Reduce power consumption by using higher end card?

[porina]

Before you look at the title and think I'm crazy, I should add the extra condition that they would be doing the same work.

 

Already I'm using a frame rate limit to lower the power used by my GPU. I forget the power numbers, but if I run unlimited I can get well above 100fps, but I've capped it at 85fps and power usage is lower enough to make a difference to heat output and fan noise. Let's say I keep this cap, would, for example, a 2080 or 2070 use less power to produce that 85fps output? They're doing the same work, but in slightly different ways. Essentially it is fewer cores at higher clock, vs more cores at lower clock. In the CPU world, the latter is more power efficient, as the silicon is run at a more power efficient part of the curve. I don't see any reason why this wouldn't also work with GPUs, until we consider other potential differences. The higher peak power of the 2080 may result in a differently optimised power delivery stage, and it may up being more or less efficient. There may be differences to ram too...

 

I probably think too much...

[GoldenLag]

Depends on how the voltage curve is for the given card. 

 

That is what in the end decides it. 

 

I would believe it applies more to AMD Hardware as they push hardware up their voltage curve.

[xAcid9]

Basically performance per watt? Is that right? 

 

[GoldenLag]

3 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

Basically performance per watt? Is that right? 

 

Almost, except some cards such as the 2080 may be higher up on the voltage ladder compared to the 2070

[vogelspinnen]

You sound like me trying to justify a new purchase. 

 

"Look honey, i just wanted to help reduce the power bills around the house, that's why i bought this 2080ti Kingpin..."

[Origami Cactus]

I also noticed that the Nvidia cards are super un-efficient in their default mode.

 

On 1080ti and 1070, when the power limit is reduced to 75%, you lost about 5-10% performance, but use 25% less power. Massive difference in gpu temps and noise too.

[porina]

4 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

Basically performance per watt? Is that right? 

Yes, but we have to be careful how we measure it. My personal criteria would be Final Fantasy XIV, at 2560x1440, 85fps, maximum settings. Without the frame rate limit the efficiency would probably go down.

 

That's a thought, how much do the settings affect power?

 

2 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Almost, except some cards such as the 2080 may be higher up on the voltage ladder compared to the 2070

It's exactly this thinking that makes the Super cards less appealing, as it feels like they're pushing them harder to get that performance differential.

 

1 minute ago, vogelspinnen said:

You sound like me trying to justify a new purchase. 

 

"Look honey, i just wanted to help reduce the power bills around the house, that's why i bought this 2080ti Kingpin..."

If I haven't already bought a 2080 Ti, I'm not going to now... the differences in power are never going to offset the up front costs.

[xAcid9]

2 minutes ago, Origami Cactus said:

I also noticed that the Nvidia cards are super un-efficient in their default mode.

AMD cards.

 

[Princess Luna]

I mean back on the days I had my 1080 Ti on 2560x1080p75hz and I V-Synced the usage of the card tended to be so low even the FE blower cooler wasn't loud, power usage was low too.

[alatron978]

Yeah, that would work.

[GoldenLag]

A relativly big navi with low clocks and voltage would probably be the best.

 

7nm is very good at the lower voltage levels.