• 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.

NVIDIA 4000 Series

Well if you read the article you'd know that you can also do a 950mV undervolt which gets you full performance and brings power draw down to 280w
That’s not what I see, performance definitely goes down once you either reduce voltage or power limit at 4K max settings. The card is definitely pushed beyond’s it’s efficiency sweet spot. I’m fine with losing 5-10% though for the reduced power draw. I don’t use FG or DLSS either.
 
Last edited:
What kind of board power draw are you guys seeing in GPU-Z when running 3D mark test (the normal one) and what kind of graphics score.

Mine topped out at 430W and a score of 31475. Running stock everything. I was expecting to see 450W in a benchmark but i am worried my PSU is holding it back maybe.
 
What kind of board power draw are you guys seeing in GPU-Z when running 3D mark test (the normal one) and what kind of graphics score.

Mine topped out at 430W and a score of 31475. Running stock everything. I was expecting to see 450W in a benchmark but i am worried my PSU is holding it back maybe.


Standard TimeSpy 31676 and peak power of 410w which happened in the Graphics 2 test.
 
Testing reveals that with the RTX4090, the gaming load power draw can be cut down to 230w whilst losing just 7% performance using an 850mV undervolt


That is far more impressive to me than drawing 500w+ for a few extra FPS when you already have well over 150fps anyway. Shows the architecture is not inherently power hungry and that the TSMC 5nm node is very good.
 
Something must be going on, so little stock and it’s been close to two months since the 4090 launched.

I had wondered about possible power connector modifications. Or it could be supply manipulation to shift remaining 30xx series and 4080s.

The GPU industry feels like the Wild West sometimes!

EDIT: Or perhaps manufacturing was pivoted towards the 4080 ahead of it’s launch. 4090 demand has been strong and availability may have been further compounded by what would have been 4080 buyers opting for the 4090 instead. I’m guessing supply chains are healthy given the availability of the 4080.
Was gonna say, been like 3 weeks now since a 4090 FE restock
 
Well if you read the article you'd know that you can also do a 950mV undervolt which gets you full performance and brings power draw down to 280w
This is not always the case, Depends on the software and title your testing this on, I've done loads of undervolts in the past with the 3080 and while locking the voltage does reduce draw in some titles in others that need more juice that use more certain features of a GPU it handicaps them and you lose more performance than you might think.

Not just raytracing, Other 3d features that push a GPU harder together at the same time you end up losing quite a bit of performance depending on the title.
 
Well if you read the article you'd know that you can also do a 950mV undervolt which gets you full performance and brings power draw down to 280w
I didn't need to read the article, I was responding to what you wrote and highlighted as the main information you wanted people to know. Next time if you want to include other relevant info then do so.

Having now looked at it I would take the uv950 undervolt option, as it retains almost 100% performance with 'good' power savings over stock. So yeah, still adhering to the same principle as what I originally wrote.
 
Last edited:
Wasn’t just me then that thought that was a little warm.
While that is bloody warm for a watercooled card he has stated he likes it nice and quite so fan and pump speed could be set to low which will impact water and core temperature. 80 deg core in furmark at nearly 600w could mean his water temperature is somewhere between 40 and 50 deg ? Warm but not excessive. It won't be hitting 80 in games :) @Colonel_Klinck what is your water temp out of interest and what temp do you get if running the card stock in furmark ?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HRL
It’s the right way around. MB is vertical though.

30 mins running furmark 590w and peak temp was 81c. Pump and fans are on minimum. I like it nice and quiet.
If you wanted some sort of comparison i have posted my results in a thread i done in the watercooling section the other day, have rerun Furmark at max power and posted results :)

 
So I'd been gaming for about an hour when I fired Furmark up. GC pump at minimum 1200 rpm. I didn't look at water temp but I'll check later.

Just played a couple of hours of Control. Between 350-440w temps maxed out at 57c and water temp maxed at 38c
 
So I'd been gaming for about an hour when I fired Furmark up. GC pump at minimum 1200 rpm. I didn't look at water temp but I'll check later.

Just played a couple of hours of Control. Between 350-440w temps maxed out at 57c and water temp maxed at 38c
Pretty high-water temp but not crazy. That pump is seriously low like you said. I run my D5 at about 2,500 and don't really hear it. Good temps for running fans and pump super low.
 
Pretty high-water temp but not crazy. That pump is seriously low like you said. I run my D5 at about 2,500 and don't really hear it. Good temps for running fans and pump super low.
same pump speed as me , have it set to 50% and works perfect. in less demanding games i do reduce pump to about 2000rpm ... i doubt the water would circulate in my loop if pump was set to just 1200rpm :cry:
 
same pump speed as me , have it set to 50% and works perfect. in less demanding games i do reduce pump to about 2000rpm ... i doubt the water would circulate in my loop if pump was set to just 1200rpm :cry:
I am also getting around 150 l/h at about the same speed as you. Happy I am able to actually get close to 1gpm if I crank the pump speed with my current build, I never used to be able to hit anywhere near that with my previous loop. I blame external reservoir and many angled fittings. This time I tried to keep it as simple as possible.
 
Last edited:
I am also getting around 150 l/h at about the same speed as you. Happy I am able to actually get close to 1gpm if I crank the pump speed with my current build, I never used to be able to hit anywhere near that with my previous loop. I blame external reservoir and many angled fittings. This time I tried to keep it as simple as possible.
Fitting the ABP has dropped my flow by quite a noticeable amount as was previously up at 180 l/h now 150 l/h , everything fitted correctly so just putting it down to the block being restrictive as temps are all good still... just tried with the pump on 1200rpm and ALARM started flashing on the byski sensor and the little spinning wheel was hardly moving , she definitely needs more pump speed to keep her happy :cry:
 
Back
Top Bottom