radrokThe lot of people you say won't be buying premium cards like this if they care about power consumption.

rpsgcBecause people who care about lower power consumption and quiet computing aren't allowed to have fast video cards right? :rolleyes:


Maybe Intel should go back to the Prescott days, and NVIDIA to Fermi. I mean, according to you, power consumption is irrelevant.

hhumasso what's the benefit of 6gb memory ?>

radrokThe lot of people you say won't be buying premium cards like this if they care about power consumption.

I don't get this power consumption argument when the cards in question are well above high end.

RavenasIn my opinion, not "getting" or understanding why power consumption plays a role in reviews is ignorance. First and formost, when you buy a graphics card (or a processor, ect...), a smart consumer would like to know how much power the card is going to use at peak levels. If you know this information, you know what kind of power supply to buy. Otherwise, you are just wasting your money on a PSU that is either not doing the job it should do or you are buying overkill and jacking up your electric bill. Additionally, if you are comparing two different cards that have OC potential that is essentially the same, are you going to choose the card that uses more or less power (pretty obvious choice there)? Personally, I would love to know the power consumption of any electronic component that I will be buying a PSU for.

james888You can buy a bigger power supply but that doesn't mean you will have higher power consumption

pantherx12But you probably will, power supplies are at their most efficiant under load so if you have something like a 1500w PSU and your system only draws 500w then it won't be as effciant as say getting a 650w of the same energy rating.

james888To my knowledge peek efficiency is at around 50% load. So it is best to get a psu with twice the amount of power you use.
www.cougar-world.com/uploads/pics/sx_effic.png
My picture doesn't want to show correctly, but the highest point there is at 50%.

rpsgcBecause people who care about lower power consumption and quiet computing aren't allowed to have fast video cards right? :rolleyes:


Maybe Intel should go back to the Prescott days, and NVIDIA to Fermi. I mean, according to you, power consumption is irrelevant.

james888You can buy a bigger power supply but that doesn't mean you will have higher power consumption

RavenasThus you are spending your money on something you don't need.

hellrazorThey should get into the monitor business, we'd be running around with QFHD (3840×2160) resolution monitors in no time.

LAN_deRf_HAPower consumption is relevant here because it's competition across the isle does the same work (or more) while using less power. AMD may be able to increase their competitiveness with overclocked cards but they have to sacrifice power efficiency to do it. Looking at the occ review it looks to be a 40-70w deficit.

radrokToo bad the majority of people don't know the difference between resolutions and because of it the manufacturer do not focus themselves on increasing panels PPI.
Only Apple has step up with the new retina macbooks, if only they'd release a 2880x1800 Cinema Display I'd be purchasing one instantly, either one of that or a 4K television.

HumanSmokeIf perf/watt is shaky then perf/$ is looking downright dicey. If the $680 price tag is correct, it's a little difficult to see where ~36% price hike over a HD 7970/GTX 680 translates into a sound investment. I'm pretty sure a strong OC reference card + Arctic cooler, or Crossfired HD 7950's for less outlay makes stronger appeal tbh.

As someone that had CF'ed Toxic HD 5850's (2GB version), I had my work cut out trying to recoup any decent portion of the retail price when I came to sell them, since the market was awash with 1GB cards - I think the owners of 4GB HD 5970's (XFX, Sapphire Toxic) and 3GB GTX 580's were/are probably in that same particular club.

If ViewSonic are showing a 3840 x 2160 monitorthen I doubt higher resolutions are that far away. 2560x1600/1440 IPS used to cost an arm and a leg- Now you have solid options in the ~$US300-400 bracket (noteably the Yamakasi Catleap et al)

HumanSmokeIf ViewSonic are showing a 3840 x 2160 monitor then I doubt higher resolutions are that far away. 2560x1600/1440 IPS used to cost an arm and a leg- Now you have solid options in the ~$US300-400 bracket (noteably the Yamakasi Catleap et al)

radrokI agree that they aren't too far from being at a reasonable price but for me the Yamakasi is not a good example being an early adopter of the Dell 3008WFP and then the refresh of it (U3011), If I can't get a zeropixel policy then I'm not satisfied.

Dj-ElectriCIm gonna guess a figure of power consummation at peak...
between 310 to 320 watts. (at lethal mode of course)

RavenasWhere is the 7990 X2??