AMD Radeon HD 4890 CrossFire

[Urlyin]

ahem? Why is everyone so worked up about the power consumptions?

They also need to take the noise to the General Nonsense thread instead of spamming the review thread...

 

[3870x2]

I really doubt that. That would be a gay naming scheme on AMD's part. It would be logical to be 4890x2.

280 is still plenty powerful.... I'm sure your fps is high enough

I dont know, due to newer drivers, my 9800GX2 is whooping the GTX280 and 285 Talk about a good investment!

 

[Apocolypse007]

It's just depressing watching your video card go further down the list lol...

my 3870 isn't even on the list !

 

[mdm-adph]

ahem? Why is everyone so worked up about the power consumptions?

Never underestimate the wrath of the angry Internet fanboy. If it's not speed, it's power consumption. If it's not power consumption, it's HD audio quality.

If it's not that, it's color, or shape, or size, or something equally moronic.

 

[DarkMatter]

They also need to take the noise to the General Nonsense thread instead of spamming the review thread...

TBH I don't understand why you have the "discuss this articles in our forums" link, if discussion about such a critic thing as power consumption is so bad considered as to say it is spamm that should be in the nonsense thread. In fact, this is not the first time a mod suggests any discussion should be out of this kind of threads. I'd suggest you save time (both to you and us) and put a big "Thank Wizzard" button instead.

Anyway it's funny how a comment that was supposed to be a joke has derived in this, but as any joke it holded a bit of truth and I know I'm right in this point. The fact is that people still fail to understand that my comment is not about the power consumption itself, but about how power consumption can greatly change the true price of a card, rendering any perf/price chart irrelevant.

I'm intrigued at this point about how so many people in these forums can care so few about power consumption, but then are so concerned about the slightest increase in price of the cards. Either they are a bunch of unconscious or just some 12 years old boys who don't pay the bills and obviously don't know how much it costs to earn the money to pay them. In any of both cases they need to understand that more power = more money, so as long as you put money into the ecuation, multi-GPU solutions lose the battle.


P.D. I actually know people who bought a Porsche/BMW sportive car and were later unable to mantain it, gas, tires, fixes, everything... their face was , the car in the garage or ebay. You know, they won the lottery/toto and went "Oh, I can buy a Porsche with this money" and they effectively could buy the car.

With graphics cards is not exactly the same, but similar, just not that dramatic. What's the point of having a perf/price chart in that case? What the point of saving up $20 when buying the cards, if it is going to cost you twice as much in just one year of use?

 

[DarkMatter]

ahem? Why is everyone so worked up about the power consumptions?

Ahem? I see the charts and the X2 consumes 230w in idle, not 308. I think it's a significative difference. And maybe it's just me, but I think the cards are idling most of the time the PC in powered on...

 

[ChaoticAtmosphere]

They also need to take the noise to the General Nonsense thread instead of spamming the review thread...

That was a hint.

Man, this 4890 kicks ass!!!!

 

[rangerone766]

has anyone seen a xfire review of a 4890 xfire'd with a 4870? just curious of that combos performance.

i'm thinking of picking one of these new 4890's up and was curious what to expect.

 

[btarunr]

Ahem? I see the charts and the X2 consumes 230w in idle, not 308. I think it's a significative difference. And maybe it's just me, but I think the cards are idling most of the time the PC in powered on...

The GTX 275 consumes more power than the HD 4890 in both average (load) and peak load, and has worse performance/watt (including the Zotac Amp!). The difference between the two in the idle chart is dwarfed by the margins by which HD 4890 leads GTX 275 in three other factors.

Neither of us can come to conclusions on what people's PC usage patterns are, and hence it boils down to how many factors a product leads in, numerically.

 

[DarkMatter]

The GTX 275 consumes more power than the HD 4890 in both average (load) and peak load, and has worse performance/watt (including the Zotac Amp!). The difference between the two in the idle chart is dwarfed by the margins by which HD 4890 leads GTX 275 in three other factors. And maybe it's just me, but idle power consumption is lesser a factor than average, load, and performance/watt when you're looking at high-end PC hardware.

The GTX275 doesn't consume more than the HD4890 on average. Wizzard's average is not really average, as per a normal usage.

# Average: 3DMark03 Nature at 1280x1024, 6xAA, 16xAF. This results in the highest power consumption. Average of all readings (two per second) while the test was rendering (no title screen).

^^ I would call that consumption under load.

And the Zotac case, it's some issue with the card that Wizzard got. In almost every other review out there the GTX275 is the less consuming card when in idle. i.e. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3539&p=22

EDIT: How much time you spend playing and how much in internet, watching videos, mailing, working...

 

[btarunr]

The GTX275 doesn't consume more than the HD4890 on average. Wizzard's average is not really average, as per a normal usage.



^^ I would call that consumption under load.

And the Zotac case, it's some issue with the card that Wizzard got. In almost every other review out there the GTX275 is the less consuming card when in idle. i.e. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3539&p=22

Then you disapprove of our testing methods. Ends our discussion. Feel free to Google your way to the review that proves your point best.

 

[DarkMatter]

Then you disapprove of our testing methods. Ends our discussion. Feel free to Google your way to the review that proves your point best.

LOL. I'm not saying that. But are you ging to say that running 3Dmark will simulate the average usage of a card? Also if you look at Wizzards charts (http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/HD_4890/27.html) the GTX285 is just above the HD4890 in power consumtion in that average: 322 vs 324. Do you really believe the true GTX275 consumes more thn the GTX285? Come on...

And furthermore, I'll repeat this question, because I didn't like your comment TBH. If you don't want critics to the reviews why do you have a disscussion thread for them??

 

[Marineborn]

wow this is the stupidest thing ive heard arguing about..Power consumptioN!! why are you buying 700+W power supplies if your so dam worried about power consumption! go green and shut your mouth and play some solitare! ahhahaha dam...i can find a tree huggers forum for you if your interested, I have a 1300wpsu in my system for a reason! its to suck that outlet dry, and i look forward to doing it!....im just happy something gave that dam gtx295 some compitiion and yes im a ati fanboy doesnt mean i wont give the nvidia card credit for holding its place for awhile without getting knocked down, by its time for big red to step in, GREAT review by the way wizzard thank you very much.

this is good for both companies, ati is the only thing that keeps nvidia in line with keeping there prices even have way decent, that is a good thing.

ill wait for the x2 version of this card buy 2 of them crossfire them and giggle like a schoolgirl

 

[W1zzard]

Wizzard's average is not really average, as per a normal usage.

so what do you propose as "average" ?

i am using a large number of measurements taken while 3dmark is running and then calculate the average.

the reason for 3dmark is that it is standard, easily obtainable, repeatable, supports multi gpu, is well supported, optimized for by all drivers and has a sufficiently high power consumption (not cpu bound).

there is neither a definition of "average" for gpu power consumption nor a definition for "normal usage". but again, bring forward your suggestions

 

[W1zzard]

322 vs. 324 should be considered equal. 0.62% is hardly a difference.

 

[DarkMatter]

so what do you propose as "average" ?

i am using a large number of measurements taken while 3dmark is running and then calculate the average.

the reason for 3dmark is that it is standard, easily obtainable, repeatable, supports multi gpu, is well supported, optimized for by all drivers and has a sufficiently high power consumption (not cpu bound).

there is neither a definition of "average" for gpu power consumption nor a definition for "normal usage". but again, bring forward your suggestions

I actually don't have a benchmark for that. What about having the testbed idling or playing a video for 5 mins after the 3Dmark run?

IDK man, sorry if that offended you. I think it's good that you measure all that info and I find it useful, but I too think that even you (king of benhmarker kings, no sarcasm I think you are the best, that's why I'm here in TPU) can be honest and think of the posibility (I'm not even talking about probability) that it might not reflect a true average. I have read many surveys that said that PCs are 90% of the time idling, I sure as hell I'm close to that. I played more in the past but as to make it closer to 75% of the time playing? A 50%? I don't think so.

EDIT: And now that I have you here (Sorry hehe ), you don't find the Zotac GTX275 results intriguing?

 

[btarunr]

And furthermore, I'll repeat this question, because I didn't like your comment TBH. If you don't want critics to the reviews why do you have a disscussion thread for them??

I personally have no problem with critics. I have a problem with people selectively judging the reviews to suit their contentions.

 

[suraswami]

as usual nice review there. thanks w1z.

420w peak power consumption, no way I can justify that if I am build something like that.

 

[W1zzard]

What about having the testbed idling or playing a video for 5 mins after the 3Dmark run?

that's what the idle result is for. playing a video stresses cpu and the integrated video decoders in the gpu but not any shading units, maybe we could have a fourth result "video playback" but i dont think it is that important. i'll look into it when i get our new power measurements stuff setup (measuring vga power only, already blew 600 € on equipment and i'm nowhere near what i am looking for)

 

[DarkMatter]

I personally have no problem with critics. I have a problem with people selectively judging the reviews to suit their contentions.

And I'm doing that? I don't know how TBH. I don't know what you think are my purposes. I have a problem with high power consumptions, that's all. I think my comments about power in every benchmark with a highly demanding (unjustifiable for my eyes) card proves so. It's been mostly Ati cards? Well take a look at the reviews of past 2 years and maybe just maybe, you can find a pattern and understand why.

 

[DarkMatter]

that's what the idle result is for. playing a video stresses cpu and the integrated video decoders in the gpu but not any shading units, maybe we could have a fourth result "video playback" but i dont think it is that important. i'll look into it when i get our new power measurements stuff setup (measuring vga power only, already blew 600 € on equipment and i'm nowhere near what i am looking for)

No, no. After or before the benchmark with the results included. Like 15 mins running 3dmark (I don't know how long it actually is) and 5 mins "not doing anything". Also I'm talking about GPU accelerated video playback, CPU usage is usually below 5% in that case.

 

[btarunr]

It's been mostly Ati cards? Well take a look at the reviews of past 2 years and maybe just maybe, you can find a pattern and understand why.

Now it's not even about HD 4890 vs. GTX 275

therefore...

And I'm doing that? I don't know how TBH. I don't know what you think are my purposes. I have a problem with high power consumptions, that's all. I think my comments about power in every benchmark with a highly demanding (unjustifiable for my eyes) card proves so.

You seem to be very concerned about idle power consumption. Here's my advice: ditch that 8800 GT for a HD 4830.

Notice how the margin looks similar (relatively) to that between HD 4890 and GTX 275.

Good day. Back to topic.

 

[DarkMatter]

You seem to be very concerned about idle power consumption. Here's my advice: ditch that 8800 GT for a HD 4830.

http://img.techpowerup.org/090403/bta657.jpg

Notice how the margin looks similar (relatively) to that between HD 4890 and GTX 275.

Good day. Back to topic.

Are you kidding? I could understand (to a point) you all mods are angry with me now but still... I have said I think 5 times up to this point that I care about power consumption because it means money. Buying another card will hardly make me save money. If you want to send, if anyone wants, to send me an HD4830 for free I will gladly exhange it for my 8800GT. I'll make a thread if there's a lot of people wanting to make the deal. Until then if someone is interested PM me.

Now it's not even about HD 4890 vs. GTX 275

therefore...

I have not talked about the GTX275, so yeah it's not about the GTX275. It's not even about a single HD4890, which IMO has a good power consumption and perf/watt. (I challenge you to find a comment in this thread where I said it wasn't.)

All this is about 308w in idle, which is just an obscene number.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

Guys, each digg saves a kitten: http://digg.com/hardware/techPowerUp_AMD_Radeon_HD_4890_CrossFire_Review

dugged

 

[Paintface]

i think i just saw a fanboy his world bubble burst....i can understand people having a hard time to deal with it....

Thats said, 4890 is available on newegg for $220!

I welcome everyone who joins our family in the ATI subforums!