AMD once again violating power specifications? (AMD RX-480)

[zMeul]

 

http://ht4u.net/reviews/2016/amd_radeon_rx_480_review/index15.php

[Valentyn]

2 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Well that's good news that means Nvidia doesn't crush AMD

 

Not only that is seems Polaris is much better with some Gameworks titles here and there as well; but it really shines at DX12

Sadly the reference card is junk, terrible power circuitry, hot, and noisy; with performance all over the place. As usual with an AMD card wait for a custom AIB version like a Sapphire Nitro or something.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-r9-rx-480-8gb-review,1.html

 

[3DOSH]

11 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I'm not saying dx12 titles aren't coming, but unless I'm mistaken those all support dx11, and the dx11 performance on nvidia cards will probably be fairly similar to the dx12 performance on AMD cards as has been the case in the past.

If the games are truly optimized for dx12,"making use of async and low level programing" you well see huge gap now thats the part that you were trying to say and i agree,  it well take a lot of time. 

[stconquest]

28 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Nope. Mathematics is proof of that.

I hope you mean that math that is used for prediction is based on testing done previously... real world physics.  You know, things tested. 

 

@patrickjp93  And another thing:  has your plane landed yet?  How was/is the flight?  Did they have free cashews?

[Briggsy]

Here's some cool pictures I stole from PCPer (keeping in mind the pci-e slot power draw is the white + red line, which in both stock tests is sitting above 75 watts combined)

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Power-Consumption-Concerns-Radeon-RX-480

 

 

 

[LAwLz]

1 minute ago, Blake said:

go read https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4qmlep/rx_480_powergate_problem_has_a_solution/

 

And clearly you haven't read it. otherwise you would also know this is a nothing story and never was, but the usual "DRAMA ALERT" that gets thrown around every time there is a new product release or some other polarised topic mentioned.

Oh so you haven't read the PCIe specifications...

 

DaaQ doesn't know what he is talking about, and neither does you since you are just parroting him.

 

 

Quote

According to the internet, the PCIE slot pulling over 75w was from 2 reviewers out of 20, of the other reviewers who were shared this information, non were able to recreate the scenario. So not being able to recreate the current overdraw by other reviewers, really means something in itself. But AMD fail is AMD fail, such is the oh too familiar mantra. rolleyes.gif Anyone that comes at me with proof.gif or your argument is invalid. How about you actually do some reading if your so concerned with proof. I seen the above information earlier in the day and am not going to spend the time trying to convince people that won't be convinced anyway.

This is wrong. The only reviewers who measured power consumption at the PCIe slot all came to the same conclusion. Right now we have 6 reviewers who did that. The rest of the reviewers measured power at the wall socket, which will mask the issue.

 

Quote

Ektobuffer 3 points 3 hours ago "Maybe i can helb you out a bit Raja. I have just read the PCI-E 3 specifications and they are telling me something different. In my understanding the 75 watt isnt the maximum limit, its just the default value on startup of the motherboard. The motherboard it self sets the maximum allowed watt per slot in the "Slot Capabilities Register" which you can configure up to over 300 watt per slot. In the bits 7 to 14 "Slot Power Limit Value" you can set 250, 275, 300 and above 300 watt. This will be multiplied with bits 15 to 16 "Slot Power Limit Scale" in steps x1 ,x0.1, x0.01 and x0.001. So its up to the motherboard manufacturer and the power management on it how many watt the slot is capable of. The Specifications do define the protocol and not the hardware specs of the PCI-E slot. If a manufacturer uses better parts which can handle higher amps on the contacts and the lines, they can allow the devie in the slot a higher power consumption than 75 watt via these registers. Sadly most people doesnt even read the specifications and judge things they dont understand."

http://composter.com.ua/documents/PCI_Express_Base_Specification_Revision_3.0.pdf

This is Ektobuffer misunderstanding the PCIe specification (are all AMD fanboys this horrible at reading comprehension?).

What the specification stats is that the maximum power allowed is 300 watts. That is 75 watts from the PCIe socket itself, plus 225 watts though other means such as the PCIe power cables from a PSU.

It does NOT specify that you can draw 300 watts from the slot itself.

 

Go to page 639 in the PDF linked above. Here is what it says:

 

The important part is this:

Quote

Limit Scale value, specifies the upper limit on power supplied by the slot or by other means to the adapter.

 

When the specification says "slot power limit" it means the total amount of power a card is allowed to use. It does not refer to the amount of power the slot is rated to provide.

 

This is the exact same discussion we had back when the Radeon 6990 launched.

Here is a quote from Ryan Smith about the PCIe power limits:

Quote

For a while now we’ve been under the impression that video card size and power consumption was ultimately capped by the PCI-Express specification. At present time the specification and its addendums specify normal (75W), 150W, 225W, and 300W PCIe card operation. In the case of 300W cards in particular this is achieved through 75W from the PCIe slot, 75W from a 6pin PCIe power connector, and 150W from an 8pin PCIe power connector. As the name implies, the PCIe specification also defines what the 6pin and 8pin power connectors are supposed to be capable of, which is where 75W and 150W come from respectively.

 

Want another source? Here is the electromechanical specification for PCIe. Here is a direct quote from page 37 regarding the maximum allowed power draw though the PCIe slot:

Quote

A x16 graphics card is limited to 75 W. The 75 W maximum can be drawn via the combination of 12V and +3.3V rails, but each rail draw is limited as defined in Table 4-1, and the sum of the draw on the two rails cannot exceed 75 W.

For a more detailed breakdown of exactly how much power is allowed though each rail, please see page 35-36.

 

 

 

Maybe you should listen to your own advice and actually read the specifications before parroting what some ignorant person on Overclockers post.

 

By the way, Ektobuffer edited his post to confirm that he was indeed wrong. You can find his post here.

[laminutederire]

7 minutes ago, Valentyn said:

 

Yeah sure, I don't know when those are due though

Asus has presented theirs, hopefully they'll launch it soon, that should make other manufacturers release theirs fairly soon as well

 

[zMeul]

@LAwLz don't argue the PCI Express® Base Specification Revision 3.0

it's a 2010 white paper that gets immediately invalidated by the 2013 PCI Express Card Electromechanical Specification Revision 3.0 that clearly states 

[laminutederire]

6 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

 

That reddit page may be right on one point:

Amd can most probably solve it through software.

It'll probably nerf a bit the card abilities, but we'll still have a really great non reference cards which won't suffer from it.

[stconquest]

5 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

By the way, Ektobuffer edited his post to confirm that he was indeed wrong. You can find his post here.

Damn programmers mixed up the 1 and the 0:

 

Power limiter 75W:  PCI-E x16 = 0; 6-pin = 1

 

I don't code, don't kill me.

[Valentyn]

7 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Yeah sure, I don't know when those are due though

Asus has presented theirs, hopefully they'll launch it soon, that should make other manufacturers release theirs fairly soon as well

 

A staff member of Overclockers.co.uk said mid July for the AIB cards to start arriving. Not too long now, shame AMD didn't just let their partners do all the cooling from the start like with the 300 series.

[laminutederire]

2 minutes ago, Valentyn said:

A staff member of Overclockers.co.uk said mid July for the AIB cards to start arriving. Not too long now, shame AMD didn't just let their partners do all the cooling from the start like with the 300 series.

Yeah so just after the juicy discounts end  GG !

[Valentyn]

2 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Yeah so just after the juicy discounts end  GG !

At least there's no AMD "Founders" edition cards

Also it's just after all the price gouging on the reference cards end.

[Briggsy]

5 minutes ago, Valentyn said:

At least there's no AMD "Founders" edition cards

Also it's just after all the price gouging on the reference cards end.

Heres the FE 480

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150772

 

or if you prefer the last resort shopping locations

http://www.ncix.com/detail/xfx-amd-radeon-rx-480-ad-133195.htm

[Valentyn]

2 minutes ago, Briggsy said:

Heres the FE 480

 

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150772

Price gouging at its finest. At least it's not at Irish local retailer pricing yet. ;P

[LAwLz]

2 minutes ago, zMeul said:

@LAwLz don't argue the PCI Express® Base Specification Revision 3.0

it's a 2010 white paper that gets immediately invalidated by the 2013 PCI Express Card Electromechanical Specification Revision 3.0 that clearly states 

Well that revision still has 75 watts as the maximum. I couldn't find the entire document which is why I didn't use that as a sourced. However, if you go to page 45 in this document you can see:

Quote

the sum of the draw on the two rails cannot exceed 75 W.

 

[Briggsy]

3 minutes ago, Valentyn said:

Price gouging at its finest. At least it's not at Irish local retailer pricing yet. ;P

That's some fine gouging there.

[Valentyn]

1 minute ago, Briggsy said:

That's some fine gouging there.

That's regular pricing there

Here's the Fury X
http://www.elara.ie/productdetail.aspx?productcode=JCEATI-XFX-R9-FURY-4QFA

There's a reason we Import things from the UK, and Mainland Europe.

[LAwLz]

1 minute ago, Blake said:

What your not part of PCI-SIG? so can't actually talk about the current revision? So you don't actually know shit about the topic (reading a spec does not make you an expert).

 

Looks like I was correct about the drama alert thing, hey? AMD has already made a statement, so unless someone who is an expert (journalists are not experts, as much as they like to 'float their own boat') calls them on it, all your doing is wasting everyone's time, polarizing the issue, and creating more drama.

 

Go on, i'll wait another 10 mins for you to go google search a response again.

So your response to me is:

"well it is not in the spec, and all the measurements we have right now shows that it is a problem, but I will only trust AMD's official statement".

Are you for real? You got proven wrong. End of story. I can talk about the current revision because I linked a citation from it clearly stating that the 75 watt power limit is still there, just like previous revisions. It did not change.

 

I do "know shit" about this topic. I think I have demonstrated that I am far more knowledgeable than you at the very least (which isn't hard since you are just parroting what you read some ill-informed person say).

 

This is not just drama. It is a real issue. The only one creating drama here is you, by denying solid evidence that contradicts your predefined conclusion. There wouldn't be any drama if people just accepted the facts.

 

Unlike you, I don't "google search" my responses.

[zMeul]

8 minutes ago, Blake said:

AMD has already made a statement

link please

 

as for PCIe 3.0 specs, the 2013 paper is the most recent covering the PEG power draw

and PS: you don't need to be a PCI-SIG employee/affiliate to read tech specs

[Briggsy]

6 minutes ago, zMeul said:

link please

according to TTL, AMD are apparently making an announcement tomorrow about the 6-pin connector.

 

actually a really interesting video. Basically means the 1328mhz xfx cards are pointless cash grabs.

[zMeul]

1 minute ago, Briggsy said:

according to TTL, AMD are apparently making an announcement tomorrow about the 6-pin connector.

so there isn't an announcement, but one to come 

[patrickjp93]

1 hour ago, stconquest said:

I hope you mean that math that is used for prediction is based on testing done previously... real world physics.  You know, things tested. 

 

@patrickjp93  And another thing:  has your plane landed yet?  How was/is the flight?  Did they have free cashews?

Nope, 6 more hours. So far, so good. Also, no, I mean mathematics that prove, without testing needed, various things. Why does calculus work? It can be proved that it works. Why does physics work? Because the calculus says it will.

[79wjd]

11 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Nope, 6 more hours. So far, so good. Also, no, I mean mathematics that prove, without testing needed, various things. Why does calculus work? It can be proved that it works. Why does physics work? Because the calculus says it will.

That math only works out when we have a complete picture.

[stconquest]

14 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Nope, 6 more hours. So far, so good. Also, no, I mean mathematics that prove, without testing needed, various things. Why does calculus work? It can be proved that it works. Why does physics work? Because the calculus says it will.

Any math that can predict is based off of some real world measurement.  That is all I am saying.  Life exists without math.  Math does not exist on earth without life.

 

...and did they give you free cashews or what?

 

Have a good flight.