ASUS Intros GeForce GTX 950 Graphics Card with Slot-only Power

[rruff]

It may clamp for max loads though. There's the wattage table in the rom.

Maybe if I'm bored I'll play with downclocking my 950 and see what it will do.

 

[xorbe]

Maybe if I'm bored I'll play with downclocking my 950 and see what it will do.

Besides the Titan X, I also have a 960 to downclock / flash, but I have no tools to reliably measure just the power delivered to the gfx card.

 

[rruff]

Besides the Titan X, I also have a 960 to downclock / flash, but I have no tools to reliably measure just the power delivered to the gfx card.

Me neither. I wonder how accurate the total power level in Nvidia Inspector would be.

 

[newtekie1]

I've been thinking about this, are there limiters in place? Is it even possible for cards to pull moee than 75W?

There are no limiters in place, at least not on the board level. And cards can, and do, pull more than 75w from the PCI-E bus. Sometimes with disastrous results.

Maybe if I'm bored I'll play with downclocking my 950 and see what it will do.

I'm guessing without the turbo and just running at the base clock the card would be close to 75w, though I'm still guessing a little over.

 

[rruff]

I'm guessing without the turbo and just running at the base clock the card would be close to 75w, though I'm still guessing a little over.

TPU tested the card I have and said it maxed at 122W (no OC). Stock boost clock is 1354 so 14% over reference. Stock vram is at reference. Even if you saved 14% (and you won't) you are only down to 107W.

 

[newtekie1]

TPU tested the card I have and said it maxed at 122W (no OC). Stock boost clock is 1354 so 14% over reference. Stock vram is at reference. Even if you saved 14% (and you won't) you are only down to 107W.

The ASUS Strix 950 tested here only hit 103w, and averaged 95w, and average boost was 1398MHz. I think if they use that same basic design and keep the clock down to the base 1024MHz of a stock 950, they might just get it close to that 75w mark.

 

[rruff]

I think if they use that same basic design and keep the clock down to the base 1024MHz of a stock 950, they might just get it close to that 75w mark.

They aren't though. Specs say 1190 boost.

I'll be interested to see where this power saving magic comes from if someone does a detailed review. They say efficient VRMs in this one and the R7 360 50W card as well.

 

[newtekie1]

They aren't though. Specs say 1190 boost.

I'll be interested to see where this power saving magic comes from if someone does a detailed review. They say efficient VRMs in this one and the R7 360 50W card as well.

That is the thing though, the card doesn't have to run at the boost clock. It can run at the base clock all the time, and never go to the boost state, or go to the boost clock for a fraction of a second every once in a while and then run at the base clock 99% of the time.

 

[jabbadap]

There's another Asus gtx950 without power connector too:
MINI-GTX950-2G