• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

£200 Where to Go

Meladath said:
390X 500W? Just wow... what a huge overstatement.
Have a nice image that has the exact opposite evidence
http://imgur.com/ZNV9pgR

Nice "proof". PEAK power usage of the whole system, with the 390X being under your estimate and the 970 being over! Just reeks of misinformation.

Maybe you should take a look at the average power usage from an actual reputable website to see the real difference. Like here: http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,8.html
According to this much more realistic power draw, the site even states that it will cost €62 a year to run this card 4 hours a day 5 days a week, most people don't game that much, but even if they did and EVEN IF the 970 only used half the power (which is doesn't, at least according to this test, its around 100W less), it would save you a grand total of £20 a year or so.

WHAT A GREAT SAVING. Please, thats like 2 hours of work a year.

Yes, the 2/390/X uses more power than the 970, I don't think anyone is denying that. What people deny is that absolutely absurd numbers that people like to come up with like the 970 using 5W and the 2/390/Xs using 1000W.
Click to expand...

Never did I suggest the 970 consumes 5W whilst the 2/390/X consumes 1000W, I agree that would be simply absurd.

It is a fact that Maxwell is the most power-efficient GPU architecture.

perfwatt_3840.gif

power_maximum.gif
 
smsmasters said:
Never did I suggest the 970 consumes 5W whilst the 2/390/X consumes 1000W, I agree that would be simply absurd.

It is a fact that Maxwell is the most power-efficient GPU architecture.
Click to expand...

No you did not, you did however make a suggestion that was almost as ridiculous, and your own proof, which was about as extreme a difference as you can possibly get, was even less extreme than your suggestion. I was obviously being OTT to make a point.

It is indeed a fact that maxwell is the most-power efficiency GPU architecture right now. Not that its the be all and end all though. That is simply one thing to consider when buying a GPU.

You also just did it again, showing the WORST case. Average (i.e the one that actually matters) power consumption of hawaii is generally around 250W.

Your proof is akin to saying "This car does 10 miles to the gallon because at 150Mph with the air con on and windows down it does!"
 
Last edited:
Meladath said:
No you did not, you did however make a suggestion that was almost as ridiculous, and your own proof, which was about as extreme a difference as you can possibly get, was even less extreme than your suggestion. I was obviously being OTT to make a point.

It is indeed a fact that maxwell is the most-power efficiency GPU architecture right now. Not that its the be all and end all though. That is simply one thing to consider when buying a GPU.

You also just did it again, showing the WORST case. Average (i.e the one that actually matters) power consumption of hawaii is generally around 250W.
Click to expand...

No, the graphs I posted are the maximum power consumption figures recorded.

Here are the averages:

power_average.gif


344W is far from the 250W figure you quoted for Hawaii.

Cheers

P.S. For your viewing pleasure: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/28.html
 
Meladath said:
That is also a very extreme benchmark which proves your case. The other 5 tops results on google show much lower power usage. You kinda have to go by multiple reviews to get an actual average.
Click to expand...

Tomshardware, which I'm sure you know is a very reputable website, shows similar power consumption as Techpowerup when the same card in question was tested.

oqMEAWI.png



j2zY5zW.png


So no, I wasn't exaggerating when I said the R9 390X uses nearly 500W in peak system power consumption.

Cheers

P.S. For your viewing pleasure http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-radeon-r9-390x-r9-380-r7-370,review-33233-10.html
 
Last edited:
Meladath said:
Your proof is akin to saying "This car does 10 miles to the gallon because at 150Mph with the air con on and windows down it does!"
Click to expand...

The variables in those test scenarios remained unchanged, yet varying degrees of power consumption figures were recorded.

This highlights the inefficiencies of the Hawaii GPU architecture and superior performance per watt of Maxwell.

I do not see what cars have to do with graphics cards. The two are as far removed from each other hence there is no comparison.

Cheers
 
smsmasters said:
No, the graphs I posted are the maximum power consumption figures recorded.

Here are the averages:

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/images/power_average.gif

344W is far from the 250W figure you quoted for Hawaii.

Cheers

P.S. For your viewing pleasure: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/28.html
Click to expand...
Here are the averages from TPU's review of another 390:

power_averagennkyx.gif

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_390_PCS_Plus/28.html

MSI's 390(X) cards seem to use a lot more power than all the others, based on the reviews I've read, possibly due to much higher stock voltages to secure the hefty factory overclocks they've put on them (1100MHz on their 390X for example). They are not representative of the other models.
 
Aretak said:
Here are the averages from TPU's review of another 390:

power_averagennkyx.gif

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_390_PCS_Plus/28.html

MSI's 390(X) cards seem to use a lot more power than all the others, based on the reviews I've read, possibly due to much higher stock voltages to secure the hefty factory overclocks they've put on them (1100MHz on their 390X for example). They are not representative of the other models.
Click to expand...

Yes that's the 390, I am referring to the 390X in the benchmarks.

Here's a 390X @ 1050 MHz which is representative of stock models.
Heat-and-Power.jpg



Source
 
smsmasters said:
Yes that's the 390, I am referring to the 390X in the benchmarks.

Here's a 390X @ 1050 MHz which is representative of stock models.


Source
Click to expand...

The OP isn't interested in the 390X so what's your point?

Even if the power usage is around 100W more than a stock 970 it's only about £20-£30 per year which not going to kill anyone.
 
fs123 said:
The OP isn't interested in the 390X so what's your point?

Even if the power usage is around 100W more than a stock 970 it's only about £20-£30 per year which not going to kill anyone.
Click to expand...

I've my point quite clear from previous posts. I'm merely replying to Meladath's prose.

Hence OP should just opt for a cheap used GTX 970; lower power consumption coupled with efficient Maxwell GPU architecture.

The difference between the GTX 970 and the R9 390 isn't that great in terms of FPS.

If OP runs games that require 8GB VRAM then go with the R9 390, if not then the GTX 970 will be more than adequate.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
fs123 said:
The OP isn't interested in the 390X so what's your point?

Even if the power usage is around 100W more than a stock 970 it's only about £20-£30 per year which not going to kill anyone.
Click to expand...

Agreed,he is on purpose trying to distort the results for some reason,by finding the worst R9 390X for power consumption. I am sure we can find the worst GTX970 for power consumption and the best R9 390 for power consumption and make things look less worse for the AMD card too.

Plus he would have to constantly play every week a year for at least 30 hours each week at least to get those savings.

Plus going for a less efficient monitor,PSU and motherboard with the GTX970 setup would easily negate those savings anyway,so if you are obsessed with energy saving you need to consider the whole system.

I think if he is so worried and panicked about power consumption he should get a midrange GTX660/GTX960 cards like I have meaning the WHOLE system is lucky to see the same average power draw as a SINGLE GTX970 or R9 390,or better still get the latest PS4:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-playstation-4-cuh-1200-c-chassis-review

The latest one sees at most around 120W at the wall.

:D

The R9 390 seems a better choice especially looking at the performance in the last DX12 benchmarks where even the old R9 290 cards which are lower clocked than the R9 390 seem to be doing better than the GTX970.

Edit!!

How,easy it is to cherry pick!

The Palit GTX970 which is one of the worst GTX970 cards for power consumption:

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_970_JetStream/images/power_average.gif

The Powercolor R9 390 which is one of the better R9 390 cards for power consumption:

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_390_PCS_Plus/images/power_average.gif

Its only 49W now!!:D
 
Last edited:
To summarise:

GTX970 for performance/watt
R9 390 for extra frame buffer

Just pick one, they're both great cards and will serve you well. I went for the 970 because I tinker with Linux gaming (AMD's Linux drivers are poor) but in Windows, there's really nothing much between them.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Agreed,he is on purpose trying to distort the results for some reason,by finding the worst R9 390X for power consumption. I am sure we can find the worst GTX970 for power consumption and the best R9 390 for power consumption and make things look less worse for the AMD card too.

Plus he would have to constantly play every week a year for at least 30 hours each week at least to get those savings.

Plus going for a less efficient monitor,PSU and motherboard with the GTX970 setup would easily negate those savings anyway,so if you are obsessed with energy saving you need to consider the whole system.

I think if he is so worried and panicked about power consumption he should get a midrange GTX660/GTX960 cards like I have meaning the WHOLE system is lucky to see the same average power draw as a SINGLE GTX970 or R9 390,or better still get the latest PS4:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-playstation-4-cuh-1200-c-chassis-review

The latest one sees at most around 120W at the wall.

:D

The R9 390 seems a better choice especially looking at the performance in the last DX12 benchmarks where even the old R9 290 cards which are lower clocked than the R9 390 seem to be doing better than the GTX970.

Edit!!

How,easy it is to cherry pick!

The Palit GTX970 which is one of the worst GTX970 cards for power consumption:

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_970_JetStream/images/power_average.gif

The Powercolor R9 390 which is one of the better R9 390 cards for power consumption:

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_390_PCS_Plus/images/power_average.gif

Its only 49W now!!:D
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. No matter if you cherry pick the best case power consumption from both sides, the fact remains. Maxwell will always be more power efficient than Hawaii.

Tute summarised nicely. The ball is in the OP's court.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
I have not read the entire thread but I would take a 390P over a GTX 970 and a 290X over a GTX 980.

The Hawaii cards are solid performers but can be a little bit quirky.

I am typing this on an AMD powered PC but I do own a couple of NVidia cards.:)
 
That escalated quickly.

Let's stick to the 970 vs 390 for the op as a gaming card, I don't think power draw need come into it really.

I'm wondering what the op is choosing in the end? Strikes me it may come down what the best deal is!

Oh, and a +1 from me on buying new, not second hand since you don't know the cards history.
 
Yeah im definitely buying new and as for power it seems its not really that much more expensive over a year so id say that probably shouldn't be a factor and as for price both the 970 or 390 are coming in at around £210 so as of now im honestly stumped probably edging toward the 390 to be fair but undecided i see that most breakdowns ive looked at favour the 390 and benchmarks certainly show in most cases it outperforms a 970 so on paper it does seem like the wise choice, but im no expert as ive recently started looking into the current state of affairs lately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom