Friday, July 8th 2016

AMD Releases PCI-Express Power Draw Fix, We Tested, Confirmed, Works

Earlier today, AMD has posted a new Radeon Crimson Edition Beta, 16.7.1, which actually includes two fixes for the reported PCI-Express overcurrent issue that kept Internet people busy the last days.

The driver changelog mentions the following: "Radeon RX 480's power distribution has been improved for AMD reference boards, lowering the current drawn from the PCIe bus", and there's also a second item "A new "compatibility mode" UI toggle has been made available in the Global Settings menu of Radeon Settings. This option is designed to reduce total power with minimal performance impact if end users experience any further issues."

In order to adjust the power distribution between PCI-Express slot power and power drawn from the PCI-Express 6-pin power connector, AMD uses a feature of the IR3567 voltage controller that's used on all reference design cards.
This feature lets you adjust the power phase balance by changing the controller's configuration via I2C (a method to talk to the voltage controller directly, something that GPU-Z uses too, to monitor VRM temperature, for example). By default, power draw is split 50/50 between slot and 6-pin, this can be adjusted per-phase, by a value between 0 to 15. AMD has chosen a setting of 13 for phases 1, 2 and 3, which effectively shifts some power draw from the slot away onto the 6-pin connector, I'm unsure why they did not pick a setting of 15 (which I've tested to shift even more power).

The second adjustment is an option inside Radeon Settings, called "Compatibility Mode", kinda vague, and the tooltip doesn't reveal anything else either. Out of the box, the setting defaults to off and should only be employed by people who still run into trouble, even with the adjusted power distribution from the first change, which is always on and has no performance impact. When Compatibility Mode is enabled, it will slightly limit the performance of the GPU, which results in reduced overall power draw.

We tested these options, below you will find our results using Metro Last Light (with the card being warmed up before the test run). First we measured power consumption using the previous 16.6.2 driver, then we installed 16.7.1 (while keeping Compatibility Mode off), then we turned Compatibility Mode on.

As you can see, just the power-shift alone, while working, is not completely sufficient to reduce slot power below 75 W, we measured 76 W. As the name suggests, the changed power distribution results in increased power draw from 6-pin, which can easily handle slightly higher power draw though.
With the Compatibility Mode option enabled, power from the slot goes down to 71 W only, which is perfectly safe, but will cost performance.

AMD has also promised improved overall performance with 16.7.1, so we took a look at performance, using Metro again.
Here you can see that the new driver adds about 2.3% performance, which is a pretty decent improvement. Once you enable Compatibility Mode though, performance goes down slightly below the original result (0.8% lower), which means Compatibility Mode costs you around 3%, in case you really want to use it. I do not recommend using Compatibility Mode, personally I don't think anyone with a somewhat modern computer would have run into any issues due to the increased power draw in the first place, neither did AMD. It is good to see that AMD still chose to address the problem, and solved it fully, in a good way, and quick.
Add your own comment

147 Comments on AMD Releases PCI-Express Power Draw Fix, We Tested, Confirmed, Works

#102
Covert_Death
Chaitanyanice of Amd to fix the power draw management.
hha, yes, how nice of them to ship a bad device and then fix it, praise be to AMD!
Posted on Reply
#103
xkm1948
Covert_Deathhha, yes, how nice of them to ship a bad device and then fix it, praise be to AMD!
Shh, now you need to defend the 1070's PCI-E gate as well. Hurry!

Oh and did I forget the dual link DVI defect of 1070/1080? Or the VR defect of 1070/1080?
Posted on Reply
#104
TheLaughingMan
Covert_Deathhha, yes, how nice of them to ship a bad device and then fix it, praise be to AMD!
Exactly. How dare AMD not anticipate review sites, who typically use the best of the best when testing, to use $30 motherboards and/or boards from like 4 years ago. Then implement a fix for their customers who may be using the same stuff. Its almost like they care about their customers or something. Next time they should be like Nvidia with their missing 512 MB of VRAM and just make excuses.
Posted on Reply
#105
Tatty_Two
Gone Fishing
xkm1948Shh, now you need to defend the 1070's PCI-E gate as well. Hurry!

Oh and did I forget the dual link DVI defect of 1070/1080? Or the VR defect of 1070/1080?
Trolling much, you on a retainer? I see some more reply bans coming if it continues.
Posted on Reply
#106
RejZoR
Covert_Deathhha, yes, how nice of them to ship a bad device and then fix it, praise be to AMD!
GTX 970 is a bad device with it's 3.5GB crap. RX480 was just configured badly. GTX 970 can't ever be fixed. RX480 was already fixed. Anything else?
Posted on Reply
#107
HD64G
RejZoRGTX 970 is a bad device with it's 3.5GB crap. RX480 was just configured badly. GTX 970 can't ever be fixed. RX480 was already fixed. Anything else?
No need to feed the trolls buddy :toast:. They have their pain now with AMD easily fixing a problem they believed it could totally ruin RX480's sales. Every customer is happy with the fix except for green fanboys who want AMD dead to be able to pay twice than now for their beloved GPUs... :oops:
Posted on Reply
#108
Fluffmeister
The superb sales of the GTX 970 has already answered all the haters.

Anyway, I think we all agree it's good to see AMD getting close to GM204's performance per watt, and fixing these problems which pop up with new card launches.
Posted on Reply
#109
D007
Kind of loling a bit here.. People keep screaming AMD fixed it!.. But they really didn't....
They gave you a driver update.. Which is totally normal and they can improve performance in "some games" while hurting it in others..
Truth is if you enable compatibility mode, you lose 3%..
The driver update is just a driver update.. All cards get them..
You lost 3% with the fix..
Ok.. Scream about the driver update now again, as if it is a valid response..lol..

That being said.. Did it ever really require a fix? I mean who's hardware could this possibly harm?
Just leave compatibility mode off I guess..
HD64GNo need to feed the trolls buddy :toast:. They have their pain now with AMD easily fixing a problem they believed it could totally ruin RX480's sales. Every customer is happy with the fix except for green fanboys who want AMD dead to be able to pay twice then now for their beloved GPUs... :oops:
In my experience around here.. people who call others fanboys are in fact themselves, fan boys..
If that's what you consider and intelligent response.
/yawn..
Posted on Reply
#110
xkm1948
RejZoRGTX 970 is a bad device with it's 3.5GB crap. RX480 was just configured badly. GTX 970 can't ever be fixed. RX480 was already fixed. Anything else?
Selective blindness it is called. I haven't seen nvidia fixing its incompatiability problem with HTC Vive yet and i see 0 complains. AMD fixed a problem and people are still complaining. Double standard much?
Posted on Reply
#111
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
xkm1948Selective blindness it is called. I haven't seen nvidia fixing its incompatiability problem with HTC Vive yet and i see 0 complains. AMD fixed a problem and people are still complaining. Double standard much?
I'm awesomely immune to a retort as I'm the one that linked the initial HTC VR issue in a post last week.
But seriously dude, your posts are incredibly immature and stink of bitterness. Why try so hard to focus on Fanboys? Don't you see the absolute irony in what you do?
Seriously, please try to post about the issue in the OP without trying to make it a gutter fight with the 'other' side.
Neither team makes perfect products. Neither team makes perfect drivers. People aren't perfect either and we'll get people here that always poke fun (talking to you @Fluffmeister :p). But fluff isn't hostile. Some people downright are and you're well on that path. It's unpleasant.
You don't like Nvidia, or you don't like their fanboys, neither do I. But as soon as you pick up the sword to fight them, you're in the other camp be default. Rise above it and help keep TPU more mature than other sites. Please?
Posted on Reply
#112
TheoneandonlyMrK
D007Kind of loling a bit here.. People keep screaming AMD fixed it!.. But they really didn't....
They gave you a driver update.. Which is totally normal and they can improve performance in "some games" while hurting it in others..
Truth is if you enable compatibility mode, you lose 3%..
The driver update is just a driver update.. All cards get them..
You lost 3% with the fix..
Ok.. Scream about the driver update now again, as if it is a valid response..lol..

That being said.. Did it ever really require a fix? I mean who's hardware could this possibly harm?
Just leave compatibility mode off I guess..



In my experience around here.. people who call others fanboys are in fact themselves, fan boys..
If that's what you consider and intelligent response.
/yawn..
I've got 2, Amd did fix it with a driver ,and I'm getting the same scores in 3mark I got before and I'm folding with them so they Have been soak tested adequately and haven't killed my mother board even without its pciex additional power Molex in use, also wizard and many other sites agree its fixed ,why you such a refusenik
Posted on Reply
#113
Norton
Moderator - Returning from the Darkness
theoneandonlymrkI've got 2, Amd did fix it with a driver ,and I'm getting the same scores in 3mark I got before and I'm folding with them so they Have been soak tested adequately and haven't killed my mother board even without its pciex additional power Molex in use, also wizard and many other sites agree its fixed ,why you such a refusenik
Did you try folding with them yet? Really hope they do well in ppd since I want to give mine some folding work to do after I get it installed :)
Posted on Reply
#114
TheoneandonlyMrK
NortonDid you try folding with them yet? Really hope they do well in ppd since I want to give mine some folding work to do after I get it installed :)
Certainly,mine are at it now, on stock clocks I was getting 550 000(clients been off and on all weekend so I actually expect 620000 given stable folding)ppd but I've downclocked them to 1140 for 528000 ppd until I get waterblocks because they do run very hot I run 4 folding CPU cores too, Ek need to get there stuff out .
Posted on Reply
#115
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
theoneandonlymrkCertainly,mine are at it now, on stock clocks I was getting 550 000(clients been off and on all weekend so I actually expect 620000 given stable folding)ppd but I've downclocked them to 1140 for 528000 ppd until I get waterblocks because they do run very hot I run 4 folding CPU cores too, Ek need to get there stuff out .
Really surprised RX480 blocks aren't out yet. The Radeon Pro Duo blocks were out almost the same time.
Posted on Reply
#116
TheoneandonlyMrK
the54thvoidReally surprised RX480 blocks aren't out yet. The Radeon Pro Duo blocks were out almost the same time.
I've seen some plate type at water cooling uk from xspc but I'd prefer EK full cover long term.
Posted on Reply
#117
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
Yeah, I think the XSPC is a 'budget' cooler. Not sure if it was TPU but I saw a PR post on a tech site for them. If you can hack that driver and get them under water you could push them further, though for folding I guess stability is king.
Posted on Reply
#118
HD64G
D007In my experience around here.. people who call others fanboys are in fact themselves, fan boys..
If that's what you consider and intelligent response.
/yawn..
I cannot feed trolls, so have a good time doing what you like. Even ignoring the facts and not being productive in the topic we discuss...
Posted on Reply
#119
GhostRyder
D007Kind of loling a bit here.. People keep screaming AMD fixed it!.. But they really didn't....
They gave you a driver update.. Which is totally normal and they can improve performance in "some games" while hurting it in others..
Truth is if you enable compatibility mode, you lose 3%..
The driver update is just a driver update.. All cards get them..
You lost 3% with the fix..
Ok.. Scream about the driver update now again, as if it is a valid response..lol..

That being said.. Did it ever really require a fix? I mean who's hardware could this possibly harm?
Just leave compatibility mode off I guess..



In my experience around here.. people who call others fanboys are in fact themselves, fan boys..
If that's what you consider and intelligent response.
/yawn..
That is not quite correct, I think you missed the part about how it changes the power distribution. It not only changes the power distribution by default to more on the 6 pin side side, but it also includes a fix for keeping the power lower if you want. By default, you will now be much lower on the PCIE side now but if you want to lower hte power further you just enable compatibility mode (Which in all honesty will probably see a very minuscule use).
the54thvoidReally surprised RX480 blocks aren't out yet. The Radeon Pro Duo blocks were out almost the same time.
Well you can order them so maybe soon?
Posted on Reply
#120
TheoneandonlyMrK
GhostRyderThat is not quite correct, I think you missed the part about how it changes the power distribution. It not only changes the power distribution by default to more on the 6 pin side side, but it also includes a fix for keeping the power lower if you want. By default, you will now be much lower on the PCIE side now but if you want to lower hte power further you just enable compatibility mode (Which in all honesty will probably see a very minuscule use).


Well you can order them so maybe soon?
Nice looking block but it would be upside down and out of sight in mine so a bit spangly for me. And expensive.
Posted on Reply
#122
Assimilator
TheLaughingManNext time they should be like Nvidia with their missing 512 MB of VRAM and just make excuses.
"Missing 512MB of VRAM"? How do you AMD fanboys dream up this s**t that has zero basis in reality?
Tatty_OneTrolling much, you on a retainer? I see some more reply bans coming if it continues.
Can't you just ban it outright and save everyone's time?
FluffmeisterAnyway, I think we all agree it's good to see AMD getting close to GM204's performance per watt, and fixing these problems which pop up with new card launches.
Yep, it's awesome that GloFo's 14nm process is barely capable of matching TSMC's 28nm, while TSMC's 16nm is leaps ahead. :D
Posted on Reply
#123
R-T-B
AssimilatorYep, it's awesome that GloFo's 14nm process is barely capable of matching TSMC's 28nm, while TSMC's 16nm is leaps ahead. :D
You have to factor in AMD insists on making their cards much more potent at FP32, which hurts their energy efficiency something fierce. Because of this, we don't really know how far behind GloFo's efficiency on their 14nm node is... but it still seems to be worse than TSMC's 16nm for certain.
Posted on Reply
#124
cadaveca
My name is Dave
R-T-BYou have to factor in AMD insists on making their cards much more potent at FP32, which hurts their energy efficiency something fierce. Because of this, we don't really know how far behind GloFo's efficiency on their 14nm node is... but it still seems to be worse than TSMC's 16nm for certain.
There's at least the clock-speed difference...


But here's the thing. It's obviously cheaper per mm, or AMD wouldn't be selling these cards for so cheap. That's part of the nice thing here when it comes to what AMD offers, is it shows something really interesting about what GloFo offers. But that's something that belongs in an entirely different thread. I'm kind of happy both with AMD and GloFo at this point. What that means in the long run is where the money is. :P
Posted on Reply
#125
cadaveca
My name is Dave
R-T-BYou have to factor in AMD insists on making their cards much more potent at FP32, which hurts their energy efficiency something fierce. Because of this, we don't really know how far behind GloFo's efficiency on their 14nm node is... but it still seems to be worse than TSMC's 16nm for certain.
There's at least the clock-speed difference...


But here's the thing. It's obviously cheaper per mm, or AMD wouldn't be selling these cards for so cheap. That's part of the nice thing here when it comes to what AMD offers, is it shows something really interesting about what GloFo offers. But that's something that belongs in an entirely different thread. I'm kind of happy both with AMD and GloFo at this point. What that means in the long run is where the money is. :P
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 20th, 2024 10:18 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts