AMD R9 295x2 price down to $650

[Apexis]

This raises some questions. Should you get a Maxwell Nvidia Card or should you go with this?

 

http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/anton-shilov/black-friday-downs-radeon-r9-295x2-price-to-479-in-the-u-k-649-in-the-u-s-e649-in-europe/

[FloRolf]

If you don't pay for electricity then sure, get the 295x2.

[Aniallation]

(gets out wallet)

[Dietrichw]

..... I want this, my computer runs off of solar so I don't need to worry about power costs

[TheSLSAMG]

Maxwell.

 

Give me all the shit you want, but I would rather my system draw ~500W at peak load instead of ~800W (R9 295X2 vs GTX 970 SLI). (Numbers pulled from eXtremePSUCalculator, 4790K@4.7GHz/1.32V, SSD+HDD, High End MB, 2 DDR3 DIMMS, 5x140MM fans)

 

And even then, SLI GTX 970s cost about the same as this solution and perform as well too. And hey, low power consumption and heat output is normally a nice thing.

[flibberdipper]

I'd rather have 970 SLI.

[Suika]

I would prefer dual 970s. It's not like I don't have enough from for a second card.

[Lotus]

Just the PSU to run that thing costs enough to make it too expensive...

 

 

...still, it's insane that now people are actually thinking about the 295x2 in terms of price to performance. That's NEVER supposed to happen with cards like that!

[MbV93]

Oh my god! When are nvidia fanboys going to get over the stupid AMD power comments!? That's the most powerful graphics card at $650, that's great shut up... We don't need to know that you'd rather have less performance because "heat/electricity" SHUT UP!

[TheSLSAMG]

Oh my god! When are nvidia fanboys going to get over the stupid AMD power comments!? That's the most powerful graphics card at $650, that's great shut up... We don't need to know that you'd rather have less performance because "heat/electricity" SHUT UP!

The most powerful GPU at $650?

 

Dual GTX 970s cost as much, dual R9 290s and R9 290Xes cost less. And if the power comments are stupid, why are both NVIDIA and AMD actively trying to drop the power consumption of their GPUs? And why are ARM and Intel doing it with CPUs?  It's only a good thing, less heat and less power draw. I am not an NVIDIA fanboy, I choose what is best for the time. And an R9 295X2 isn't that great, they had to attach a damn AIO to it, adding a point of failure and making case compatibility limited (not that limited, but there are still cases where installing and mounting one is a PITA.) So, with that, no thanks. I'd like to express my opinion without having people like you telling me and others to be quiet.

 

And considering you need an 800W PSU for one of these cards, it consumes a lot of fuckin' power.

[Enderman]

Oh my god! When are nvidia fanboys going to get over the stupid AMD power comments!? That's the most powerful graphics card at $650, that's great shut up... We don't need to know that you'd rather have less performance because "heat/electricity" SHUT UP!

Maybe once you move out of your parents basement you will notice the difference in power cost...

You can get two 970s for the same price, which perform better, overclock more, run cooler, quieter, and have less driver issues.

 

Also telling people to shut up because of their opinion is also a good way to get banned from the forum.

 

Just because you think the 295x2 is better doesnt mean people who prefer something else are all wrong.

[That Norwegian Guy]

Maxwell.

 

Give me all the shit you want, but I would rather my system draw ~500W at peak load instead of ~800W (R9 295X2 vs GTX 970 SLI). (Numbers pulled from eXtremePSUCalculator, 4790K@4.7GHz/1.32V, SSD+HDD, High End MB, 2 DDR3 DIMMS, 5x140MM fans)

 

extremePSUapproximator, more like.

 

Tom's Hardware actual hands-on measuring and not magical guesstimations by an outdated script: 469.8W peak system draw.

 

Furmark MIGHT get up to 550W.

[TheSLSAMG]

extremePSUapproximator, more like.

 

Tom's Hardware actual hands-on measuring and not magical guesstimations by an outdated script: 469.8W peak system draw.

Those consumption numbers are for the GPU itself...

[Lotus]

Sheesh, power consumption doesn't matter for desktop users. The move of maxwell to lower power is because of the trend towards laptops and NVIdia wants to capitalize on it, and you guys are falling for the marketing. The problem with higher power consumption is the need for a beefier PSUs and cooling. You'll spend, what, like an extra $20 on your power bill? That's nothing in a $2k build. It doesn't matter.

[That Norwegian Guy]

Those consumption numbers are for the GPU itself...

 

Derp, you're right. Still, you won't get anywhere near 800W unless you have a 300W TDP processor from the future. Hard drives and fans are peanuts, and memory/SSD other flash based components are neglible.

[TheSLSAMG]

Derp, you're right. Still, you won't get anywhere near 800W unless you have a 300W TDP processor from the future. Hard drives and fans are peanuts, and memory/SSD other flash based components are neglible.

They're not really negligible, five 140MM fans, a HDD, an SSD, an AIO and the motherboard itself all consume power too. And if you overclock your CPU, you still have more there. 800W is suprisingly realistic. If you don't overclock so much like I do, you can reasonably run it on a 750W supply, but a lot of people still OC.

 

Either way, they sit here on desks in cases. At least we don't have to strap them to our backs and bring them places

[Briggsy]

unless you are running benchmarks all day that taxes your gpu, power consumption is a silly argument. If I were to switch from Hawaii to Maxwell, it would take me a few decades to make back the money for switching, simply because in real world use the Hawaii GPU is quite efficient. Tom's hardware were able to push the Maxwell GPU's to their max, and to no ones surprise they consumed the same amount of power as Kepler. Until 20nm is out in full swing, these power consumption arguments are straw man at best.

[Mooshi]

inb4 Asus makes another crazy niche card that is 2 970's on the same PCB.

[Tacitus]

I'd rather have a 295x2... and I've already got one 970...

[Tacitus]

inb4 Asus makes another crazy niche card that is 2 970's on the same PCB.

 

Gigabyte's "waterforce"? 3 GTX 980s with external WC loop for £2500.

[Faa]

And considering you need an 800W PSU for one of these cards, it consumes a lot of fuckin' power.

And preferably no PSU with OCP aka no multirail. Even ax1500i's have OCP enabled by default set to 30Amps, if you don't turn it off it can't feed that card.

 

 

Tom's Hardware actual hands-on measuring and not magical guesstimations by an outdated script: 469.8W peak system draw.

That's done with Corsair Link which only can measure the total AC/DC draw and how much Amps are flowing through a cable. 500W was being drawn from PCIe cables and the socket is able to provide around 75W which comes down nearly to 600W.

 

 

Oh my god! When are nvidia fanboys going to get over the stupid AMD power comments!? That's the most powerful graphics card at $650, that's great shut up... We don't need to know that you'd rather have less performance because "heat/electricity" SHUT UP!

Some people care about silence and this card is freaking loud; http://nl.hardware.info/reviews/5417/27/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-z-sli-review-tones-tizair-systeem-geluidsproductie

Besides we pay here 0.35 Eur/kWh that's 0.43$/kWh, think again.

[Rohit Jackdaw]

This thing is watercooled out of the box. Still power consumption is an issue but this looks cool. So my preference is this over 970 SLI even though I am an Nvidia Fanboy.

[mark201200]

295x2 ftw.. thats more powerful then 970s, plus it's water cooled, so it overclocks better.

[bcredeur97]

SLI support is better than XFire unless all you play is AAA games. id go with 970 SLI.

 

less power usage too. and it will put out less heat into the room. and you dont have to find a spot for a radiator in your case.

[patrickjp93]

295x2 ftw.. thats more powerful then 970s, plus it's water cooled, so it overclocks better.

No. 2 970s with a mild overclock is more powerful, and this is on release drivers.