to edit agian

 

the scenario was an 8350 at stock or regular overclock

but let's say you run a regualr cpu

oh, I know!

Let's use the article you linked but didn't even bother to read apparently, 

Quote

 

Tom's Hardware agrees: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/graphics-card-power-supply-balance,3979-5.html

and it makes sense as it's the first article on google when you search "295x2 power draw"

 

This article tested whether or not you could run a 295x2 safely on a 1000w psu, which you can obviously if you're not planning on getting a crazy cpu and overclocking the hell out of it. 

In that article, they run a 4770k, a much less power hungry cpu, and guess what? It drew up to 610 watts. This is a regular gaming scenario, your expected power draw.

 

Now, let's use some other sources to get a better picture. This one is from guru3d. 

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-r9-295x2-review,12.html

now read carefully 

Quote

Power Consumption

Let's have a look at how much power draw we measure with this graphics card installed. The methodology: we have a device constantly monitoring the power draw from the PC. We simply stress the GPU, not the processor. The before and after wattage will tell us roughly how much power a graphics card is consuming under load. Our test system is based on a power hungry six-core Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition Sandy Bridge-E based setup on the X79 chipset platform. This setup is overclocked to 4.60 GHz on all cores. Next to that we have energy saving functions disabled for this motherboard and processor (to ensure consistent benchmark results). We'll be calculating the GPU power consumption here, not the total PC power consumption.

Power Consumption

1. System in IDLE = 137W
2. System Wattage with GPU in FULL Stress = 624W
3. Difference (GPU load) = 487W
4. Add average IDLE wattage ~20W
5. Subjective obtained GPU power consumption = ~ 507 Watts

 

In this system, they are using a 3960x, at idle. At stock settings, it has a very similar TDP to a stock 8350.

Hmm, gee, 624 watts stressing just the GPU and idling the CPU in this system? Looking a bit shakey to use a 650w psu isn't it? 

 

And here's where I'd like to interject an interesting fact- gaming load is much different than a compute style load. The toms hardware article showed power consumption while gaming. The guru 3d article they probably ran furmark or some other synthetic benchamrk. A real world way to replicate this is rendering or mining/folding. 

The difference is much bigger with CPUs and gaming, since most games don't truly make them go to 100%. Prime95 (wouldn't use that on newer cpus) or AIDA64 will give you a different power consumption result than running some crushing game, even if it's cpu heavy. 

Anyway here's toms hardware' power consumption calculation for the 295x2

 

in heaven, it peaked at 469 watts, lower than the 507 watts in the synthetic test, which is a number referenced in a chart you posted

2 hours ago, HKZeroFive said:

None of those systems will require a 1000W power supply. Look up power consumption benchmarks.

 

so now, what if I told you TDP is not actually the power consumption limit, but just a ballpark number that's used for cooling? It's actually often far off from the real draw numbers. Don't factor that in, but it's worth knowing that it's often that the TDP is lower than the peak power consumption under maximum stress.  

https://www.anandtech.com/show/5091/intel-core-i7-3960x-sandy-bridge-e-review-keeping-the-high-end-alive/7

For total power consumption I will reference this article for the 3960x in the guru3d setup since they didn't stress the cpu, just the gpu. 

 

 

The total system uses 211 watts under load with no dedicated gpu. 

Add the isolated power consumption of the 295x2 under stress tests of 507 watts, you are at 718 watts under synthetic load. 

Let's advance one page in the article and overclock 

320 watts and 507 watts- 827 watts under syntehtic load with an overclocked 3930k. 

Different cpu, yes but I got some news for yah 

while it uses less power,the 8350 still consumes a fuck ton of power leaving you with a 702 watt system peak with no overclock

and an 801 watt system with their overclock here 
https://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/8

but that's THEIR overclock. Not all silicone is the same. 
364 watts also at 4.8GHz here
https://www.bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/amd-fx-8350-review/7/
that's an 871 watt system 

oh just use the 650 watt psu for an overlcock 8350 and a 295x2, you're FINE
/s

so, with the lower power draw scenario, the article you linked with a cpu that's much more efficient with no overclock, running regular games and not encoding or stress testing, you got 610 watts. Now, what you would call the right margin for a psu is subjective, depending on what you believe about stuff like capacitor ageing, expanding, and all that shit. But it's certainly not a 650 watt psu for what you linked as a 610 watt system (with an 8350 it's not, not even at stock). That's a 6% buffer, best case scenario, not under full load. 

If you take the gaming load with a 4770k (power efficient cpu ) with no overclock at 610 watts from the toms hardware article, are you really gonna buy a 650 watt psu for a system that peaks at 610 WHEN GAMING and like draws much more under synthetic load? 
No. No one that dropped that much money on theri system to put a 295x2 in it at the time was gonna do that. That's stupid. 
Yes I agree that 1000w psus are often overkill even most reasonable high end gaming pcs with one gpu, hell I run one myself in my 5820k at 1.25v and 1080 draws so little from my psu that the fan never kicked on, not even once, effectively making it a fanless psu. I'm talking less than 400 watts with aida64 iirc. 
But you were wrong, and it's very obvious 650 watt psu is stupid for a 295x2, not even doable. They only reason it may work for gaming only if you tried is these psus are built a bit past their rating, but good luck running full load even with that in mind. 

Oooh, almost forgot, that 650w psu has gotta give 507 watts from the 2 8 pin connectors for the GPU. If you go a couple of pages ahead in that aricle that, again, you linked, it talks about wire thickness, number of rails, and other concerns when, idk expecting your psu to give 500 watts to just the GPU alone. So, for that 650 watt psu, make sure to shop one that's built to take a 500 watt load on just the pcie connectors. 

 

[HKZeroFive]

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

no, its not. no PSU calculator is, but it gives you a rough number. LEDs dont draw 0Ws, nor does your PCH and rest of the motherboard. the 100W it estimates is generous but that was with ONE SSD and ONE HDD, not the two or three of each i would expect form a high end build here. what i said was that there has been reasons to get 1KW PSUs before, and then i limited myself to even just 2 GPUs and said there were builds that need them.

PCPP also overestimates.

 

I never said the other parts don't draw 0W, I said that they don't draw as much power as you imply. Also, why would a high-end build happen to have three SSDs and three HDDs? Seems rather counterintiutive.

 

You were correct to limit yourself to 2 GPUs because 3/4-way SLI/Crossfire is useless in its own right.

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

the Vega 64 draws 300W alone, have fun with say the 16 core chip instead at stock, or even the last gen 10 core, or hell even its predecessors back on Ivy.

An octacore i7-7820X at 4.3GHz paired with RX Vega 64 draws 410W in FurMark. And yes, I know I'm considerate for including a HEDT CPU since you insisted:

 

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

yes but i didnt say "the lowest end enthusiast chip", i said the highest core count I7, which hasent been a quad core since early first generation Core I when they hadnt launched the hexacores.

 

oh and look at this too:

 

thats total system power from when the 480 launched, look at the 480 SLI, sure you could run that on a 870W PSU i guess, but thats on a first gen I7, the I7 920, and CPUs and GPUs have gotten more powerfull if you look at the top of the line ones, performance per watt has shot up, but the draw per card has increased as well, and now lets throw that custom loop on there, thats another 30W, so 880W, do you really want to run that off a 900W PSU? 20W spare? nope. 

When and why did the GTX 480 suddenly come into this equation? The card was released more than seven years ago for crying out loud.

 

When I said that "people now have a valid reason to get a 1000+W power supply", I was referring to (or at least I thought I was reffering to) the state of the recent and current PC market. Two GTX 980Tis don't need a 1000W power supply. Two GTX 1080s don't need a 1000W power supply.

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

http://www.overclockers.com/intel-skylake-x-i9-7900x-and-kaby-lake-x-i7-7740k-cpu-review/

 

Overclockers are seeing a 400+ W power draw from the 7900x even, pair that with a 295x2 and bam, 900W for just the GPUs and CPU.

 

There have, like i said, been reasons to get 1KW PSUs for ages, this 18c chip dosent bring us much more then another one. Systems needing 1KW PSUs have been around for absolute ages, and this is when we are talking just desktop systems, for bench systems and extreme overclocking 2KW ones can be too little, a 980TI can draw 500W alone with ease once you put it under LN2, and so can an R9 Fury or 780 TI

Yes, but why would you pair a i9-7900X with a R9 295X2 in the first place?

 

The whole basis of your argument relies on the fact that a few people will need 1000+W power supply because they'll get the most power hungry of components and then do everything in their power to make them consume as much power as possible, be it through overclocking them or running through some stress tests that simulate unrealistic loads. You're manipulating the facts to suit your own agenda.

 

Anyway, that first statement was a tongue-in-cheek statement. Not sure how we got here.

[TVwazhere]

2 hours ago, Syntaxvgm said:

I'll strap a honda civic radiator to the fucker if I have to

This is awesome