I like efficiency just as much as the next guy, but the argument that running these cards is more expensive than a more efficient one is ridiculous, unless you are buying them by the pallet for a mining farm or something, in which case, that little bit more power would be multiplied over X (high) number of cards which experience load conditions constantly. While the (still) high multi monitor power consumption is a little unsettling, in the real world it hardly matters.
Pascal was a bit of an outlier. Due to lack of competition, nVidia simply tweaked Maxwell and, along with a die shrink, both increased performance and efficiency, and the power draw was superb. Now, with Turing, we have really big dies thanks to all the RT stuff (big die means inefficient) and more shaders/CUDA cores/whatever they're called now.
Next time competition heats up, especially in the high performance segment, nobody will give a flying whale turd about power draw and focus on getting the best performance, because that's what wins sales. While we like efficiency, almost nobody will buy a lower performing product because it's more efficient. We need FPS!
