I'd be more interested to see what AMD can do around about 150W than 300W. Hopefully that's the requirement for a dual GPU card, as otherwise it would seem that AMD is still avoiding power efficiency with its latest designs.
I'd be more interested to see what AMD can do around about 150W than 300W. Hopefully that's the requirement for a dual GPU card, as otherwise it would seem that AMD is still avoiding power efficiency with its latest designs.
planned leak anyone and the 300w is to put people off the scent ..check if they still have jobs ..leaking info would get them the sack
What does it matter now if men believe or no?
What is to come will come. And soon you too will stand aside,
To murmur in pity that my words were true
(Cassandra, in Agamemnon by Aeschylus)
To see the wizard one must look behind the curtain ....
300w or not, I'm all for horsepower and getting away from the energy saving nonsense.
Ok you save X% power usage over the last generation but if the horsepower is only Y% more whats the point imo unless it's a significant shift. Ends up having to use more power to do the same job long term.
I, like a lot of peeps, didn't buy an 800w+ PSU so only use half of it.
Give us the power !
So I guess you would be ok with a 600w TDP GPU?. I want a balance, the TDP makes me wonder about the heat the card will make. There was that rumour that AMD is using a 295X cooler for the next cards, which has me a bit worried.
I hope the performance justifies having a 300W TDP
Of course there was no problems with the 295X2 it's a water cooler GPU, the problems were with the R9 290's
That was because of a poor stock cooler on release. That issue no longer exists with aftermarket coolers; it's fine when using exactly the same coolers used on GK110 cards.
I could have sworn you said something about the last high TDP card. That'd be either the 295x2 or later releases of the 290 series.
I did, but i also thought by saying "if AMD keep using sub par cooling solutions it's not" that people would know i didn't mean the 295x2 (water cooling), or AIB suppliers with better cooling solutions than the standard AMD heatsinks.
It's also worth noting that the 290X already has a 290W TDP, GK110 is 250W. They're pretty meaningless numbers, so no reason to kick up a fuss about a 300W TDP, provided it's even accurate, before we know anything else about the card.
The 300W they are referring to is the estimated TDP, which quite frankly is only 12W more than the 980GTX!. I don't see platinum or mrjim complaining about the 980gtx!. Dear oh dear.....
The interposer is a sub component and 300W is just the current PCIe card power limit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#Power
Given the tech is going to be used on a high end card, it comes down to either 300W or 375W as the only 2 sane targets. I really don't think this tells us anything about the target power consumption of the finished graphics card.
Someone posted a 3DMark 11X score of 8121 points on AnandTech. Someone needs to make a 5K FreeSync monitor sharpish.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)