New Upcoming ATI/AMD GPU's Thread: Leaks, Hopes & Aftermarket GPU's

Plz, everything so far has been right not that I am justifying or anything , just stating.

AMD card which is almost as fast as titan is gonna consume 300W because AMD cards are always more power hungry than NV. You dont even need a secret source to know that.

Now, when OC`ed it is faster than titan. For reference: 980Ti Oc`ed consumed 350W to beat titan maxwell. In perspective it puts AMD at 400W and with modded BIOS it is holy molly...

TL DR: R490X consumes 400W no sweat. And with custom BIOS you will need another power supply to power it!:grin:

 

Is your only purpose in this thread to flame and troll? If so please leave now.

 

since when stating facts is trolling?

It is called criticizing, ever heard of this word?

 

Facts are something you can link to for reliable sources. What you spewed forth was speculation.

 

Come again. Everything point towards a 250-300W TDP just like the TXP.

Again all you are doing is posting flame bait and trying to turn this discussion in a war.

Please leave now.

 

Fermi.

Boom, your mind is blown.

There is a difference between a logical, well-thought-out post and the flame baiting inaccurate nonsense you posted.

 

Bringing up a decade old gpus is nonsense.

Lets take a look at the more recent history:



AMD card consuming 100W more watts than Nvidia equivalent.

Now, with custom BIOS as I stated it will easily do 400W+ in normal gaming scenario. Why? Because even 980 Ti consumed 350W, titan x even more than that, so it is bizarre to say that AMD can beat NV meanwhile consume less, want it or not.

Power efficiency is hardly improving on AMDs nor Nvidia gp1x0 side.

And when it happens dont pretend as if no one said it before anyone else

 

Can somebody wake up Hicks ?!

Yes, please stick to the Topic.

Now we need some info about Vega & ZEN :banana:

 

Everything is already known. Now everyone is copying each other. You want an actual hardware, dat what.

 

You're really bad with words. Fermi is 5 years old not a decade and certainly not "always". You used Furmark because it looks worse, in Crysis the Fury X only uses 20w more. It's pretty well known that recent AMD cards have consumed slightly more power than their Nvidia equivalents - but hyperbolizing it with a flamebait post just makes you look petty. Polaris significantly closed the gap in terms of efficiency - IIRC the binned mac Polaris chips match Nvidia in perf/w - Vega is expanding on this.

Anyway it's pretty clear that you're just here to troll/derail the thread, so I'm done responding and just going to report your nonsense.

 

1)

Almost a decade ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_400_series

2) I said Custom BIOS, not on stock. At stock according to my OG post it would be at ~300W which the aforementioned data proves.

3)With custom BIOS, 980Ti uses 350W of power. https://www.overclockers.ru/lab/762...ie-videokarty-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080.html#14

4)Power consumption remains the same throughout the generations for high end cards like 980Ti(GM200). ~250W

So an AMD card 490x(as it is supposed to have at least some OC potential unlike its predecessors) with custom BIOS will breake 400W no sweat, just like titan pascal will reach and even breach 350W watt with an unlocked bios.

Isn`t this forum supposed to be for adults as there is "too much" adolescence.

 

Yeah we do. No news about Vega or Zen OnnA.

 

It's called bad comprehension. You can criticize based on fact not speculation, even more so when that speculation is wrong within its own logic.

Here you clearly say that the 490x will need 400W to work. With that logic, the Fury X would need 500W. It's really 2x Tahiti and Tahiti cards get up to 250W, right?

Obviously wrong.

Read your own links.

Except for Maxwell, all AMD cards linked are faster and use less power. The 7970 is faster than the 680 and the 580, the 290x is faster than the 780Ti. It's also Furmark which not only is not representative of gaming loads, it's actually called a "power virus".

As for *SPAM* things, seven years is closer to five years than it is to ten, but judging from the rest of the math in some posts, the expectations were too high I guess.

 

^^^^Dats 7 years in march(def not 5+) fermi was announced even earlier than the actual release.. But the point is it is a complete non sense to go back to Fermi. Might as well bring up ATI when their cards were actually faster than NV.

I have the most recent history of both companies at hand(read post above). Of course AMD can pull off another weak card which is gonna lose big to titan pasclal/1080Ti while consume less. It will be a complete embarrassment then.

 

The face palm is so hard it hurts.

They still are faster, depending on the part of the market. Apple is also using AMD GPUs exclusively, to make their laptops fat and slow.

The only generation were NVidia cards are indisputably faster is this one, and that's because AMD won't compete at a specific segment yet. In the ones that it does, it's the better choice.

Also what do you mean "back to Fermi"? How old are you? 3dfx went down in three years. Nobody is guaranteed their place anywhere. You sound like a person who can't believe that the status quo changes, because you've never seen it change. This is geezerland, tread lightly on the lawns.

 

lolz, did you really ignore the whole section of power consumption. Referred to amd mobile gpu when we clearly talk about desktop parts.

Confirmed that NV gpus are faster(if benches are not enough already). And what in the world does 3dfx have to do with 490X power consumption?:grin:

Conspiracy theory: 3dfx are secretly amd, jking..

You cherry picked in the wrong direction.

Lastly, when I said 7 years because Fermi was announced around Jan time, the same time period VEGA is supposed to launch, it is really almost a decade ago; heck I remember even at school 7-8 years were classified as "almost as a decade".

 

NVidia GPUs are the fastest in absolute speeds currently. In the segments that AMD competes, I would argue that the equivalent AMD cards are better choices.

Pulling supposed power consumption numbers out of your ass means nothing. We have no product in our hands. Even if Vega is just 2x 2048 shader Polaris minus the HBM factor, we would be in the 225-260W ball park, but we'll see. You see, at least I'm trying to be less confident about the product of my orifices until we have at least a glimmer of an actual product.

Also 3dfx are openly NVIDIA, and the point you miss is the stupidity of using the word "forever" for things in the tech sector.

No, it's closer to a five year period than a ten year period, since 7-5=|2| and 7-10=|3|.

 

I like how your points are very vague. "AMD cards in its competitive segment are a better choice" ehh, this is not up to me but majority of the desktop market is Nvidia ruled. Power VR on mobile.

Whats with the graph of mine you quoted? It shows an actual representation of what a custom BIOS would do to a gpu.

So we take 350W+ of Titan X pascal(with bios), add ~100 of Watts as according to these graph and it will equate to 490x at ~500W of power off of a single graphics card. Pretty insane. The whole point behind all of this fiasco.

You are stating the obvious math to yourself. If you come to someone and say something lasted for about a decade, the person would assume about 7-10 years.
When/how did you graduate?

 

I just realized that I'm getting frustrated. I can also imagine you're like this for other things in life. Since I don't want lose faith in humanity even more, I'm out.

Spoiler