What he claimed that his inside sources had told him that: 'Polaris was significantly slower and less efficient than Pascal'
Now that both parties have shown their 150w tdp cards, the 1070 and the 480, the first outputting 980ti performance and the second outputting 390-390x performance, I can only conclude he was right.
At its price point it's still a competitive card, but it's definately slower and less efficient than the 1070
We don't know yet. We only know that peak consumption of the 480 is 150w. We don't know idle power consumption (most important for electric bill) and we don't know load power consumption (for how hot the card runs).
Now you can stop speculating, and stop shitting on AMD. At least until the first benchmarks come out.
Thomas Sanchez
Tdp is not power consumption. 1070 and 1080 condone about 160-180w on average.
480's max output limit on PCI Lane and 6pin is 150w. The average will be around 120w
Luke Flores
>We only know that peak consumption of the 480 is 150w. eeuh no we don't?
>Tdp is not power consumption It isn't but it is heavy correlated, look at the tdp on the 300~ series cards versus the TDP on Maxwell cards. I'd say TDP is a good proxy for power consumption.
Chase Nelson
He made a negative spin story based on a positive one. That's a mark of an angry shill.
Brayden Hughes
A story that turned out to be true
Grayson James
>shill apologetics We don't actually know anything for sure right now. No it didn't you dumb cuck.
Connor Hughes
>We only know that peak consumption of the 480 is 150w. Bad phrasing, we know the absolute max the card can get is 150w.
Isaac Fisher
>We don't actually know anything for sure right now.
We do, we know the TDP of the 1070 and the 480, and tdp is a good proxy for power consumption
Ethan Cox
>Maxwell TDP's were real nicely memed
protip: we know it's peak power because that's how much a PCI-E slot and 6 pin connector can supply. That's all the ref 480 has.
Levi Russell
PCI Lane provides 75w 6pin provides 75w. That's the standard mobo specification.
Pls Kyle your stale shilling is stale.
Jason Price
>$199 >$379
Hunter Morris
>and tdp is a good proxy for power consumption No.
Nathan Price
That chart still shows Maxwell is well ahead in effiency
>we know it's peak power because that's how much a PCI-E slot and 6 pin connector can supply. That's all the ref 480 has.
The reference yeah, board partner cards might have two connectors.
Samuel Brooks
>No. Yes.
Nathan Cruz
On the subject of polaris, i hope they are available in half-height/low profile formats. It'd be a pretty sweet card for a HTPC setup.
Sebastian Butler
What kind of load were they testing here, is it synthetic stuff like furmark or was it actualy gaming loads? I'd like to see the source
Elijah Morris
Not a argument
Zachary Roberts
No and read the above posts you mouthbreathing retard.
Jacob Butler
How was he wrong?
David Sanders
>r9 290x beats gtx 980ti in dx12 games
heh...what a return on my investment...truly the 7970 ghz of its generation...
Justin Phillips
So you're saying nvidia 1070 and 1080 might not be 150w but could be 300w because board partners will have two connectors instead of one?
Thanks for the heads up nvidiot.
Parker Wright
>read all the comments that agree with me but ignore the others Yeah, fuck off
Levi Jenkins
it fucking says on the pictures
Metro Last Light 1080p for the AMD cards Thief 1080p for the Nvidia
Different reviews, but both used the same voltage and amperage measuring equipment
Aiden Butler
>So you're saying nvidia 1070 and 1080 might not be 150w but could be 300w because board partners will have two connectors instead of one? No, because we have already seen board partner 1080's tested and they weren't 300w
Asher Myers
Cool, looks like Maxwell is still alot more efficient
Alexander Campbell
How is he right when we dont even have the benchmarks? He may be proven right but its a little bit premature senpai
James Richardson
You can read in the article he got his info from inside sources, which turned out to be right.
Kevin Jackson
The RX 480 has about the same speed as a R9 Nano and it's 2.8x as power efficient. This would put it's power consumption to
175W / 2.8 = 62.5W
Jaxon Ross
>can't read two posts precisely explaining why his nonsense is just that mouthbreathing retard confirmed
Jace Morales
and they exceeded their TDP's massively
Matthew Perry
>The RX 480 has about the same speed as a R9 Nano Lol what?
Caleb Robinson
[THIS POST UNAVAILABLE IN EU MEMBER STATES DUE TO THE HATEFUL AND/OR VIOLENT NATURE OF ITS CONTENT. ANY DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO ACCESS CENSURED CONTENT WILL RESULT IN PROSECUTION TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW UNDER CONSPIRACY AND ACCESSORY GUIDELINES FOUND IN EU RESOLUTION #3648.]
Daniel Sanchez
I read them, and none of them countered the fact that TDP is a valid proxy for power consumption
Andrew Anderson
uh
2.8x more power efficient only applies to the GPU core
4gb of GDDR5 take up around 50 watts alone.
William Howard
>countered the fact >posted a baseless assertion without anything to back it up
mouthbreathing
retard
Isaac Rogers
Its probably basing off off 390X, which is 275 TDP. A bit more OC'd version would be around 300w
300/2.8 = 107w
Thats probably their target.
Jonathan Miller
...
Wyatt Flores
Why are these results so different from the typical power draw from the wall analysis that most reviewers post?
You always see very big differences between the 200 series and Maxwell there.
If one source deviates so much from what everyone else is showing I tend to get suspicious.
I know Sup Forums likes their tinfoilhat conspiracy theories, but I think it's unlikely that everyone is wrong while only these guys are right
Michael Lewis
>posted a baseless assertion without anything to back it up >baseless >780ti had a much higher tdp than a 970, and also had a much higher power draw >300~ series cards all have a much higher tdp than Maxwell cards and use up much more power
Baseless huh?
Mason Lee
That's a synthetic benchmark though, AMD card tend to do well there since they have alot of raw horsepower, it doesn't always translate to extra gaming performance
Daniel Powell
>still thinks a card can draw more power than a rail can provide Yes baseless. Now we're getting somewhere.
Ryan Smith
>much more >29w difference
Zachary White
70 watt delta between a 290X and 970 isn't small dude.
The point was they went way over their TDP
Gavin Sanchez
That's literally irrelevant to the question whether TDP is a good proxy for power consumption, and like I already said, aftermarket cards will likely have more power connectors
Luke Butler
>furmark >290x is a lower performing card than the 980
Justin Howard
You nvidiots really need to stop moving the goal posts around. It makes you look stupid when you can't stick to your own statements.
Ryan Cook
I guess that is rather shifty
Tyler Perry
>I know Sup Forums likes their tinfoilhat conspiracy theories, but I think it's unlikely that everyone is wrong while only these guys are right I'm not an expert on video cards by any means, but in my experience this actually tends to be the case in practice.
Sturgeon's law applies to test websites. 90% of benchmarks are run by clueless idiots who don't know how to set up a proper test environment.
The well-executed tests are usually the outliers when you look on the internet.
Benjamin Clark
You aren't comparing cards with similar performance, and you aren't using it in a situation where that card would be used by somebody who buys it
Basicaly, you are being disingenious
Blake Fisher
Reminder: 280, 280X, 290, and 290X all had the same TDP rating; you're delusional if you think all four of them drew the same amount of power.
Ryder Campbell
> but in my experience this actually tends to be the case in practice.
An analysis of power draw is literally plug in a device and average the numbers over your gaming session. It's not rocket science. No I don't believe 90% of them are doing it wrong is very likely. It it was something more complicated I might agree
Aiden Jones
>A Ferrari uses more petrol than a Honda, >Honda wins >Not comparing it with a Lambo >The city of being retarded like you
Wyatt Adams
The difference between 290X and 980 are diminishing every day.
Literally, with every new game, the average performance/watt on 290X card gets closer and closer to 980. This isn't even counting DX12, simply counting DX11's mature drivers on AMD.
Andrew Fisher
>Reminder: 280, 280X, 290, and 290X all had the same TDP rating
No they didn't, stop lying
the 280x had a 250 TDP while the 290x had a 290 TDP
Thank god the 980 isn't being actively sold anymore and nvidia has replaced it with a new model. While AMD still hawks a 3 year old card as new.
Jose Lewis
>The difference between 290X and 980 are diminishing every day. Resorting to memes again, top kek
Austin Thomas
>You aren't comparing cards with similar performance
Not even that guy, but, ????
The 290X may even inch ahead in DX12 games.
Isaiah Williams
>DX12 games >Not a meme funny guy
Cooper Anderson
>JUS PLUG A KILLAWATT IN DA WALL AN IT BE DON
People like you are why shit power supplies get sold.
See this graph? This is the 12v rail on a $300 Gold rated 1500w power supply. Most review sites didn't fucking catch how they cut as many corners as possible in the design, resulting in this. Because most review sites use shit ass setups where they stick a killawatt in the wall and call it done.
Logan Cook
>Thank god the 980 isn't being actively sold anymore LuL
Henry Turner
Again with moving goal posts.
>tdp of architecture vs architecture -> performance tier of architecture -> age of retail significance of architecture
kek
JUST to humor you, 290X isn't being sold either. So we can't make ANY comparison right? fucking hilarious.
Asher Lee
How is that relevant to the average power draw of a card over a gaming session?
If those spikes would happen frequently you would simply see a higher average power draw
Isaiah Young
>290x isn't being sold either A 390x is a 290x though moron.
Nathan Cook
>He posted a graph that proved me factually wrong >Better use the word meme to nullify his argument
Top cuck.
Benjamin Johnson
dude I have no fucking clue about benchmarks and I can think of at least 5 ways to fuck that up right off the top of my head
>not isolating power draw between the GPU and the rest of the system >mismatched / non-equivalent driver/game settings >not compensating for differences in cooler design or airflow >using a different fan profile or thermal target curve >not normalizing for / providing performance delivered
Eli Thomas
And 980 is still sold.
This is just too hilarious. Are you really that retarded?
Julian Bailey
Literally 24/7 the AMD shills crawl out to point out the only benchmark they win. Forgetting to mention that nobody actually plays those games.
Jacob King
What DX12 exclusive games (so no DX11 mode) are really out right now?
That's right, no major titles, so yeah it is a meme
Vulkan is obviously the superior option since its cross platform
Benjamin Lee
>980 is still being sold It's just the remaining stock, Nvidia aren't manufacturing any more.
anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/ >AMD doesn’t list the power consumption of the 290X in any of their documentation or specifications, and after asking them directly we’re only being told that the “average gaming scenario power” is 250W.
Techpowerup DB has been wrong on more than one occasion mate.
Isaiah Harris
And you think AMD is still manufacturing 390s and 290s?
I'm beginning to worry about you nvidiafags. Do you live in a world where only nvidia exist in your imagination and your reality? Just apply the same fucking logic and reasoning to AMD. This type of thinking is just too backwards for me.
Austin Gonzalez
Because killawatts are a shit way to measure power consumption, and the example was to show how outliers can reveal shit.
Evan Morales
>You think AMD is still manufacturing 390s?
Yes, they're still actively selling them.
Adam Hall
Stop moving the fucking goalpost, you made a retarded statement before checking the facts and got exposed.
That doesn't answer what I said, why wouldn't spikes be included in their calculcation of the average power consumption?
And why should you focus on spikes instead of average consumption what actualy matters for your power bill
Benjamin Powell
290X, 290, 280X, and 280 all have the same TDP
250 watts.
Do you think a 280 uses 250 watts? Do you think back in 2012 when the 7950 launched, that it used 250 watts? It had the same TDP back then you know, right?
Zachary Murphy
actually AMD cards do less well in 3Dmark 11 compared to real-world. Nvidia does better in this particular synthetic.
>BTFO
Justin Hill
This is just embarrassing to watch. A shill can't even see what they're typing.
Ethan Jackson
Sigh, shills out in force today. Where did I even once mention one game?
I posted a graph to disprove a shill when he said the 980 and 290X don't have similar performance, they do, end of.
I couldn't give two shits about aots. I just mentioned that future DX12 games will likely favour the 290X. And DX12 games are coming, stop spouting this only 1 game meme.
Cooper Rodriguez
>290X, 290, 280X, and 280 all have the same TDP No they don't, I already showed you they don't
Angel Jenkins
why are people so autistic about muh gpu? I had a r9290 and I can still run all games on max with a slight overclock.
Nathan Sanders
Lets see some evidence for that
Asher Thompson
You posted a link to the Techpowerup GPU database.
I posted a link to a review of the 290X, with a statement that AMD considers the TDP to be 250 watts.
Smith, the writer of the review, thinks the TDP is a bit too low, but the official AMD statistic is that the 290X has a 250 watt TDP.
Leo Wood
me2, @2560x1440... people with 770/780/780 Ti already getting that insane gimp with new games, losing out to midrange AMD cards
>people with 770/780/780 Ti already getting that insane gimp with new games, losing out to midrange AMD cards
Which midrange AMD cards are you talking about
Thomas Rivera
(unofficial)
Ian Rivera
Again, as I said, the author of the review thinks the TDP is 300w, and thus put it down on there as such.
It should be noted that Anandtech measures powerdraw at the wall, not at the GPU however.
I posted the link to get the direct statement that AMD themselves consider the TDP to be 250 watts. Not for the statement by a reviewer who doesn't even have access to proper power measurement equipment.
Your picture even has "300W (Unofficial)" on it. 250w is the official.
Quit dicking about.
Ayden Myers
And they put it there because they think it is closer to the truth.
The 290x does not have the same typical power draw as a 280x, which should have been obvious
Jackson Murphy
>I posted the link to get the direct statement that AMD themselves consider the TDP to be 250 watts
That just means AMD is retarded with their TDP ratings, and was probably to ashamed to put actual TDP of the 290x on it 300w is much close to the truth, and thus the 280 doesn't have the same tdp as a 290x
Samuel Price
>380x, 970, 290, 390, RX 480 ,btfo
>2013 800$ card, while the 600$ at the time 290x is now at near-980 levels and rising.
You got fucking memed kid
Ryder Phillips
And it's already been shown their opinion was categorically false when actual power measurement equipment was used. The 290X draws 250 watts nearly exactly. So yeah, 250 watt TDP for 290X, 290, 280X, and 280.
Also, TDP means Thermal Design Power. Who the fuck told you it meant Typical Power Draw?
Jace Wilson
>380x beats 970's in new games Oh really, heres DOOM, you see where the 380x is ? And do you see where the 970 is?
Oh let me guess your response will be >b-but that doesn't count! here have a benchmark of Asots!
Jayden Thomas
Yeah 380x is the only card he listed that is behind the 780 Ti though.
