REALLY... are people such stupid douchebags that they bring up 970!?

gee i didnt know JEDEC makes a compliance list or that segmented memory speed is anything close to electricity & failures or even fires

obviously we dont care about the sticker, what about someone with a lower end mobo? what about corporate IT support? what about an OEM? how about thinking of others for once

which reminds me, never called out the hysterical mob in the call of duty article months ago, sick of such people infesting what should be an intelligent empathetic enthusiast forum

kn00tcnREALLY... are people such stupid douchebags that they bring up 970!?

gee i didnt know JEDEC makes a compliance list or that segmented memory speed is anything close to electricity & failures or even fires

obviously we dont care about the sticker, what about someone with a lower end mobo? what about corporate IT support? what about an OEM? how about thinking of others for once

which reminds me, never called out the hysterical mob in the call of duty article months ago, sick of such people infesting what should be an intelligent empathetic enthusiast forum

Calm your tits, just a prank bro. XDDD.

Nice reply tho I score you 3.5/4

Pewzorjust a prank bro

that did make me giggle

but i'm cereal, dough

Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Ahh the 970, aka the GM204, still giving 14nm Polaris a hard time... what a GPU.

FluffmeisterAhh the 970, aka the GM204, still giving 14nm Polaris a hard time... what a GPU.

Yep the 3.5gb/4gb is working out just fine.

Still waiting for my ISO9001 approved video card ...

PewzorYep the 3.5gb/4gb is working out just fine.

That's just it, it is! The card outsold everything for good reason too.

FluffmeisterThat's just it, it is! The card outsold everything for good reason too.

yes, ignorance is widespread. enjoy that 380x level performance in dx12

semitopeyes, ignorance is widespread. enjoy that 380x level performance in dx12

You're right, all those superb DX12 games, gee I feel I'm missing out already.

$ReaPeR$couldn't find anything confirming what you said. furthermore, i find this whole story a bit shady, i mean, first they have the rating then they dont.. its a load of bs if you ask me.

RMS is the industry standard. Every multimeter on the planet tries their hardest to indicate true RMS power. Only the crappiest multimeters measure RMS slightlg wrong and only the most advanced and expensive multimeters give you the option to disable RMS and view the peaks or lows if someone ever needs that functionality for their particular serious research purposes. But, like I said, every power meter and multimeter on the planet indicates RMS power by default and that is the standard which every electrical standard on the planet observes.

It is only armchair youtube viewers who think that some site's video about their method of hooking up a random and un-scientific amount of filtering indicates something about anything meaningful. If anything, they should have used Toms' graph of realtime data and applied RMS to Toms' realtime data to arrive at pretty close to the correct values instead of throwing some random coils into their experiment and skewing the data by an unknown and arbitrary amount without paying any attention to the lowpass or highpass filtering implications and inaccuracies introduced into their data due to an input signal of unknown frequency and randomness and then trying to explain it in a way which sounded enlightened. Neither site got it quite right. But that is besides the point.

The point is that PCI-SIG used the industry standard RMS power when it developes and publishes its industry standard. Thus they do indeed level off the peaks into a more true indication of average power consumption and heat production over extended use and load and do indeed place less importance on any individual power spike. It is similar (in a way) to what PCper tried to do, but in a much more scientific and reproduceable way which does not change drastically depending on your power supply's output ripple frequency or your game's/application's load and computation distribution.

ty_gerRMS is the industry standard. Every multimeter on the planet tries their hardest to indicate true RMS power. Only the crappiest multimeters measure RMS slightlg wrong and only the most advanced and expensive multimeters give you the option to disable RMS and view the peaks or lows if someone ever needs that functionality for their particular serious research purposes. But, like I said, every power meter and multimeter on the planet indicates RMS power by default and that is the standard which every electrical standard on the planet observes.

It is only armchair youtube viewers who think that some site's video about their method of hooking up a random and un-scientific amount of filtering indicates something about anything meaningful. If anything, they should have used Toms' graph of realtime data and applied RMS to Toms' realtime data to arrive at pretty close to the correct values instead of throwing some random coils into their experiment and skewing the data by an unknown and arbitrary amount without paying any attention to the lowpass or highpass filtering implications and inaccuracies introduced into their data due to an input signal of unknown frequency and randomness and then trying to explain it in a way which sounded enlightened. Neither site got it quite right. But that is besides the point.

The point is that PCI-SIG used the industry standard RMS power when it developes and publishes its industry standard. Thus they do indeed level off the peaks into a more true indication of average power consumption and heat production over extended use and load and do indeed place less importance on any individual power spike. It is similar (in a way) to what PCper tried to do, but in a much more scientific and reproduceable way which does not change drastically depending on your power supply's output ripple frequency or your game's/application's load and computation distribution.

i got that. that wasn't my point, i just couldn't find the standard's specs on the net, and my point was, why give the compliance in the first place and then take it away? that looks shady to me and totally unprofessional. also how can spikes to 200+ watts be ok for the spec but 10 watts of continuous power be harmful? im not an electrical engineer, but i find the lack of clear info on the subject not to my liking.

ZeppMan217I think the funny part is how the reference RX480 got the certification in the first place, since it was not compliant with the requirements.

. I won't be buying a card that could possibly overdraw power from my system.
This stuff costs far too much for me to ignore ~any~ possible risks in it's power delivery system.