Flaw in TPU's graphics card power consumption measurement

[mirakul]

I will go straight to the problem.
Let's see recent number of R9 FuryX

Ok, FuryX 280W, 980Ti 238W, AMD sucks as usual.

But detailed test from an other review tells a different story
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196-7.html
Max power 450W, but average 220W in gaming loop.
Most of review only show the peak number, but the average consumption is that really matter.
Fyi, 980ti has 295W max but 235W average
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti,4164-7.html

Same story which the stress test

Woops, 432W.
Meanwhile, Tom records 448.52W max 347.49W average

The fact that TPU doesn't offer the AVERAGE number could be very misleading. It is a BIG flaw.
Your thought? @W1zzard

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Misleading in what way? For me peak is the most relevant number. It tells me what PSU I really need, it tells me what the power will be in the bleeding edge games I tend to play. Average for me would be misleading and not very relevant.

 

[95Viper]

The fact that TPU doesn't offer the AVERAGE number could be very misleading. It is a BIG flaw.

Am I missing your point... I apologize if I am.

The average number is offered in his reviews: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4 GB Power Consumption

And, he explains how the results are obtained:

For this test, we measure the power consumption of only the graphics card via the PCI-Express power connector(s) and PCI-Express bus slot. A Keithley Integra 2700 digital multimeter with 6.5-digit resolution is used for all measurements. Again, the values here only reflect the card's power consumption as measured at its DC inputs, not that of the whole system.

We use Metro: Last Light as a standard test representing typical 3D gaming usage because it offers the following: very high power draw; high repeatability; is a current game that is supported on all cards; drivers are actively tested and optimized for it; supports all multi-GPU configurations; test runs in a relatively short time and renders a non-static scene with variable complexity.

Our results are based on the following tests:

• Idle: Windows 7 Aero sitting at the desktop (1920x1080) with all windows closed and drivers installed. Card left to warm up in idle mode until power draw was stable.
  
• Multi-monitor: Two monitors connected to the tested card, both using different display timings. Windows 7 Aero sitting at the desktop (1920x1080+1280x1024) with all windows closed and drivers installed. Card left to warm up in idle mode until power draw was stable. When using two identical monitors with same timings and resolution, power consumption will be lower. Our test represents the usage model of many productivity users, who have one big screen and a small monitor on the side.
  
• Blu-ray Playback: Power DVD 9 Ultra is used at a resolution of 1920x1080 to play back the Batman: The Dark Knight Blu-ray disc with GPU acceleration turned on. Measurements start around timecode 1:19, which has the highest data rates on the BD with up to 40 Mb/s. Playback keeps running until power draw converges to a stable value.
  
• Average: Metro: Last Light at 1920x1080, representing a typical gaming power draw. Average of all readings (12 per second) while the benchmark was rendering (no title/loading screen). In order to heat up the card, we run the benchmark once without measuring power consumption.
  
• Peak: Metro: Last Light at 1920x1080, representing a typical gaming power draw. Highest single reading during the test.
  
• Maximum: Furmark Stability Test at 1280x1024, 0xAA. This results in a very high no-game power-consumption that can typically be reached only with stress-testing applications. We report the highest single reading after a short startup period. Initial bursts during startup are not included, as they are too short to be relevant.

Power consumption results of other cards on this page are measurements of the respective reference design.

 

[mirakul]

Both reviews I mentioned stated card power consumption only

 

[Pill Monster]

Average is gonna vary between workloads. Peak is always the same tho, people wanna know peak when PSU shopping.

 

[Nordic]

Do you mean this average? If you did not see it, it is the 4th graph on the bottom left.

Which is recorded using this method:

• Average: Metro: Last Light at 1920x1080, representing a typical gaming power draw. Average of all readings (12 per second) while the benchmark was rendering (no title/loading screen). In order to heat up the card, we run the benchmark once without measuring power consumption.

246w at tpu is pretty close to toms 220w. Easily just a difference in test used.

 

[Ralfies]

It is important to know power consumption under all scenarios. That's why w1zzard offers various readings under different loads, including average power consumption while gaming as seen above.

 

[15th Warlock]

Isn't it funny how many posts questioning TPU's review methods are popping up after the Fury review?

In my 10+ yrs as a forum member I don't ever remember seeing this phenomenon before.

People, get over it, in over a dozen reviews found outline, the only outlier has been Tom's findings in their review.

 

[Ebo]

I cant really see any problem at all, just like 15th Warlock.

I mean peak preformance is allright to know if your PSU might not be able to handle the workload. If you are cutting it that close, you have your head in the ground, if you ask me. then is dosent really matter, since you're going to shop for another PSU in a short while anyway.

I had my mind set up for Fury X also, to replace my R9 290 Tri-x OC from Sapphire, but now im not so sure. My card can run anything i throw at it atm so it was more the itch for getting now tek than actual need. Now i can pick up a 2nd R9 290 for ½ the price of Fury X, and get almost similar preformance.
I bourght a new PSU just about 1½ month ago, to be ready for Fury X, so i have no problem in that direction at all. I have all the power I need, I just need a new GFX or a 2nd similar to the one i allready have.

Lets see how the R9 Fury on air behaves when its launched mid next month, mabye I'll go that way.

 

[rtwjunkie]

W1zzard is absolutely right to give us peak power consumption. Why?

Because that tells me in the most demanding game what i can expect to draw power-wise from a card. That's the most important number to know. Why?

Because although someone's PSU can provide the average power draw all day long, that peak consumption number might put it down. Better to know beforehand if your PSU can handle a card or not.

 

[Tatty_Two]

I just checked the review, there is clearly a graph supporting average consumption so not sure what the issue is here, the only problem I could see is that terms like "idle" or "maximum" of fairly definite, where as "average" could be somewhat subjective between testers.

 

[qubit]

Isn't it funny how many posts questioning TPU's review methods are popping up after the Fury review?

In my 10+ yrs as a forum member I don't ever remember seeing this phenomenon before.

People, get over it, in over a dozen reviews found outline, the only outlier has been Tom's findings in their review.

Well yes, very good point. Everyone knows that the Fury X is twice as fast as the 980 Ti, because AMD's PR slides said so. I think @W1zzard should do the decent thing by revising his review and simply double all the Fury X framerates to correct for his terrible error and make AMD apologists happy. The overall rating should then become 11/10 as well, to reflect the card's true performance.

 

[Aquinus]

Someone seems to have somewhat rather selective sight when it comes to the what he sees in a review.

 

[dorsetknob]

Well yes, very good point. Everyone knows that the Fury X is twice as fast as the 980 Ti, because AMD's PR slides said so. I think @W1zzard should do the decent thing by revising his review and simply double all the Fury X framerates to correct for his terrible error and make AMD apologists happy. The overall rating should then become 11/10 as well, to reflect the card's true performance.

Top Tip Buy AMD Shares
Share ramping

What is share ramping? Share ramping (also known as 'pump and dump' and 'book ramping') is where criminals influence the share price of a company and ...

 

[qubit]

Ah, gotta get me some of them share ramps. Thanks for the tip!

 

[Pill Monster]

Just realised OP did u start this thread over a difference of 16w?

My desklamp draws more than that.




This type of activity was becoming rampant at Guru. Mainly endorsing AMD.

 

[cadaveca]

Just realised OP did u start this thread over a difference of 16w?

My desklamp draws more than that.

But my monitor does not. Nor does my Surface 3 Pro. These days 16W can power an entire system.


But I digress, W1zzard's numbers are spot on, and I do not doubt his results one bit.

 

[Pill Monster]

But my monitor does not. Nor does my Surface 3 Pro. These days 16W can power an entire system.


But I digress, W1zzard's numbers are spot on, and I do not doubt his results one bit.

Yes but in the context of a 430w GPU, 16w is minuscule .

 

[AsRock]

Over 16w lmao, how ever i do with wizard would add wattage usages for each game.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Would be interesting. I've found Witcher 3 to be the most power hungry of any of my games. My system frequently goes over 400w, close to 450, due in all likelihood to the GPU usage most of all.

Showing a representational usage for several types of games would be great!

 

[Nordic]

Was he really complaining about 16w, or did he just not see the average power graph?

 

[dorsetknob]

Just realised OP did u start this thread over a difference of 16w?

My desklamp draws more than that.




This type of activity was becoming rampant at Guru. Mainly endorsing AMD.

We have had our Share of them here as well ( did they follow you is it your fan club snigger.
back on point
The OP whineing about 16w i expect he wastes more than 16w of energy driving to his local 7/11 kentucky Shicken shack or having big bert deliver his 18" doubledecker supersized piza for his SNACK

 

[AsRock]

We have had our Share of them here as well ( did they follow you is it your fan club snigger.
back on point
The OP whineing about 16w i expect he wastes more than 16w of energy driving to his local 7/11 kentucky Shicken shack or having big bert deliver his 18" doubledecker supersized piza for his SNACK

Chances are all the items in a household take more than that even more so if you use a lot of adapters.