AMD's Answer to GeForce GTX 700 Series: Volcanic Islands

[Casecutter]

Well, something must have happened between those old tests and the newer ones at [H]OCP...

Yeah, if you read what you posted [H] say they're using "real gaming and recorded the highest value in each"... Not an average of what it took to complete that section! Sure a 7970 might peak for a millisecond, is that what they mean as the "highest" value?

While now [H] doen't tell us the games used, but hopefully figure the 5 [H] used in that new review, which are different that the earlier 5. [H] drop Batman and Witcher (use 11% more watts than the 7970GHz) which as move the data against the GHz Edition. Also, in most of the titles the 7970GHz provide more Fps verse a 680, so we'd logial anticipate more power usage. Even Sleeping Dog [H] had to us the lower 1920x Res to have more Fps,

Going back to an average of the what a card require to complete the run-throughs of each game, and them take those five games add them together and divide by 5 is more real world anyway you slice it.

Why persist in spreading misinformation? This is from a previous thread about the GTX780:

From W1zzard's own GTX Titan review you can find in the TPU website:

That's only one game Crysis 2 on a specific run-through. Sure it looks good by that on one data point, but hardly is telling the whole story, when various titles have their average power usage and over a long period of playing each. Sure if all you play is "Crysis 2 at 1920x1200, Extreme profile, representing a typical gaming power draw. Highest single reading during the test" and then limited your play to that one small run-through each time then you can abide with that one point of data.

 

[Recus]

kinda like gk110 you mean(titan) with one unit disable after a year of making
and then the 780 comming out with 2 units disabled lol
nvidia is just horrible with new process nodes, they never seem to get the hang of that, they are the ones always complaining about yield and what not simply because their engineers fail to work according to tsmc's fabs which nvidia has been using for over 10 years
amd on that front is miles ahead, always bringing excellent chips right when the fab spins, gotta appreciate amd from amd, and if this volcanic islands thing is coming out this years then it only further proves my point(though i still believe that image has nothing to do with volcanic island or the rumor itself)

Except AMD regularly feeding their fans with fake marketing slides, and lies such as HD 2000 (DDR4), HD 7000 (XRD2), HD 9000 (20 nm).

Sincerely, AlMostDead

 

[W1zzard]

Highest single reading during the test

that's for the "peak" graph. "average" represents the average you are looking for. all other sites that i know use a single reading for their power consumption measurements and dont disclose details, some even list full system power

even today, crysis 2 is still a great choice for power consumption testing

 

[15th Warlock]

that's for the "peak" graph. "average" represents the average you are looking for. all other sites that i know use a single reading for their power consumption measurements and dont disclose details, some even list full system power

even today, crysis 2 is still a great choice for power consumption testing

Precisely, no other reviewer so thoroughly tests hardware under most conceivable scenarios like you do, and clearly disclose all environmental factors influencing the results.

And I agree, Crysis 2 maxed out can still stress most hardware configurations out there, and make even the fastest system break a sweat, it's as good a test tool as any other game out there.

 

[d1nky]

Except AMD regularly feeding their fans with fake marketing slides, and lies such as HD 2000 (DDR4), HD 7000 (XRD2), HD 9000 (20 nm).

Sincerely, AlMostDead

really? what is it about a bledy graphics/cpu brand that creates conflicts?! in my life its girls that create conflicts!

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Except AMD regularly feeding their fans with fake marketing slides, and lies such as HD 2000 (DDR4), HD 7000 (XRD2), HD 9000 (20 nm).

Sincerely, AlMostDead

:shadedshu

 

[RejZoR]

that's for the "peak" graph. "average" represents the average you are looking for. all other sites that i know use a single reading for their power consumption measurements and dont disclose details, some even list full system power

even today, crysis 2 is still a great choice for power consumption testing

Also CS:GO and Trackmania Unlimited (even in track editor). The only two games that make my otherwise silent graphic card spin its fans like crazy. So crazy high that i had to create my own fan curve and sacrifice some thermals in order to keep it quiet along with the rest of the system.

 

[xorbe]

Also CS:GO and Trackmania Unlimited (even in track editor). The only two games that make my otherwise silent graphic card spin its fans like crazy. So crazy high that i had to create my own fan curve and sacrifice some thermals in order to keep it quiet along with the rest of the system.

Are your fps readings in the stratosphere? You might try a frame rate limiter.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Except AMD regularly feeding their fans with fake marketing slides, and lies such as HD 2000 (DDR4), HD 7000 (XRD2), HD 9000 (20 nm).

Sincerely, AlMostDead

Useless post there dude and largely balls too, Xdr2 for 7### was a rumour and 8### isn't fully out yet so suggesting the nine series isn't going on 20nm is jumping the gun in the extreme ,as it probably will be 20nm as could be the v2 sea islands , lame amd bashing try harder.
I think its quite clear to most that the pics of an Apu, so if this were Vi then amd will just be making scaleable Apus for everything and most situations, and its too soon for that imho but id welcome a mythical gpu like that pic x2, because damn them things would fold well even intels phi would look a bit weak on double precision compared to that spec of chip.

 

[Casecutter]

that's for the "peak" graph. "average" represents the average you are looking for

Stand corrected Thank you.

So with Crysis 2 the Ghz furnishes 9.8% more performance, while requiring 28% more watts than a GTX 680. If several other titles had that same trend(s) it could be appreciated it as a veritable results, but one data point is not definitive proof.

While Titan has 35% performance increase while basically using the same power of GHz, (even with the one data point) Titan appears to have some determinate efficiency. Now, can the Titan LE (fusing off 2 SMX) provide something approaching that performance/watts?

 

[cdawall]

Except AMD regularly feeding their fans with fake marketing slides, and lies such as HD 2000 (DDR4), HD 7000 (XRD2), HD 9000 (20 nm).

Sincerely, AlMostDead

You might want to tell their stock holder because they believe something is going well. Sitting at almost $4 a share now which is almost double from the start of the month.

 

[HumanSmoke]

Yeah, if you read what you posted [H] say they're using "real gaming and recorded the highest value in each"... Not an average of what it took to complete that section! Sure a 7970 might peak for a millisecond, is that what they mean as the "highest" value?

Nice hypothesis
A couple of observations:
1. How do you know that the maximum measurement is the peak of a millisecond?, and
2. Isn't it conceivable that the other cards are being measured the exact same way...so in fact the GTX 680's full load power measurement could also be a transient peak of a millisecond duration ?

While now [H] doen't tell us the games used, but hopefully figure the 5 [H] used in that new review....

I was told by another guy who holds AMD to be the one true god, that they have it on good authority that the 7970GE was tested with Crysis 2, Metro 2033, BF3 multiplayer, Furmark, and 3DMark while the GTX 680 was tested with Solitaire, Minesweeper, Tetris, Farmville and The Lost Titans. If true- and I'm assured it is, that could account for the discrepancy. If so, then the world-wide conspiracy against AMD does indeed cover the entire planet!
Xbit ( difference of 78W in Metro 2033)
HT4U (difference of 76W - gaming benchmarks)
PCGH ( difference of 73W in Battlefield Bad Company 2)
Hardware.info (difference of 65W in Metro 2033)
Hexus (difference of 61W in Far Cry 3)
PC Perspective ( difference of 61W in BF3)
SweClockers (difference of 50W - application not specified)
Lab501 (difference of 47W in Crysis 2)
Hardware Canucks (difference of45W in Ungine Valley bench)
TechPowerUp (difference of 43W in Crysis 2)
HotHardware ( difference of 40W -application not specified)
TechSpot (difference of 38W in Crysis 3)
Hardware France (difference of 42W in Anno 2070 and 36W in BF3)
Bit-tech (difference of 35W in Unigine Heaven bench)
ComputerBase (difference of 35W in AC3)
Anandtech (difference of 24W in BF3)
HardwareLUXX (difference of 13W - application not specified)
Tech Report ( difference of 8W - application not specified)

By my count, that takes in Northern, Central, Western, and Eastern Europe, North America, and Australia.

 

[d1nky]

I was told by another guy who holds AMD to be the one true god, that they have it on good authority that the 7970GE was tested with Crysis 2, Metro 2033, BF3 multiplayer, Furmark, and 3DMark while the GTX 680 was tested with Solitaire, Minesweeper, Tetris, Farmville and The Lost Titans

its late....... was that sarcasm?!

 

[Super XP]

This new series should be called AMD MONSTER HD 8970. Can't wait to see these baby's in action. The HD 8900 Series is my next upgrade.

 

[pjl321]

I will be upgrading from a very old system but want to wait for either Volcanic Islands or Maxwell for a graphics card.

So the question is, what is faster my AMD Radeon HD 4870 512mb or the Intel HD 4600 on the 4770k?

Next question, as i am pretty sure Intel will not have managed to compress an entire high-end (ish) video card from 2008 into a few transistors on a CPU, can i still use the OpenCL power of the Haswell chip if i have my old discrete card plugged in? I remember on early Sandy Bridge reviews you could only use QuickSync if you had a monitor plugged into Intel's video outputs.

 

[Super XP]

Personally I think the HD 4870 is the faster card, though I believe it supports upto DX10.1 where as the Intel supports Direct X 11.1.
Discrete graphics won't choke in games like integrated. The Intel one does 4K video well but for games the AMD takes it. Can somebody else advise

 

[HTC]

This new series should be called AMD MONSTER HD 8970. Can't wait to see these baby's in action. The HD 8900 Series is my next upgrade.

That's some blind faith you have, dude!

Wouldn't it be more sensible to see some reviews BEFORE making that decision?

 

[Recus]

You might want to tell their stock holder because they believe something is going well. Sitting at almost $4 a share now which is almost double from the start of the month.

Because of this http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2013/05/01/amd-spikes-13-on-heavy-volume/.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Personally I think the HD 4870 is the faster card, though I believe it supports upto DX10.1 where as the Intel supports Direct X 11.1.
Discrete graphics won't choke in games like integrated. The Intel one does 4K video well but for games the AMD takes it. Can somebody else advise

You have it right there mate.
I use a hybrid physx card that needs to have a monitor attached btw I just use the second input on a single monitor, I can't see them both but dont use thr second input and it enables the features I want, the pjl136 dude could use this same tactic on his intel gfx output surely.

One day this phone will pay for all these messups.

Odd dp I edited sorry.

 

[W1zzard]

How do you know that the maximum measurement is the peak of a millisecond

nobody tests graphics card power consumption with millisecond resolution.

most editors use cheap killawatts that take a reading every 1-2 seconds. some even slower/people just look and memorize the highest number.

a handful of sites use proper measuring devices. i'm running at 12 samples per second, which in my opinion is a good compromise between accuracy and speed.

it could be interesting to look at power consumption with sub-microsecond resolution to observe the effects of power limiting systems, but spending a few k just for that doesn't seem to be worth it.

 

[xorbe]

nobody tests graphics card power consumption with millisecond resolution.

most editors use cheap killawatts that take a reading every 1-2 seconds.

Right, but that number that's updated every 1-2 seconds ... was it just an "instantaneous" (perhaps "1 ms" effectively) reading, or a true average of the last 1-2 seconds?