AMD Officialy Confirms Existence of New Radeon Flagship "Ultra-Enthusiast" GPU

[mr moose]

Your issue of keeping the environment in mind when making any buying decision is fine. No one disputes that. What I absolutely unapologetically laugh in his face for is calling himself an environmentalist and therefor boycotting AMD cards. There are too many deficiencies in what he said from a logical point of view that it needs to be called out. Boycotting a companies graphics cards based on miniscule additional power draw over the competition and calling yourself an environmentalist in the same breath is actually an insult to environmentalists everywhere. Again using semi synthetic oil in ur Humvee doesnt make you an environmentalist. It doesnt mean you have to drive a Humvee either...or live in a cave. Just dont call yourself an environmentalist as a thinly veiled reason for not wanting to buy AMD cards.

 

Maybe he mispoke or something...because as it stands its out of this world...I also am really intrigued on what he does with his old PC parts and what he thinks becomes of them in the end. 

 

I didn't read his post as being set in concrete, but that for now that's the way it is.  I am also more responding to the people ridiculing him for such an environmental ethos.  For all we know his card could be sitting on top of a baytrail ( I doubt it, but if we are going to make assumptions about the rest of his life and rig based on this one post then why not be unbiased about it). 

 

Like all good people he should be sending old parts in for recycling.  When he comes back we'll find out.

[Faa]

There's about a 65 watt difference in power consumption between the GTX 970 and the R9 290X at full load.

 

65 watts @ 10 hours use per day = 237.25 kWh/year @ $0.20/kWh = $47.45 a year additional cost.

 

That's with gaming 10 hours a day every single day out of the entire year (not going to happen). So in reality the cost is only about 1/10 of that at the most ($4.75 a year).

My 970 consumes 120W;

​Pretty sure a 290x is around 250-270W, so that's twice as much. You're only looking at price, show me a 290x running at 65° with fans at 700-800rpm, 3 Way CF is just impossible to cool on air where as with 3 970's it can be done easily.

[Opcode]

My 970 consumes 120W;

​Pretty sure a 290x is around 250-270W, so that's twice as much.

I'd trust Anandtech over you any day.

 

 

Peaking at 71 additional watts in FurMark (no game will reach them numbers so 65 watts would be your average).

[mr moose]

There's about a 65 watt difference in power consumption between the GTX 970 and the R9 290X at full load.

 

65 watts @ 10 hours use per day = 237.25 kWh/year @ $0.20/kWh = $47.45 a year additional cost.

 

That's with gaming 10 hours a day every single day out of the entire year (not going to happen). So in reality the cost is only about 1/10 of that at the most ($4.75 a year).

 

Now multiply that buy the number of top end GPU's bought annually (about 10M roughly) If everyone used them at full load that often we could save 2.3TW of power a year.  That's enough to power a big city.

 

Not that I am harping on, just pointing out the environmental aspect is not insignificant, depending how you approach the issue.

[Meladath]

Now multiply that buy the number of top end GPU's bought annually (about 10M roughly) If everyone used them at full load that often we could save 2.3TW of power a year.  That's enough to power a big city.

 

Not that I am harping on, just pointing out the environmental aspect is not insignificant, depending how you approach the issue.

 

Citation needed on that 10M. Given that nvidia's revenue last year was just over 4bn, that means that even if everything they sold was $500 (a "high end GPU) they only sold 8M, even if you double it assuming nvidia only has 50% market share (which isn't right, they are sitting around 70%), thats only 16M. Thats assuming every single penny they made was selling high end GPU's, which is obviously far from the truth. I find it incredibly unlikely that all of those things happened.

[Faa]

I'd trust Anandtech over you any day.

 

Peaking at 71 additional watts in FurMark (no game will reach them numbers so 65 watts would be your average).

It's proof you're seeing in real-time, if you screw the reality for your fanboyism sure be that delusional. Measuring from the wall is quite useless as the PSU efficiency is never static and they're not even clear about what the rest of his system are using.

Thats 130W not 65w.

[Meladath]

It's proof you're seeing in real-time, if you screw the reality for your fanboyism sure be that delusional. Measuring from the wall is quite useless as the PSU efficiency is never static and they're not even clear about what the rest of his system are using.

~snip~

Thats 130W not 65w.

 

Well done, you found literally the only benchmark on the internet that shows the 970/980 actually performing the way nvidia markets them.

 

Now look at every other benchmark out there to see what other people get, and average them. Just because 1 result agrees with you doesn't mean they all do.

The very fact that he posted one review and you posted only one more merely debunks both of you.

[Opcode]

Now multiply that buy the number of top end GPU's bought annually (about 10M roughly) If everyone used them at full load that often we could save 2.3TW of power a year.  That's enough to power a big city.

 

Not that I am harping on, just pointing out the environmental aspect is not insignificant, depending how you approach the issue.

Environmental socialists are a joke that's just my own opinion. Read the glaciers and you'll understand about the ice ages that coexist on our planet every 6000 years. Before we can even "save" the planet mother nature will kick our asses from it. I honestly could care less as my gene pool will be long gone before the world decides to "shut down". One person looking to be "eco-friendly" is not going to make even a 0.00000000000000000000000001% difference on the global impact. I'll burn my wood to heat my home, fill the sky with black smoke from my diesel while I smoke my cigarettes and enjoy life.

[Opcode]

It's proof you're seeing in real-time, if you screw the reality for your fanboyism sure be that delusional. Measuring from the wall is quite useless as the PSU efficiency is never static and they're not even clear about what the rest of his system are using.

Thats 130W not 65w.

TDP is not power consumption.

[mr moose]

Citation needed on that 10M. Given that nvidia's revenue last year was just over 4bn, that means that even if everything they sold was $500 (a "high end GPU) they only sold 4M, even if you double it assuming nvidia only has 50% market share (which isn't right, they are sitting around 70%), thats only 8M. Thats assuming every single penny they made was selling high end GPU's, which is obviously far from the truth.

 

If more than 11Million units are shipped per quarter then the total shipments per year is at least 40Million. Assuming only 1/4 to be top end that gives about 10Million GPU AIBs sold per year. 

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8446/the-state-of-pc-graphics-sales-q2-2014

[mr moose]

Environmental socialists are a joke that's just my own opinion. Read the glaciers and you'll understand about the ice ages that coexist on our planet every 6000 years. Before we can even "save" the planet mother nature will kick our asses from it. I honestly could care less as my gene pool will be long gone before the world decides to "shut down". One person looking to be "eco-friendly" is not going to make even a 0.00000000000000000000000001% difference on the global impact. I'll burn my wood to heat my home, fill the sky with black smoke from my diesel while I smoke my cigarettes and enjoy life.

 

One person won't but 10 might and 5 million will.  If you think pumping all the by products from both manufacturing and power generation back into the waterways is not going to effect your quality of life then you are the joke.  

[Meladath]

If more than 11Million units are shipped per quarter then the total shipments per year is at least 40Million. Assuming only 1/4 to be top end that gives about 10Million GPU AIBs sold per year. 

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8446/the-state-of-pc-graphics-sales-q2-2014

 

Shipments are most certainly not equal to sales, close, but not the same at all. Also I HIGHLY doubt the high end GPU sales are anywhere NEAR 1/4 of the overall sales, I have no proof of this, but enthusiast PC sales are already a small market, couple that with the fact that with the amount of GPU's that will be shipped in most pre-builds etc...

 

Again, pointing to the revenue of nvidia, it's incredibly unlikely its anywhere near 10M high end gpu's.

[nicehat]

I'll burn my wood to heat my home, fill the sky with black smoke from my diesel while I smoke my cigarettes and enjoy life.

 

And you're confused if you think diesel engines today are bad for the environment. Youre also a clown if you think smoking cigarettes hurts anyone (including the environment) more than it does you. 

 

If you're trying to say that one cannot pay respect to the environment/due diligence and simultaneously enjoy life, then you are also an idiot for that too.

 

Thats just my opinion. 

[Faa]

TDP is not power consumption.

Are you trolling or? I don't know which reviewer ever would try to measure the cooling you need if the TDP specs are already up >.> Guru3D thinks TDP is power consumption.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-and-980-reference-review,7.html

 

Measured power consumption GTX 970

1. System in IDLE = 120 Watts
2. System Wattage with GPU in FULL Stress = 274 Watts
3. Difference (GPU load) = 154 Watts
4. Add average IDLE wattage ~10 Watts
5. Subjective obtained GPU power consumption = ~ 164 Watts

   Power consumption AMD Radeon R9-290X

   1. System in IDLE = 120W
   2. System Wattage with GPU in FULL Stress = 396W
   3. Difference (GPU load) = 276W
   4. Add average IDLE wattage ~10W
   5. Subjective obtained GPU power consumption = ~ 286 Watts

    

[mr moose]

Shipments are most certainly not equal to sales, close, but not the same at all. Also I HIGHLY doubt the high end GPU sales are anywhere NEAR 1/4 of the overall sales, I have no proof of this, but enthusiast PC sales are already a small market, couple that with the fact that with the amount of GPU's that will be shipped in most pre-builds etc...

 

Again, pointing to the revenue of nvidia, it's incredibly unlikely its anywhere near 10M high end gpu's.

Nvidia aren't the only manufacturers of GPUs, you can't only look at their revenue and try to work things out.

 

JP research is quite accurate, and given that I have intentionally rounded down and ignored almost 11 Million units to ensure a worse case scenario then I highly doubt the consumptions figures are lower than what I proposed. 

[Ebinlaw]

If the new flagship beats Titan X and is under or equal the price of 980, AMD wins this round.

[Opcode]

And you're confused if you think diesel engines today are bad for the environment. Youre also a clown if you think smoking cigarettes hurts anyone (including the environment) more than it does you. 

 

If you're trying to say that one cannot pay respect to the environment/due diligence and simultaneously enjoy life, then you are also an idiot for that too.

 

Thats just my opinion. 

Oh boy not another tree hugger... Scientists are pointing to combustion exhaust fumes as to not only impacting the environment (carbon dioxide) but also cancer and other shit now too. Smoking cigarettes is just an example of the two fucks I give about what people think is judgmental to my health. I could care less about how much of an impact I alone make on the environment because it's on such a small scale that it's literally irrelevant. Even with 10 million people becoming eco-friendly it still would be such a small scale to the point of where literally nothing has changed. You environmental socialists are just as bad as them damn Jehovah witnesses knocking on my door asking me if I found Jesus.

[Meladath]

 

Are you trolling or? I don't know which reviewer ever would try to measure the cooling you need if the TDP specs are already up >.> Guru3D thinks TDP is power consumption.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-and-980-reference-review,7.html

 

Measured power consumption GTX 970

1. System in IDLE = 120 Watts
2. System Wattage with GPU in FULL Stress = 274 Watts
3. Difference (GPU load) = 154 Watts
4. Add average IDLE wattage ~10 Watts
5. Subjective obtained GPU power consumption = ~ 164 Watts

   Power consumption AMD Radeon R9-290X

   1. System in IDLE = 120W
   2. System Wattage with GPU in FULL Stress = 396W
   3. Difference (GPU load) = 276W
   4. Add average IDLE wattage ~10W
   5. Subjective obtained GPU power consumption = ~ 286 Watts

    

 

 

Good for you bro. Again, find another source and it matters. He used anandtech, you used Guru3D. The general results tend to be between 180-200 for the 970 and 260-280 for the R9 290X, obviously an average.

 

You go through every 970 and R9 290X review and work it out yourself if you really want to. 

[Dabombinable]

Is it me, or are people forgetting that solar power is a thing now? And that more and more homes are starting to use it, reducing the impact on the environment by a shitload?

[Tacitus]

Good for you bro. Again, find another source and it matters. He used anandtech, you used Guru3D. The general results tend to be between 180-200 for the 970 and 260-280 for the R9 290X, obviously an average.

 

You go through every 970 and R9 290X review and work it out yourself if you really want to. 

 

When disabling crossfire, my entire system draws 350-380W from the wall (so around 300 - 325W is what the system is actually using). I have 2  290xs, and 4670k at stock clocks. Even with a modest overclock, in a gaming scenario, the GPU is rarely drawing more than probably 220W.

[mr moose]

Oh boy not another tree hugger... Scientists are pointing to combustion exhaust fumes as to not only impacting the environment (carbon dioxide) but also cancer and other shit now too. Smoking cigarettes is just an example of the two fucks I give about what people think is judgmental to my health. I could care less about how much of an impact I alone make on the environment because it's on such a small scale that it's literally irrelevant. Even with 10 million people becoming eco-friendly it still would be such a small scale to the point of where literally nothing has changed. You environmental socialists are just as bad as them damn Jehovah witnesses knocking on my door asking me if I found Jesus.

 

There is no way to combat such ignorance.

 

 

Is it me, or are people forgetting that solar power is a thing now? And that more and more homes are starting to use it, reducing the impact on the environment by a shitload?

 

I have solar, about half of my houses power usage is from the panels on the roof.  My next house is going to be totally of the grid.

[Opcode]

Are you trolling or? I don't know which reviewer ever would try to measure the cooling you need if the TDP specs are already up >.> Guru3D thinks TDP is power consumption.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-and-980-reference-review,7.html

 

Measured power consumption GTX 970

1. System in IDLE = 120 Watts
2. System Wattage with GPU in FULL Stress = 274 Watts
3. Difference (GPU load) = 154 Watts
4. Add average IDLE wattage ~10 Watts
5. Subjective obtained GPU power consumption = ~ 164 Watts

   Power consumption AMD Radeon R9-290X

   1. System in IDLE = 120W
   2. System Wattage with GPU in FULL Stress = 396W
   3. Difference (GPU load) = 276W
   4. Add average IDLE wattage ~10W
   5. Subjective obtained GPU power consumption = ~ 286 Watts

    

 

I'm trolling? I'm not the one that made the claim that TDP = Power Consumption. Tho to satisfy your fancy (prove to you how stupid your argument is) lets run the numbers.

 

Lets say the R9 290X uses 122 more watts of power.

 

122 watts @ 10 hours use per day = 445.3 kWh/year @ $0.20/kWh = $89.06 a year additional cost.

 

As stated before that's with gaming 10 hours a day every single day out of the entire year which is not going to happen.

 

So in the end the cost is only about $8.91 a year at max. I wipe my ass with more money than that in a month.

[Dabombinable]

There is no way to combat such ignorance.

 

 

 

I have solar, about half of my houses power usage is from the panels on the roof.  My next house is going to be totally of the grid.

Good luck, because at the moment it relies heavily on standard lead-acid batteries, and they don't seem to last as long as is needed for true off the grid use.

[mr moose]

Good luck, because at the moment it relies heavily on standard lead-acid batteries, and they don't seem to last as long as is needed for true off the grid use.

New lithium phosphate batteries are better, but significantly more expensive.  By the time I am ready to build there will be new battery tech.  I figure if I was to build now I could build a system that would last 10 years and cost about $15,000.  So I am holding out hopes I can better that with new batteries in a few years.

[Opcode]

Is it me, or are people forgetting that solar power is a thing now? And that more and more homes are starting to use it, reducing the impact on the environment by a shitload?

More people are using solar energy and other forms of clean energy for one main reason, to reduce the impact of their electrical bill.