TR Forums

I found this today: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-r3 ... marks.html

Not sure how accurate the performance is, but the power consumption seems right! HAHAHA... haha... ha.

I want to believe.

If true... power efficiency has improved massively (>50%) and it's either water-cooled or a massive chip -judging by the low operating temperature and high power consumption.

There seems to have been an unending stream of next-gen AMD leaks though, I'm not sure what to think about any of them.

From the rumors so far its both. Massive (4096 'cores') and water cooled (leaked picture look very much like the 295x cooling solution).

My guess is that this card is will be in $600 range...

Duct Tape Dude wrote:

I found this today: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-r3 ... marks.html

Not sure how accurate the performance is, but the power consumption seems right! HAHAHA... haha... ha.

There is a massive performance gain seen here, i wouldn't feel sad if this is the kind of performance i am getting from Top tier card.

That performance seems pretty plausible for a massive watercooled chip with super high memory bandwidth. It'll be interesting to see the price on this one (assuming it's real).

if thats true i bet it will be priced accordingly
i tend to stay away from the highest end gpu's

hopefully the 390 will be a nice price though

Why do people even care so much about power consumption :S
so it draws 100 w more or less like its gonna make a huge difference

killadark wrote:

Why do people even care so much about power consumption :S
so it draws 100 w more or less like its gonna make a huge difference

it doesnt make much of a difference in america because the power is so cheap but the price of power is double and even quadruple or more elsewhere in the world

f0d wrote:

killadark wrote:

Why do people even care so much about power consumption :S
so it draws 100 w more or less like its gonna make a huge difference

it doesnt make much of a difference in america because the power is so cheap but the price of power is double and even quadruple or more elsewhere in the world

GO GREEN! solar power is affordable and will save u a lot of $$$ but people are so reluctant to make the one time payment :/

f0d wrote:

killadark wrote:

Why do people even care so much about power consumption :S
so it draws 100 w more or less like its gonna make a huge difference

it doesnt make much of a difference in america because the power is so cheap but the price of power is double and even quadruple or more elsewhere in the world

You are exaggerating, i live in Gujarat, India. Our state electricity department charges us the most compared to other states in India, but if i am in the market for Graphic card and if i can afford some thing like this card, i don't mind such issues. After all there is a reason these cards are called enthusiast cards. Also,Its not like we play games 24/7, its hardly a 2 - 4 hour session a day for a normal gamer, i only play during weekends and max would be a 2 hour session.

There are other equipments in house that draws far more power than a graphic card - example - Microwave, Iron, Geyser, Air conditioner, Hair dryer, etc. All this equipments draws more than 1000 Watts compare to 300 watts of this card.

EDIT: Also note while you are browsing or watching movies this card will not draw 300 Watts, so the only time you will be seeing this card suck power is during the gaming sessions.

The performance gain over the GTX 980 doesn't seem big enough to win over the upcoming big chips, but who knows maybe nvidia will underdeliver like they did with the 960 (unlikely, but it has happened before).

Jigar wrote:

f0d wrote:

killadark wrote:

Why do people even care so much about power consumption :S
so it draws 100 w more or less like its gonna make a huge difference

it doesnt make much of a difference in america because the power is so cheap but the price of power is double and even quadruple or more elsewhere in the world

You are exaggerating, i live in Gujarat, India. Our state electricity department charges us the most compared to other states in India, but if i am in the market for Graphic card and if i can afford some thing like this card, i don't mind such issues. After all there is a reason these cards are called enthusiast cards. Also,Its not like we play games 24/7, its hardly a 2 - 4 hour session a day for a normal gamer, i only play during weekends and max would be a 2 hour session.

There are other equipments in house that draws far more power than a graphic card - example - Microwave, Iron, Geyser, Air conditioner, Hair dryer, etc. All this equipments draws more than 1000 Watts compare to 300 watts of this card.

EDIT: Also note while you are browsing or watching movies this card will not draw 300 Watts, so the only time you will be seeing this card suck power is during the gaming sessions.

2-4 hours is nothing really - i play for 6-8 (or even more rarely) hours a day on weekends (about 4 hours weeknights)
microwave, hair dryer (lol really?) geyser? (what the?) and iron etc are only on for like 5 mins a day max - sure i have the air con on a lot and they are expensive enough as it is and i try to not use it if possible

not exaggerating on the price of power, i pay 26c a KWh and thats pretty cheap where im from in australia - americans pay as low as 8c a KWh
also if you look none of my comments were complaining about the power usage but i can definitely understand the people that do which is why i mentioned the huge difference in rates for power

US average to 12 cents, Germany one of the highest in the 'developed' worlds is 36 cents.

(note: the leak show the 380x to be almost equal to the GTX 980 in term of power efficiency)

But lets compare a 290x to a GTX 980, just ballpark numbers to get a sense of the cost involved.

Anand show a 60w different playing Crysis3 and 15w at iddle (desktop)

a) If you use your computer 6 hours a day and also game 10h a week the saving for a year is : 32.85kwh + 31.2kwh
Your yearly saving would be $7.6 saving if you live in the US or $23 in Germany.

b) If you use your computer 12 hours a day and also game 20h a week the saving for a year is : 65.7kwh + 62.4kwh
$15.3 in the US and $46.1 in Germany

Comes down to about a ~$10 saving a year in the US, ~$35 in Germany (by using a GTX 980 vs a r9-290x)

sschaem wrote:

US average to 12 cents, Germany one of the highest in the 'developed' worlds is 36 cents.

(note: the leak show the 380x to be almost equal to the GTX 980 in term of power efficiency)

But lets compare a 290x to a GTX 980, just ballpark numbers to get a sense of the cost involved.

Anand show a 60w different playing Crysis3 and 15w at iddle (desktop)

a) If you use your computer 6 hours a day and also game 10h a week the saving for a year is : 32.85kwh + 31.2kwh
Your yearly saving would be $7.6 saving if you live in the US or $23 in Germany.

b) If you use your computer 12 hours a day and also game 20h a week the saving for a year is : 65.7kwh + 62.4kwh
$15.3 in the US and $46.1 in Germany

Comes down to about a ~$10 saving a year in the US, ~$35 in Germany (by using a GTX 980 vs a r9-290x)

australia isnt too far off of germany (posted pic above)
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/graph-of-the-day-average-electricity-prices-around-the-world-24207

and 20h a week is nothing - think more like 30+h a week of gameplay

also as i previously said i wouldnt ever get the highest end card anyways (980 or 290x) - i usually get a notch or 2 lower

Electricity where I am is about 25c/kWh. My main PC is on 24/7 because it doubles as a server, GPU sees 2 hours of use on weekdays, 3-4 hours on weekends.
So if a keep a GTX970 for three years the cost of ownership is actually less than a 290X, even if I could get them at US's heavily discounted prices (which I can't).

If the 390X really is 50% more efficient then that's great news.

f0d wrote:

2-4 hours is nothing really - i play for 6-8 (or even more rarely) hours a day on weekends (about 4 hours weeknights)
microwave, hair dryer (lol really?) geyser? (what the?) and iron etc are only on for like 5 mins a day max - sure i have the air con on a lot and they are expensive enough as it is and i try to not use it if possible

not exaggerating on the price of power, i pay 26c a KWh and thats pretty cheap where im from in australia - americans pay as low as 8c a KWh
also if you look none of my comments were complaining about the power usage but i can definitely understand the people that do which is why i mentioned the huge difference in rates for power

I just checked my power bill i am paying around 12c a KWh, and i understand you are paying twice the money for power bills but this doesn't change the scenario much even if you are playing 6 hours every day.

f0d wrote:

also as i previously said i wouldnt ever get the highest end card anyways (980 or 290x) - i usually get a notch or 2 lower

Then why have a discussion on power consumption when you don't fall into enthusiast category.

Jigar wrote:

f0d wrote:

2-4 hours is nothing really - i play for 6-8 (or even more rarely) hours a day on weekends (about 4 hours weeknights)
microwave, hair dryer (lol really?) geyser? (what the?) and iron etc are only on for like 5 mins a day max - sure i have the air con on a lot and they are expensive enough as it is and i try to not use it if possible

not exaggerating on the price of power, i pay 26c a KWh and thats pretty cheap where im from in australia - americans pay as low as 8c a KWh
also if you look none of my comments were complaining about the power usage but i can definitely understand the people that do which is why i mentioned the huge difference in rates for power

I just checked my power bill i am paying around 12c a KWh, and i understand you are paying twice the money for power bills but this doesn't change the scenario much even if you are playing 6 hours every day.

f0d wrote:

also as i previously said i wouldnt ever get the highest end card anyways (980 or 290x) - i usually get a notch or 2 lower

Then why have a discussion on power consumption when you don't fall into enthusiast category.

so i have to be an enthusiast (which i still am i believe - i dont need the latest highest end card to be one) just to have a discussion?

and i completely disagree with the fact that it "doesnt change the scenario much" it certainly does if the difference is close to $50 a year going by sschaems maths and my gaming habits

edit: just checked your signature and you dont even have the latest high end card so why are YOU having this discussion if you dont fall into the enthusiast catagory?

Jigar wrote:

f0d wrote:

killadark wrote:

Why do people even care so much about power consumption :S
so it draws 100 w more or less like its gonna make a huge difference

it doesnt make much of a difference in america because the power is so cheap but the price of power is double and even quadruple or more elsewhere in the world

You are exaggerating, i live in Gujarat, India. Our state electricity department charges us the most compared to other states in India, but if i am in the market for Graphic card and if i can afford some thing like this card, i don't mind such issues. After all there is a reason these cards are called enthusiast cards. Also,Its not like we play games 24/7, its hardly a 2 - 4 hour session a day for a normal gamer, i only play during weekends and max would be a 2 hour session.

There are other equipments in house that draws far more power than a graphic card - example - Microwave, Iron, Geyser, Air conditioner, Hair dryer, etc. All this equipments draws more than 1000 Watts compare to 300 watts of this card.

EDIT: Also note while you are browsing or watching movies this card will not draw 300 Watts, so the only time you will be seeing this card suck power is during the gaming sessions.

What's a Geyser?

But yeah power consumption is really not something enthusiasts will be deliberating over I would have thought. The performance levels look well worth it imo!

f0d wrote:

so i have to be an enthusiast (which i still am i believe - i dont need the latest highest end card to be one) just to have a discussion?

I didn't mean that, what i wanted to tell you is that you are arguing on a point which doesn't concern you as you will never go for top tier category product. Its like arguing on mileage of a sports car that you will never buy.

f0d wrote:

and i completely disagree with the fact that it "doesnt change the scenario much" it certainly does if the difference is close to $50 a year going by sschaems maths and my gaming habits

$50, i could care less for $50, new games costs more than that when they are launched in the market and yes people do buy them.

f0d wrote:

edit: just checked your signature and you dont even have the latest high end card so why are YOU having this discussion if you dont fall into the enthusiast catagory?

heh, i bought that card when it was launched at $500 (Costed me more like $800 in India)

My electricity is really low due to the gas boom. Haven't checked recently, but I think it did go as low as 5c, and it's 6.22c right now. I have no qualms buying power hungry cards if the perf/$ ratio is good, and I don't mind the extra heat in the winter. If I'm going to run a space heater anyway, might as well kill two birds with one stone.

Comprehensive energy statistics are compiled routinely by the federal government and communicated in a readily-usable form:
http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/bro ... o=g&freq=M

Pez wrote:

But yeah power consumption is really not something enthusiasts will be deliberating over I would have thought. The performance levels look well worth it imo!

Reviewers have generally reported on power consumption in the past because it was relevant to how much cooling and power supply capacity were needed when building a new enthusiast PC. Since large power supplies and capable cooling solutions are readily available, power consumption has never been a show-stopper. In the past twelve months, NVidia's evil marketing geniuses have hyped power consumption as the most important thing to talk about because it is an area where their Maxwell architecture succeeds very well.

Jigar wrote:

I didn't mean that, what i wanted to tell you is that you are arguing on a point which doesn't concern you as you will never go for top tier category product. Its like arguing on mileage of a sports car that you will never buy.

no matter - it doesnt make my point any less valid
and yet you are doing the same? where is your 290x or 980?
also millions of people argue every day irl and on forums about things they will never have anything to do with (cars/jets/football teams/wars etc etc)
(also i never considered this arguing but a discussion)

Jigar wrote:

$50, i could care less for $50, new games costs more than that when they are launched in the market and yes people do buy them.

yet some people go crazy about a $50 price difference between 2 brands of video cards making one much more of a deal than another - $50 is still $50

Jigar wrote:

heh, i bought that card when it was launched at $500 (Costed me more like $800 in India)

its still not an "enthusiast" card though
its about as "enthusiast" as my gtx 670 which was one notch down from the top card (as i said i get one notch or two lower)


fact is some people like to monitor their power usage and keep it as low as possible and to them the difference in power usage really does matter
it doesnt matter to you? GREAT.!
that doesnt mean that it doesnt matter to everyone

Jigar wrote:

Also,Its not like we play games 24/7, its hardly a 2 - 4 hour session a day for a normal gamer, i only play during weekends and max would be a 2 hour session.

Jigar wrote:

2 - 4 hour session a day for a normal gamer

(；・∀・)

Guys, we aren't honoring the AMD gods by arguing over international electricity costs or numberOfChildren:timeAvailableToPlayGames ratios.

Can we get back to the card? Or at least argue over if its rumored performance will vary a lot based on how much a game benefits from memory bandwidth (ie: HBM)?

Duct Tape Dude wrote:

Guys, we aren't honoring the AMD gods by arguing over international electricity costs. Can we get back to the card? Or at least argue over if its rumored performance will vary a lot based on how much a game benefits from memory bandwidth (ie: HBM)?

thats true
but the answer is a simple yes
all games would get a boost but the extreme bandwidth will benefit some games more than others

This would be a grand return to form for AMD if true. However, I'll reserve believing these "leaks" until TR and Anand acquire this mythical beast of a card and conduct their own benchmark suite. If R9 390X really is 50% faster than R9 290X, that would be a generational leap not seen in several years and doing so while drawing only 4% more power? This would be a Maxwell killer for sure and I would be stoked to see what the R9 380/R9 370 series would bring! Looks like I'm going to put the pause on purchasing that GTX 960 for now...

Jigar wrote:

f0d wrote:

2-4 hours is nothing really - i play for 6-8 (or even more rarely) hours a day on weekends (about 4 hours weeknights)
microwave, hair dryer (lol really?) geyser? (what the?) and iron etc are only on for like 5 mins a day max - sure i have the air con on a lot and they are expensive enough as it is and i try to not use it if possible

not exaggerating on the price of power, i pay 26c a KWh and thats pretty cheap where im from in australia - americans pay as low as 8c a KWh
also if you look none of my comments were complaining about the power usage but i can definitely understand the people that do which is why i mentioned the huge difference in rates for power

Bad electricity pricing there.
Wow very poor chart. I live in Ontario Canada an after delivery, taxes, etc. my electricity rate is 19.8 cents/kw.hr

And WOWZORS that is a ton of gaming. I have 2 kids and my wife works shift work, if I get 8 hrs of gaming in a 7 day week that is a lot for me.

If I was in Australia, I would be more concerned over having a high efficiency Air Con unit, since I bet it run continuously about 6 months of the year there and probably uses 3000W or more??

Now if your gaming 20 hr/wk and 12/wkend for 32 hr/week total, at 0.1kw.hr, that's 3.2 kw.hrs/week or 166 kw.hr/yr or about $33.28 a year at 20c/kwhr at those hours. If someone only games 1/3 of those hours it works out to about $11/year, which is trivial when you think about it, I mean lunch at a fast food place is $11.

If say the more efficient card was $100 more dollars than at even your gaming hours that would be at least a 3yr payback in electricity costs. And over 10 years in my case.

Only real decent thing about lower 3D power consumption is the ability to keep the card cooler and run quieter (with a good heatsink solution that is)

ultima_trev wrote:

This would be a grand return to form for AMD if true. However, I'll reserve believing these "leaks" until TR and Anand acquire this mythical beast of a card and conduct their own benchmark suite. If R9 390X really is 50% faster than R9 290X, that would be a generational leap not seen in several years and doing so while drawing only 4% more power? This would be a Maxwell killer for sure and I would be stoked to see what the R9 380/R9 370 series would bring! Looks like I'm going to put the pause on purchasing that GTX 960 for now...

Basically this. Hype buried under a silo full of salt. (ﾉ´∀｀*)

If true, GIMME DAT! (*´ڡ`●)

it would be nice to see more then 50% in performance gains generation over generation, or maybe i was expecting too much, i mean there was a massive jump in memory bandwidth which prolly is not even needed i though that might maybe push it close to 60% over last gen

On a side note:
Electricity here in Saudi is very cheap like petrol which costs less then water , when i go back to India its expensive but nothing jaw dropping

JustAnEngineer wrote:

In the past twelve months, NVidia's evil marketing geniuses have hyped power consumption as the most important thing to talk about because it is an area where their Maxwell architecture succeeds very well.

Yeah, just keep imagining that "evil marketing geniuses" are driving that viewpoint and not the desires of the marketplace.

Buggy whips.