6970 Power consumption

[Davefran]

Afraid not bud.

Sasahara quoted a comparison between the HD 4870 and HD 6970 showing the HD 6970 requiring up to 61W more power but stated that the HD 4890 may require more power than the HD 4870.

In response to that I stated the PSU calculator showed the HD 4890 requiring 54W more than the HD 4890 and that, therefore, the HD 4890 and HD 6970 were pretty close.

You quoted me and repeated what the PSU calculator says about the HD 6970 and HD 4890, ignoring what it says about the HD 4870.

I responded showing the PSU calculator results for a Q6600 with all three cards to show how wrong it was.

There's nothing wrong with what I said.

You quoted the PSU calculator when it suited you and ignored it when it produces spurious results.

Can you see where you went wrong?

Perhaps you should re-read the posts

I actually used the Psu calculator to compare the 4890 with the 6970 which gave a difference of 54w and are the only two cards in question here the 4870 shouldn't even come into it.

And now you're saying the PSU calculator showed the HD 4890 requiring 54W more than the HD 4890

It's certainly not me who needs to re-read the posts lol

 

[mattbill]

I use the HX520W Corsair with my HD6970 2GB... haven't had any issues. System is as follows:

i5 2500k @ 4ghz
Asrock Z68 Gen3
ATI HIS 6970 2GB
8GB Corsair Vengeance
OCZ 64gb SSD
LG DVD drive
1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3
500GB Samsung Spinpoint F3

I'd of thought you'd be fine.

 

[Surveyor]

I actually used the Psu calculator to compare the 4890 with the 6970 which gave a difference of 54w and are the only two cards in question here the 4870 shouldn't even come into it.

And now you're saying the PSU calculator showed the HD 4890 requiring 54W more than the HD 4890

It's certainly not me who needs to re-read the posts lol

Excuse my typo where I should have said the PSU calculator showed the HD 4890 requiring 54W more than the HD 4870.

It was Sasahara who brought the HD 4870 into the discussion and my post you replied to was directed at his post. You can tell that because I quoted him.

It's odd that you made no comment when he brought up the HD 4870 power consumption but only chose to reply to my response.

And your reply had nothing to do with what I posted. I commented on the power consumption of the HD 4890 compared to the HD 4870 as that's what Sasahara mentioned.

Your response to my post was:

a) a respose to something that wasn't even directed at something you said and

b) not even relevant to what I said.

This whole discussion came about due to you yet again using another site that would seem not to give a reliable answer.

The different power consumptions quoted on the PSU calculator for a HD 4870 and a HD 6970 are implausible so why should any other result it produces be more reliable?

At best the site gives a very general indication and can't be used to give precise power consumption differences between components.

Guru3D have the HD 4890 and HD 6970 at approximately the same power consumption.

AnandTech have the HD 6970 using ~60W more.

Make what you will of the results but at least those results are based on actual usage and not figures plucked from who knows where.

 

[masscrazy]

I use the HX520W Corsair with my HD6970 2GB... haven't had any issues. System is as follows:

i5 2500k @ 4ghz
Asrock Z68 Gen3
ATI HIS 6970 2GB
8GB Corsair Vengeance
OCZ 64gb SSD
LG DVD drive
1TB Samsung Spinpoint F3
500GB Samsung Spinpoint F3

I'd of thought you'd be fine.

Awesomeness. Exactly what I was after and confirmed my suspicions.

Though someone above did mention that the q6600 and p5k-e motherboard may take up quite a bit more power than an overclocked i52500k and z68 motherboard?

Do you believe this to be the case?

 

[Davefran]

Excuse my typo where I should have said the PSU calculator showed the HD 4890 requiring 54W more than the HD 4870.

It was Sasahara who brought the HD 4870 into the discussion and my post you replied to was directed at his post. You can tell that because I quoted him.

It's odd that you made no comment when he brought up the HD 4870 power consumption but only chose to reply to my response.

And your reply had nothing to do with what I posted. I commented on the power consumption of the HD 4890 compared to the HD 4870 as that's what Sasahara mentioned.

Your response to my post was:

a) a respose to something that wasn't even directed at something you said and

b) not even relevant to what I said.

This whole discussion came about due to you yet again using another site that would seem not to give a reliable answer.

The different power consumptions quoted on the PSU calculator for a HD 4870 and a HD 6970 are implausible so why should any other result it produces be more reliable?

At best the site gives a very general indication and can't be used to give precise power consumption differences between components.

Guru3D have the HD 4890 and HD 6970 at approximately the same power consumption.

AnandTech have the HD 6970 using ~60W more.

Make what you will of the results but at least those results are based on actual usage and not figures plucked from who knows where.

Absolute drivel

 

[Surveyor]

Absolute drivel

It's a pity you feel the need to resort to posts like that when I made a perfectly reasonable post without using inflammatory language.

But I suppose that when you're in the wrong that sort of response is all you have left.

As you have nothing constructive to say it'll have to be left at that.

 

[Davefran]

I'm not in the wrong, I just can't be bothered trying to figure out how you think can possibly be right.
You're entitled to think whatever you like, it doesn't mean it's right or that anyone else has to agree with it.

 

[Surveyor]

I'm not in the wrong, I just can't be bothered trying to figure out how you think can possibly be right.
You're entitled to think whatever you like, it doesn't mean it's right or that anyone else has to agree with it.

This still applies:

As you have nothing constructive to say it'll have to be left at that.

 

[MichaelM]

I have a similiar (ish) system to you with regards to the main components so this was helpful thanks.

One question though i always worry about the amount of power im using. As i have two 6950 unlocked and overclocked to 6970 speeds would my power usage be identical to yours or would it still be slightly lower as the 6950 uses two six pin power connectors.

I do not know the full working of the power slider in ccc but if you had to increase it past 0% it might negate that. I think a 6970 at stock would still be well inside the 300w envelope that two 6pins allow anyway.

PSU efficiency and rating could be more of an influence in differences.

Best to get a power meter and checking the actual draw to be completely sure.

 

[ATIorNvidia]

The amount of misinformation in this thread.

@OP Your HX520 is more than enough for a single 6970. Heck, even 450w would be.

Also, PSU calculators are pretty useless, as are AMD/Nvidias power recommendations.

 

[mattbill]

Awesomeness. Exactly what I was after and confirmed my suspicions.

Though someone above did mention that the q6600 and p5k-e motherboard may take up quite a bit more power than an overclocked i52500k and z68 motherboard?

Do you believe this to be the case?

Good stuff

With regards to the q6600/p5k-e... I'm not too sure tbh. I believe the older tech uses more juice, but I can't imagine its a hugely significant number? I'm sure you'd be fine though!

 

[masscrazy]

The amount of misinformation in this thread.

@OP Your HX520 is more than enough for a single 6970. Heck, even 450w would be.

Also, PSU calculators are pretty useless, as are AMD/Nvidias power recommendations.

I thought that may be the case. Thanks for the input.

Good stuff

With regards to the q6600/p5k-e... I'm not too sure tbh. I believe the older tech uses more juice, but I can't imagine its a hugely significant number? I'm sure you'd be fine though!

Im still contemplating, short term gfx card with current system then upgrade whole build in few months or just wait for a whole new system. We shall see.