One reason why AMD GPU's will not die out any time soon

[Tangtawan]

As long as AMD is still developing GPU, High wattage PSU market will keep growing.

[don_svetlio]

As long as AMD is still developing GPU, High wattage PSU market will keep growing.

You do realise Titan X pulls more power than a Fury X, right?

[totjup5]

Fear not my fellow forum denizens! Captain Obvious has graced us with his presence!

[Tangtawan]

butthurt AMD fan spotted.

[don_svetlio]

butthurt AMD fan spotted.

Ignorance spotted.

[Tangtawan]

And no. The AMD Fury X consumes more power than the Titan X.

I have tested both cards, during gaming and with torture test.

 

Titan X's rig peak around 390w + -  >> https://youtu.be/qHZf3PCOhA8?t=9m38s

Fury X's rig peak around 480w + - >> https://youtu.be/NJ7UpfXVAXE?t=13m27s

[don_svetlio]

And no. The AMD Fury X consumes more power than the Titan X.

I have tested both cards, during gaming and with torture test.

 

Titan X's rig peak around 390w + -  >> https://youtu.be/qHZf3PCOhA8?t=9m38s

Fury X's rig peak around 480w + - >> https://youtu.be/NJ7UpfXVAXE?t=13m27s

Kombustor is not Valid - I already told you - Nvidia and AMD both throttle power Viruses - thing is - Nvidia do it harder to save the card from dying.

[Tangtawan]

I did the video through kombustor, but I have spend an entire week with each of the cards.

Doing daily usage and gaming as well.

 

Not being theoretical 

The Titan X clearly has better power consumption ratings compare to the Fury X

 

There are other websites that confirm this statement.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/208874-amds-radeon-fury-x-previewing-performance-power-consumption-and-4k-scaling/3

http://wccftech.com/amd-fury-digitialstorm-review-leaked-dead-heat-titan/

[Timmahnz]

The main reason being that they are used in consoles 

 

I'm not trying to start a flame war but just trying to make a point 

 

I would think that the revenue AMD generates from selling APUs for the Xbox One and PS:4 to not be enough to keep AMD afloat, given the consoles have been out almost two years and AMD is still losing money each quarter. 

[don_svetlio]

I did the video through kombustor, but I have spend an entire week with each of the cards.

Doing daily usage and gaming as well.

 

Not being theoretical 

The Titan X clearly has better power consumption ratings compare to the Fury X

 

There are other websites that confirm this statement.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/208874-amds-radeon-fury-x-previewing-performance-power-consumption-and-4k-scaling/3

http://wccftech.com/amd-fury-digitialstorm-review-leaked-dead-heat-titan/

WCCFTech...... Why not throw in GPUBoss?

[Tangtawan]

WCCFTech...... Why not throw in GPUBoss?

 

so you're saying. your argument is more trustworthy than all of the review sites that had tested countless graphic cards?

[don_svetlio]

so you're saying. your argument is more trustworthy than all of the review sites that had tested countless graphic cards?

I'm calling bullshit on a 295X2 pulling 650W considering a single 290X is currently working fine on a 400W PSU on this very forum meaning that each 290X drawing 325W is impossible.

[Tangtawan]

But have you used any of those cards / test it, or its just a matter of assumption?

[don_svetlio]

But have you used any of those cards / test it, or its just a matter of assumption?

If a 290X system works fine on a 400W PSU, it makes no sense for 2x 290Xs to be pulling 650W since 1x would be 325W and a system usually uses about 100W - a cheaper PSU cannot overload like a boss...

[Tangtawan]

Have you ever tested power consumption rate in real life usage? Or you have been reading through the internet?

 

Let me ask you straight away.

Does AMD Hawaii or Nvidia GM200 has better power consumption/performance rating; this is a simple question.

[don_svetlio]

Have you ever tested power consumption rate in real life usage? Or you have been reading through the internet?

 

Let me ask you straight away.

Does AMD Hawaii or Nvidia GM200 has better power consumption/performance rating; this is a simple question.

Who's talking about Hawaii? I'm talking Fiji

[Tangtawan]

When you called me ignorance and provided me a chart, i didnt see any Fiji cards...

 

So can i have my answer? GM200 or Hawaii which one consume more power for the same performance?

 

However,I cannot argue for Fiji as I have yet to test the R9 Nano which I will spent my next week with.

 

R9 Fury seems to be a good card though, but not Fury X as the air coming out of the radiator is as hot as the air from hairdryer.
If Fury X heat management is efficient, why does it come stock water cooled?

[don_svetlio]

When you called me ignorance and provided me a chart, i didnt see any Fiji cards...

 

So can i have my answer? GM200 or Hawaii which one consume more power for the same performance?

 

However,I cannot argue for Fiji as I have yet to test the R9 Nano which I will spent my next week with.

 

R9 Fury seems to be a good card though, but not Fury X as the air coming out of the radiator is as hot as the air from hairdryer.

If Fury X heat management is efficient, why does it come stock water cooled?

Hawaii is a different story. It uses more power, I agree.

Fury X's heat is managed with an AiO since HBM needs to be cool.

[Prysin]

I'm calling bullshit on a 295X2 pulling 650W considering a single 290X is currently working fine on a 400W PSU on this very forum meaning that each 290X drawing 325W is impossible.

my 295x2 draws approximatly 600-630w when running a 7.5% OC to the Core and 150MHz OC to the RAM

[don_svetlio]

my 295x2 draws approximatly 600-630w when running a 7.5% OC to the Core and 150MHz OC to the RAM

The GPU alone or the entire system?

[Prysin]

The GPU alone or the entire system?

entire system hits 735w in valley.

idle wiht intel HD sitting at desktop is around 45w

So i guess it is around there...

 

Idle with 295x2 installed sitting on desktop is around 110w

 

System draw at stock settings is 620w..

 

So yeah, it CAN go over 600w for GPU alone

[don_svetlio]

entire system hits 735w in valley.

idle wiht intel HD sitting at desktop is around 45w

So i guess it is around there...

 

Idle with 295x2 installed sitting on desktop is around 110w

 

System draw at stock settings is 620w..

 

So yeah, it CAN go over 600w for GPU alone

I guess you're right. I still think 600W is where the stock 295X2 was last I checked. Could be wrong I guess

[Prysin]

I guess you're right. I still think 600W is where the stock 295X2 was last I checked. Could be wrong I guess

stock is supposed to be 500w....

 

a single R9 290X is 300w... the R9 295x2 was supposed to have "slightly lower TDP, and slightly higher clock speeds" then 2x R9 290X

[don_svetlio]

stock is supposed to be 500w....

 

a single R9 290X is 300w... the R9 295x2 was supposed to have "slightly lower TDP, and slightly higher clock speeds" then 2x R9 290X

TDP ain't really a good reference point but it's odd that it should hit 650W. Well - the 590 hit 700W but that's a different story

[Prysin]

TDP ain't really a good reference point but it's odd that it should hit 650W. Well - the 590 hit 700W but that's a different story