http://www.overclock.net/t/1604477/reddit-rx-480-fails-pci-e-specification/100
has a collective board ever been as BTFO as /g/ right now?
>>55340638
>>55340651
>he trusted poo in loo man
>>55340638
LITERAL HOUSEFIRE
Can't wait for the first deep fried motherboard
>>55340638
The 960 had spikes up to 250W, higher than the 480. Where was the outrage and fried motherboards? Why is it okay when Nvidia do it, as per usual?
>ushanka
why do AMD get the best hat?
>>55340690
>b-b-b-but nvidiaaaaa
>>55340690
Nvidia has more money to silence the press
im sure they gave an extra tip to reviewers about the RX480's power consumption
>>55340721
that would be so scummy, we shouldn't find out until someone burns their house down instead
>>55340690
That was a problem with ASUS-specific implementation of the 960, this is the reference card from AMD.
>>55340690
Spikes up to, but doesn't average at. Problem with the 480 is its averaging well above PCI specification in stock configuration. Overclock on a midrange board and enjoy the fireworks.
>>55340883
So is that shitty ASUS 960. But you'd have to be retarded to buy ASUS so that's okay.
>>55340638
>has a collective board ever been as BTFO as /g/ right now?
>I just come here to shill
FTFY, fucking shill
>>55340883
spikes? its spending more than half its time above 150W when the AMD card is not even hitting that. thees graphs are misleading.
>>55340638
here we go again
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4qmlep/rx_480_powergate_problem_has_a_solution/
>>55340638
DELET THIS
>>55340638
Already proven false. Move along everybody
A disaster !!
I don't know why everyone is shitting the bed so hard about this, as long as you aren't using some cheap piece of shit foxconn or equivalent board you'll be fine. I turned up the pci-e power draw in my custom bios for my 970 up to 150w, no issues at all in the past year. This whole issue is just shills shilling shills.
glad I bought a 1070
>>55342054
DELET THIS
>>55341941
Good counterpoint to shills in there:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-750-ti-review,3750-20.html
When nvidia 750ti drew 125w solely from the slot, apparently it was okie dokie.
Why would you bother drawing the more than the bare minimum from the PCI bus if you're going to require a direct power supply connection anyway?
>>55342215
DELETE THIS!!!!1 NVIDIA IS PERFECT AND CAN DO NO WRONG!!!2 ONLY AMD CAN FUCK UP LIKE THIS!!!1
"In my understanding the 75 watt isnt the maximum limit, its just the default value on startup of the motherboard. The motherboard it self sets the maximum allowed watt per slot in the "Slot Capabilities Register" which you can configure up to over 300 watt per slot. In the bits 7 to 14 "Slot Power Limit Value" you can set 250, 275, 300 and above 300 watt. This will be multiplied with bits 15 to 16 "Slot Power Limit Scale" in steps x1 ,x0.1, x0.01 and x0.001. So its up to the motherboard manufacturer and the power management on it how many watt the slot is capable of. The Specifications do define the protocol and not the hardware specs of the PCI-E slot. If a manufacturer uses better parts which can handle higher amps on the contacts and the lines, they can allow the devie in the slot a higher power consumption than 75 watt via these registers. Sadly most people doesnt even read the specifications and judge things they dont understand."
>>55342247
this card was a massive fuck up in more than just this particular issue
>>55342054
>960
>two years old
>>55342288
>Budget level card with budget price performs at budget levels very well
Explain the failure.
3rd party with 8 pin with solve it.
>>55340690
cause nobody was stupid enough to own 960.
R-right?...
>>55342136
how do you get 1070's to crossfire?
as soon as i activate CF mode windows tells me my graphics card is not supported
>>55345880
weak bait
>>55341941
So 75W is the maximum a card can draw on startup because it is the minimum amount of power a PCI-e slot should be able to supply but then the card can negotiate a higher draw with the motherboard and it is up to the motherboard manufacturer to set the limits based on the motherboard construction and components.
Which basically means that the card was drawing over 150W because it the motherboard literally told it that it could.
Which means that tomshardware not doing a long overclocking benchmark for fear of damaging the motherboard was retarded because the motherboard basically informed the graphics card that it was able to supply that much power and if the motherboard died the only thing it would show us is that the motherboard was actually shit.
>>55342036
Source?
>>55340638
DELETE THIS
>>55340690
The 750ti did the same thing as well
>Some cards are using two 8-pin connectors, but this has not been standardized yet, therefore such cards must not carry the official PCI Express logo.
>literally all dual 8-pin cards are outside PCI-e specification
Oh wow.
>>55340638
jesus FUCKING CHRIST WHAT THE FUCK AM I SUPPOSED TO DO!
I don't want to buy a fucking 970 because >3.5 and because it is not ready for DX12. So I wait for this RX 480 from AMD, it's absolute shit and will KILL MY PC FROM POWER OVERDRAW. I can't buy a 1070 or 1080 until PROBABLY AUGUST.
WHAT THE FUCK AM I SUPPOSED TO DO /g/!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I just wanted to rebuild my PC int he beginning of the summer for a comfy gaming summer. Little did I know i would get bullshit thrown at me from all angles
It's actually much worse
>>55346527
oh wow just like 295x2
>Source: reddit
Thanks OP
Good post
>>55346548
It actually dosent matter
>>55346548
But which card is the % outside spec referring to?
>implying
>>55340638
>its a forum link
>PCI-E compliance require the circuit to provide a min 75watt to be certified
You can read further about the testing requirement, method etc over here by a company that makes tool to measure it
>http://teledynelecroy.com/doc/docview.aspx?id=7649
>>55346386
You are correct, however 75 watt isn't the maximum standard, but rather the lowest standard that a PCI-E circuit needs to deliver to be certified.
How high does it can handle literally depend on the motherboard itself.
Toms bench mobo obviously can handle at least twice the min specification.
How the heck such tech site freak out because of this?
>>55346592
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Power-Consumption-Concerns-Radeon-RX-480
>>55346601
>75 watt isn't the maximum standard
It is literally the maximum standard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#Power
>>55346386
The motherboard doesn't tell it anything. It might have monitoring/protection chip to cut off power to PCIe if it's too high (I doubt it does), but I know for a fact that motherboards can and do burn the 24 pin because of high PCIe draw in some multi card configurations (which is why a few high end boards have an aux power connector near the PCIe slots).
The power circuit on the PCIe slots should be dumb circuit. Just straight pipe 12V from PSU to the slot.
>>55346527
Any card worth anything should have 2x8pins or at least 8 pin and 6 pin.
I bet this beautiful fucker doesn't even draw on the PCIe slot.
lol nvdia sucks lmao
>>55346386
A motherboard is only built to go up to 75W on PCIE.
This is what happens when you go beyond that (from pcper article):
"I asked around our friends in the motherboard business for some feedback on this issue - is it something that users should be concerned about or are modern day motherboards built to handle this type of variance? One vendor told me directly that while spikes as high as 95 watts of power draw through the PCIE connection are tolerated without issue, sustained power draw at that kind of level would LIKELY CAUSE DAMAGE. The pins and connectors are the most likely failure points - he didn’t seem concerned about the traces on the board as they had enough copper in the power plane to withstand the current.
As we all know with hardware failures in PCs, this is something that could in theory happen during a single gaming session, or it might instead take months and months of gaming to wear down componentry. "
>>55346641
No, it isn't.
That specification standard you posted is out of date (2004?)
>>55346708
No it's not, it's literally the pcie 3.0 standard. 75W is the max allowed over pcie 3.0.
The problem is AMD for some reason decided to take shortcuts with the 480 and went far over this limit, causing all sorts of issues.
![PCIe%20Power%20Rail-2_0[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/NqGrHgT.png "PCIe%20Power%20Rail-2_0[1].png")
>>55346708
yes it is.
>>55346708
Do you have a citation that provides to the otherwise? Even if the report is ten years old he provided something authoritative and you have yet to provide anything other than posting "nuh-uh."
>>55346782
>According to the internet, the PCIE slot pulling over 75w was from 2 reviewers out of 20, of the other reviewers who were shared this information, non were able to recreate the scenario.
Stopped reading here. See >>55346618
>>55346798
Do more than 2 reviewers even have the equipment to measure draw at slot?
>>55346815
It's difficult to measure, but for every single one that measured it, it has gone over the spec every single time.
Holy shit who is making these threads? You people don't know shit about electronics, the reference rx 480 is completely fine. It doesnt oc much but most clients don't care anyways about oc.
Oh and no it will not fry motherboards. I wonder what hive mind makes you think that...
>>55346815
Are you saying PCPer and TomsHard are unreliable or biased against AMD?
>>55346815
not everyone can afford it.
I want to like AMD, but it's really super annoying how fucking far you guys completely buy into AMD's hype time and time again.
"Nobody said it would perform as good as the things it doesn't perform as well as!"
Bull fucking shit. There were "980 TI PERFORMANCE FOR $200!!!!" threads plastered here all last week. Every single time it's the same shit here with AMD's stuff. Weeks (or even months) of hype and then when the thing drops and doesn't live up to expectations it's "nobody ever said that!" and then non-stop bitching. It's the same shit over and over again.
>>55346868
Or TPU?
>Normal gaming is higher than that limit, too. While nearly all motherboards and power supplies should be able to handle that, it still exceeds specifications, especially if you crank the power limit up while overclocking. Two 6-pin or one 8-pin would have maybe been the better power configuration.
>>55346847
Really? Is that why actual motherboard manufacturers are saying this?
"One vendor told me directly that while spikes as high as 95 watts of power draw through the PCIE connection are tolerated without issue, sustained power draw at that kind of level would LIKELY CAUSE DAMAGE. "
>>55346890
>it's really super annoying how fucking far you guys completely buy into AMD's hype time and time again.
Arguably AMD's worst factor is how much hype it spins out and how rabidly its supporters swallow it.
>There were "980 TI PERFORMANCE FOR $200!!!!" threads plastered here all last week.
Not to mention "THIS ISN'T A PAPER LAUCNH LIKE NVIDIA!"
Are there power consumption tests for PCIe draw done on other video cards? I'd like to see what is typical, not just based off specification
>>55346890
>>55346654
My fucking god, that is disgusting craftsmanship. They need to hire more than 11 year old schoolgirls to make their products. Cant even line shit up properly, and it needs TWO PCIE CONNECTORS WTF
>>55346931
Tom's does them all the time.
Tom's was actually the one who started this because they were the first ones to point out how far out of spec the 480 goes compared to all the other cards they've tested.
>>55346890
>There were "980 TI PERFORMANCE FOR $200!!!!" threads plastered here all last week.
I don't come here often, but the only thing I remember about the card was that its performance was to be in-between a 970 and a 980. Which is somewhat the case, even if slightly underwhelming.
But then again, this is 4chan, expect retards.
>>55346997
Nah, he's right. There were legit retards saying that. I asked them once sarcastically "what is wrong with having realistic expectations?"
>>55346997
They were saying it was better than a 980 and actually could reach a 1070 when overclocked.
Hilarious how so far off base they were.
>>55346997
There are still embellishments even now like >>55346950
>>55340638
That thread is based off of claims made in a reddit post, which has been updated to read:
>EDIT: UPDATE FROM AMD:
>1) The RX 480 has passed PCIe compliance testing with PCI-SIG. This is not just our internal testing. I think that should be made very clear. Obviously there are a few GPUs exhibiting anomalous behavior, and we've been in touch with these reviewers for a few days to better understand their test configurations to see how this could be possible.
>2) Update #2 maybe the OP is confused. There is a difference between ASIC power, which is what ONLY THE GPU CONSUMES (110W), and total graphics power (TGP), which is what the entire graphics card uses (150W). There has been no change in the spec, so I would ask that incorrect information stop being disseminated as "fact."
>We will have more on this topic soon as we investigate, but it's worth reminding people that only a very small number of hundreds of RX 480 reviews worldwide encountered this issue. Clearly that makes it aberrant, rather than the rule, and we're working to get that number down to zero.
tl;dr OP's claim is factually inaccurate and OP is either an assmad nvidiot or a shill
>>55346741
>>55346764
>>55346769
The maximum PCI-E wattage is not enforced, its really up to the motherboard partner to allow how much a full lane can draw.
These compliance are nothing more but numbers on paper, and to get these certification they need to adorn the minimum standards which is 75watt/16lane.
SIG have never enforce these rules, they test it and give the certification to the vendor so that they can plaster the PCI-E shit on their box.
>75watt/16lane is a minimum voltage to be certified
>tons of motherboard with multiple slot/higher wattage per route are allowed to get these cert despite being 'over the spec'.
>SIG have no control over these manufacture and they can cram as much as they want as long as they meet the minimum spec SIG imposed to get the certification
In short, 75watt/16 lane is what SIG set, but not imposed on these manufacture.
Depending on the motherboards, going over the spec is completely safe as high as the motherboard allowed it to do/
>but mobo doesn't have control over the voltage
Wrong, in the most recent revision that I read, PCI-E offer flexible voltage control over the lanes through respective manufacture firmware.
>>55347039
You might want to read this, based on actual testing:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Power-Consumption-Concerns-Radeon-RX-480
>>55347039
You are believing what AMD, who would never be biased or interested in defending their newest product, say over what independent reviewers are reporting?
>>55347049
The motherboard will of course have built in tolerances to go over 75W.
The problem is that it is not built for sustained use over 75W.
Straight from a mobo manufacturer on the issue:
"One vendor told me directly that while spikes as high as 95 watts of power draw through the PCIE connection are tolerated without issue, sustained power draw at that kind of level would LIKELY CAUSE DAMAGE. "
>>55347053
>there are a few GPUs exhibiting anomalous behavior
>>55347072
>You are believing what AMD, who would never be biased or interested in defending their newest product
>The RX 480 has passed PCIe compliance testing with PCI-SIG. This is not just our internal testing.
>This is not just our internal testing.
What the fuck is reading comprehension?
Why would over-spec power consumption fry the motherboard? Doesn't the motherboard itself regulate the amount of power delivered via PCIe bus?
>>55347072
It is not what AMD is saying. It is what PCI-SIG is saying. The guys that _make_ the fucking pcie spec greenlit it. Why would you need another opinion?
>>55347114
It's all marketing. The 750 ti drew more from the slot at load. Pcie 3.0 is able to handle 300w.
>>55347102
>What the fuck is reading comprehension?
Might have to ask you the same thing.
>>55347124
You know, funny thing is that the PCI-SIG fags might be lazy. I know that ecos consulting is. Those are the fags that give out 80+ gold ratings for PSUs. They don't even test the product sometimes and still give out a rating, because another product on the same platform already exists.
>>55347102
>What the fuck is reading comprehension?
Hmm. I wonder what is reading comprehension?
>This is not just our internal testing.
Said who? AMD? An independent reviewer? Under gaming loads or not? Overclocked or not? Of course AMD is not a corporation that would use underhanded tactics like posting half-truths. . .
>>55347124
>It is not what AMD is saying.
>UPDATE FROM AMD
If AMD is not saying it who is? Someone who hacked AMD?
>>55347114
It does. Motherboards will let you draw more than 300 watts through a single slot if you have a crossfire board. If you go out of bounds with the electricity the motherboard will just turn itself off.
Just a bunch nvidiots still but blasted for buying a 3.5gb meme card trying to report on something they have no clue about.
>>55346541
wait for AIB RX 480s with 2x PCIE connectors
>>55346890
>>55347023
Nah, the leaks were showing that it was a bit below a 980, overall, and people were speculating that it should overclock to give somewhere between the 980 and 980Ti in performance. That appears to be exactly the case.
>>55347085
It depends on the motherboards itself, as high as it allowed.
If the motherboard allowed the PCI-E to suck more than 200watt then the board is build to handle such load.
I am looking for it now, but I've seen some reviewer using low profile motherboard reporting a much respective power draw while having an issue overclocking it even with power limit set to high.
It is most likely that his motherboard is only allowing a lower maximum amount of watt drawn from it compared to these high end mobo these reviewers are using.
Also
>talking to VENDOR
>not directly to the manufacture/engineer themselves
why.jpeg
>>55347133
The slot can handle momentary loads of thousands of watts. The question is, how high is the sustained load? It's not that it can't handle the load, but the 12v contact points in either the 24 pin power connector or PCIe slot can get hot if you sustain high average power loading and that can damage or burn the contacts.
Spikes don't matter at all, but average kinda does. The killer is heat not voltage spikes. It's a dumb circuit. It doesn't have any delicate silicone that can be damaged by spikes.
>>55347148
>he believes they didn't actually do the tests or didn't pass PCI-SIG and are just lying about it
I hope nvidia is paying you well to act this dense.
>>55340690
Stop question Tom's Goyware.
>>55347193
>he believes they didn't actually do the tests
Straw man.
>are just lying about it
That's a possibility but I think it more plausible that the "testing" done was not representative of typical usage by a consumer, or as put previously, a "half-truth."
>>55347148
Sorry I think you got something mixed up here. Nvidia is the pathological liar company not AMD. Easy mistake to make :^)
>>55347192
>thousands of watts
>12v rail
>over 80 amps to reach 1kW
That's not going to happen. Ever.
>>55347133
>Pcie 3.0 is able to handle 300w.
Wow you really are dumb.
>>55346868
>2016
>not knowing tomshardshills is biased against AMD
>>55347124
>Why would you need another opinion?
Really?
Of course we want to see independent reviewers test it instead of blindly believing whatever AMD tells us.
And guess what...every single reviewer that has tested it has found the same power problem.
>>55347214
>Straw man.
Sorry, I miss quoted, that part was supposed to be in reference to: >>55347145
>Those are the fags that give out 80+ gold ratings for PSUs. They don't even test the product sometimes and still give out a rating
>>55347214
External tests have happened as well. Not all reviewers have had the same results.
>>55347219
>I believe in my guys and call the other guys liars despite the evidence
Whatever floats your boat. Unlike you, I'm not a fanboi who feels a need to defend or present one corporation over another.
>>55347231
Just like PCPer and TPU.
>I'm going to call everyone who doesn't align with my beliefs are biased
>>55347085
>"One vendor told me directly that while spikes as high as 95 watts of power draw through the PCIE connection are tolerated without issue, sustained power draw at that kind of level would LIKELY CAUSE DAMAGE. "
Abit shouldn't be interviewed ever.
>>55347183
>If the motherboard allowed the PCI-E to suck more than 200watt then the board is build to handle such load.
Of course.
But why would a motherboard be built to handle 200W, when the actual PCIE specification is 75W.
As you can see when they talked to actual mobo vendor, they said it would have serious problems going outside of spec. This is straight from the mobo company.
Mobos meant to handle 75W (all of them) are going to have major problems with this card over time.
I can see the lawsuits coming already.
>>55347242
but it is not what amd tells us. it is what the pci-sig tells us.
>>55347250
>Not all reviewers have had the same results.
Which ones have not? So far I've looked at PCPer, TPU, and Guru3d. All have noted it drawing power above the claimed 150w.
>>55347272
Nope, you might want to check your source, that was straight from AMD.
God bless those bastards "Everything is fine."
>>55347223
1kW and even 2kW PSUs exist. You can also spike lower wattage PSUs to that level if they don't have OPP or OCP trip points below those levels.
Although I think the spike could be like 1ns or so at most, because you're gonna have some very fucking hot 12V contacts with such massive power draw.
>>55347280
Yes all of them are having the exact same results.
At first AMD tried to play it off like it was isolated to just a few boards, then everyone tested it.
SAME. RESULTS. EVERY. TIME.
>>55347267
>As you can see when they talked to actual mobo vendor, they said it would have serious problems going outside of spec. This is straight from the mobo company.
It's not like people from companies haven't said incorrect things before.
Just look at Microsoft support.
>>55347267
Motherboard can handle 200W easy, but it can't be sustained 200W. It must average below 75W.
>>55347267
>Mobos meant to handle 75W (all of them) are going to have major problems with this card over time.
If what you're saying were true, the PCIe specification would never allow the motherboard to set power limits independently.
>why would a motherboard be built to handle 200W, when the actual PCIE specification is 75W
As pointed out by another anon, motherboards built for multi-GPU have more robust power circuitry to compensate for any voltage droop. That's not a fantasy, it's real. Moreover, every power supply on the market can safely supply 120W on the 6-pin because they're ALL over engineered so that your cables won't melt if there's a problem. You can expect similar over engineering on many motherboards.
>they talked to actual mobo vendor
We don't know what vendor that was, and we don't know if the vendor was referring to specific motherboards. Right now all we have is second hand information on that front, and second hand information is notoriously unreliable, regardless of the subject.
At the moment, the problem is only really a problem if you're overclocking and you have a cheap motherboard with few power phases. Even then, the motherboard will prevent the card from drawing too much off the slot.
This is not nearly as big an issue as everyone is saying it is. Let us wait and see AMD's solution is. Put the fucking pitchforks down, you simpletons.
>>55347359
Nice damage control
>>55347192
>can damage or burn the contacts.
Which is why it is up to the board manufacture to decide how much it should draw based on their own parts quality.
SIG standard, in regard of PCI-E compliance, is that these parts need to be able to sustain and tolerate 75watt of constant power draw.
Each motherboard manufacture will set how much their board can handle, but as long as it meet SIG standard they will get the certification.
Seriously, RX 480 getting more juice out of the PCI-lane is not AMD fault, but rather that the motherboard manufacturer who allowed these card to suck up these amount of juice.
Which is also why it can draw more power from the PCI-E pin, its because that the powersupply were designed, and allowed it to suck more (Which happens to a FUCKTON of GPU)
>>55347267
>Mobos meant to handle 75W (all of them) are going to have major problems with this card over time.
>I can see the lawsuits coming already.
Actually, its gonna be the Mobo manufacture that gonna get sued.
They allowed the PCI-E lane to draw more power while not having the component to handle it.
Really, the GPU will only suck as much as it allowed to.
PIC related, GTX1070 FE OC that draw more power the standard allowed but still can because the manufacture allowed it to.
this can only end in two ways
either AMD recalls or they release a hotfix.
honestly it's a lose-lose either way.
>>55347293
So you want to imply that amd is flat out lying and completely circumvented the pcie certification program and is now selling these uncertified cards?
Man I was about to write an insult but at this point you must have already gotten how ridiculous you sound.
If the main issue here is heat wouldn't it be fine so long as your case has non-abysmal airflow? My Phantom 410 has a fan aimed directly at the PCI-E slot.
>>55347293
So you believe they're not PCI-SIG certified and AMD is lying about it. Got it.
>>55347369
He's right though. Good motherboards allow you to run 300w through the pcie slot, pcie 3 is 225 minimum after boot by nature.
>>55347397
Just like when the 750 ti hit 140 watts on older, inferior boards right?
>>55347389
>Seriously, RX 480 getting more juice out of the PCI-lane is not AMD fault, but rather that the motherboard manufacturer who allowed these card to suck up these amount of juice
You cannot be serious.
Other cards do not do what the 480 does, and you're trying to pretend like it's the motherboard's fault?
It is clearly the 480 that is causing the issue and nothing else.
Not sure why AMD thought they could cut corners on the 480, but they got caught and it's not looking pretty.
Computerbase and Pcgameshardware found efficiency and performance gains by undervolting the card
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-RX-4808G-Grafikkarte-264637/Specials/Overclocking-Undervolting-Wattman-1200042/
https://www.computerbase.de/2016-06/radeon-rx-480-test/12/
pcgameshardware has the card at the advertised 110W GPU power draw. It probably is under PCIe specs like that too.
So theres the solution. AMD would do good to still work on a solution to prioritize pulling power through the 6 pin though.
>>55340638
This is just prototype version they will add more power sockets at Asus and Gigabyte when the real cards are released
>>55347434
it's 300w total included fans and everything apparently. 75w for the pcie slot. but the real difference can be different depending on the motherboard.
>>55347433
You can use the cert once you meet the requirements. The RX480 is with in spec ONLY when at stock. The problem come in to effect when you overclock by moving the power slider in the Wattman application.
>>55347397
would not matter. The 3.5gb lie was compared to this an unmitigated disaster and it still didn't stop people from buying these cards.
>>55347389
All boards have the same quality of parts. It's not like they make high quality gaymer 24 pin MOLEX 44206-0007 connectors you freak. That's what's going to burn if you load it too much. Either that or the PCIe slot, but it's probably going to be the molex.
The only time where the board makes a difference is if the board in question has a supplementary power connector for the PCIe slots. THAT IS RARE!
The motherboard literally doesn't control or monitor the current that goes into the PCIe slots. It's not a regulated circuit. You can draw whatever the fuck you want from there, just like you can draw whatever the fuck you want from the 8 pin PCIe connector.
Doesn't mean you should draw 1000W.
>>55347413
The rumor is that AMD certified an early version of the board, then realized it couldn't beat a 970 at lower clocks.
The upped the voltage, and factory overclocked it, then just shipped out the new version without testing.
>>55347459
That smacks of "we couldn't afford/be bothered to fix it ourselves so we'll leave it to the OEMs."
>>55347451
>Other cards do not do what the 480 does,
480 is a shitty card with a sincle PCI-E pin connector and drawing it to the limite.
You can literally simulate RX 480 situation with any cards as long as you have a good multi slot PCI-E lane where the motherboard have high wattage running through it.
This shit happen almost on all FERMI gpu where the reviewer push the card over its spec.
>>55347485
It actually does retard.
Why the fuck do you think some PSU manufacture allow more than twice wattage through their connector and brags about it despite having to adorn to PCI-E compliance?
>>55347489
that sounds too retarded to be true.
even for AMD.
>>55347489
but it actually goes faster with lower voltage
>>55347456
>>55347529
Nothing is too retarded for AMD
>>55347489
That's an interesting rumor. I wonder if another explanation may be that it was the 480 4GB, which also has lower memory bandwidth, that was certified.
>>55347228
in appendix to spec usb 3.0 is able supply 100W
>>55347456
Powergate over, lads.
480 is now back in spec and matches the 390x.
>>55347521
I have no idea what you're saying, do you want to try calming down and saying whats on your mind instead of that incoherent outburst?
I know how PSUs are built down to internal component level and PSUs that actually monitor current going into PCIe cables are very rare today because of muh single rail meme. Even then if you had 2 rails and both PCIe 6 pin and 8 pin were on 1 rail on a 500W PSU you could draw 250W from either of the connectors. (75W and 150W according to spec)
>>55347483
>unmitigated
The card does not do this out of the box. It only does this when you try to overclock.
At 10:50 On this video he tells you what happens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Oc7zXhzlzU
The fix is don't OC unless your board can handle it.
>>55347596
Uhh it goes out of spec even when not overclocked
See >>55346548
Just imagine what fucking housefire Vega will be. Could be 400-500W overclocked.
>>55347577
You'll excuse me if I don't believe two no-name non-English websites. I'll reserve judgment until we see Anandtech, TechPowerUp, etc. says the same.
>>55347596
******************************
Sorry 9:50 not 10:50
>>55347618
>Vega "pulled to October"
If the rumor of last minute reference OC is even somewhat/semi-accurate it could certainly get interesting.
>>55347582
PCI-E power connector through the powersupply needs to adorn to SIG PCI-E complaince.
Yet some powersupply build and allowed these PCI-E connector to draw up to double the wattage.
You claim that there's no such things gaymer pin, but there is.
SIG standard require these component to handle a certain load but Powersupply/Motherboard said fuck it and put in a more higher quality component, better build, tested it and allowed their connector/circuit run and sustain massively higher wattage.
tl;dr; Yes, there's a gaymer pin n shit
>>55347626
now this is an ebin meme
0.5 dollars have been deposited on your account Sanjay
>>55347610
ouch if thats true.
Reminder that the PCI spec says AT LEAST 75W, it's up to the manufacturers if they want to support more, as they also have the ability to LIMIT the power available to the PCIe lane.
>>55340638
>has a collective board ever been as BTFO as /g/ right now?
During the 3.5 fiasco
>>55347626
wow that's racist.
>>55347489
that would be equally illegal.At that point they could have just completely circumvented the pci-sig. Also what kind of rumor is that? Not even currytech reports a story this retarded.
>>55347665
>wow that's racist.
We've had plenty of threads listing German and Chinese sites with "benchmarks" showing the 480 performing far above what we saw over the last two days of reviews.
>>55340690
>Aftermarket OC
>Company's standard
That's why it's bad.
>>55342215
Fuck, i knew shills blow everything out of proportion when it's about the competition.
>>55347626
>no-name
kek. Believing two currytech blogs rather than a 17 year old magazine. wew lad
![girls2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/PrhwCXs.jpg "girls2[1].jpg")
>>55346949
This is what happens when you have them manufactured in chink sweatshops for the lowest cost possible. Oh and yes it is 11 year old schoolgirls making them.
>>55347645
>Slightly lower than stock 1080 performance but almost no OC headroom
>Consumes 2 times more power
>3 times if you try to OC it for 5% gains
>Sounds like a jet engine because fans are at 100% all the time
>>55347745
>a 17 year old magazine
TPU - 12 years old
>not reliable because its not as old
Anandtech - 19 years old
>not reliable because its not as- Oh wai
>>55340690
so just wait for third party gpu's with 2x8pin
problem solved
>>55347072
The problem is the shilling, at this moment some people has proved that they'll spread FUD about a brand even if it's not factual information, they want to change opinions as fast as possible against that brand, that's why i always remain skeptic about every piece of information.
>>55347648
Yea no shit, and it does. The standard is 150W for 8 pins and 75W for 6 pins. That doesn't mean you can't pull 1000W from those connectors if your PSU is a single rail 80A monster. There is literally nothing stopping you from pulling that much. LITERALLY NOTHING.
A single rail PSU does not have OCP, and multi rail PSUs don't have the OCP configured to give you exactly 12.5A from 8 pin PCIe and 6.25A from 6 pin PCIe. That's fucktarded.
Oh and Molex makes every single power connector on the PSU/graphics card/motherboard/etc. All of those connectors are the same shit. Yea you might get some shoddy chinese knockoff molex from a flea market but no motherboard/PSU/card manufacturer uses anything but the genuine article. And any PSU that advertises more than 150W from 8 pin is full of shit. The connector doesn't magically become better.
Some PSUs have thicker gauge wires eg 16 gauge instead of 18 gauge which is standard, that's it. The connector is the same.
You CAN pull way more than 150W from those connectors without any ill effect, but the specification is and will always be 150W.
The motherboard is a different story, though. The 24 pin has 2 12VDC pins, that's literally 1 less than the PCIe 6 pin. Everything that takes 12V on the motherboard except the CPU gets power from those 2 pins, so you better hope you're not loading 'em too high.
>>55347799
>two blogs which solemnly rely on being sponsored by tech companies are better sources than an actual magazine
whatever mang
>>55347901
Move a lot of goalposts?
>Anandtech and TPU are biased
If you are making this claim prove it. Both have years and years and years of tech history for you call on but I expect you'll just blow this off/move the goalposts again because all you can do is sling baseless shit.
>yfw Raja did this on purpose so the ensuing lawsuit would force AMD to sell the Radeon department to Intel
>>55347931
TPU and Anandtech are actually some of the best tech sites out there
>>55348083
Someone alludes to the otherwise. . .
>>55346949
Please be bait...
>>55347456
>AMD would do good to still work on a solution to prioritize pulling power through the 6 pin though.
Pcie draw limitation is controlled by the motherboard and generally adjustable. I defo want at least a single 8 pin version with a good cooler for overclocking though.
This reference is absolute balls.
>>55348255
The 480 is the only card going over the spec, the problem is definitely not on the motherboard, it's on the 480
>>55348255
>Pcie draw limitation is controlled by the motherboard
Motherboard does not control that. There is no limitation. You can pull as much as you want until the PSU shuts down or something burns out between the PSU and draw source.
>>55347473
75w is recommended for a si for pcie slot. 300w is available. Unless you're trying to make your case take flight with a dirt cheap mobo whilst overclocking a 9590, it still shouldn't be a problem.
I'd wait for non reference regardless, where it will be even more of a non issue.
>>55348255
but how much will aftermarket cards cost?? Why should I get MAD aftermarket when I could add up $60-80 more and get a 1070??
>>55348308
>300w is available
No it is not, motherboards are made for 75W only. Anything else and you are going outside of spec and causing damage.
>>55348304
Then why are there discrete settings? Have you actually ever poked around a bios? Or OCed anything?
>>55345819
Yeah, defenitly not me...
>>55348332
Discrete settings for what? Be more specific what you're talking about.
>>55348292
Except the 750 ti did the same exact thing but worse or less advanced boards. Stop talking out your neck.
>>55348321
If well cooked 980s hit $280 regularly, you may have a point. Otherwise, it won't be a contest. Unless nvidia can resolve production issues and really wow with the 1060.
>>55348351
So you're saying 2 GPUs go out of spec, and suddenly it's the fault of every single motherboard ever manufactured.
You might actually be retarded.
I know one of you homos has a 480.
Try doing this like those crazy Germans and see if they're full of shit or not.
>The 480 is the only card going over the spec
No its not.
RX 480 however, is currently the most well known card that is tested to have it.
GPU can easily draw more watts when you push it over the spec and only be limited by the GPU internal voltage regulator.
In RX 480 case, the card voltage internal limitation has been set a lot higher than its TDP.
Where the fuck do you think Fermi housefire meme comes from?
>>55348371
Even the 970 is a way better deal than a 480 at this point
>>55348376
the 750Ti doesn't even go out of spec, it says below 5,5A.
>>55348349
You can adjust the wattages your pci bridge allows. Your mobo shouldn't let it go beyond its individual spec. Someone earlier was talking about how they got better clocks on their 980 after allowing 300w, which is perfectly safe with pcie 3.0.
>>55348351
The 750 Ti does not go outside the pcie spec, only the 480 has done it which is why it's a pretty big fucking deal
>>55348391
>equal performance with immature drivers and reference board up against custom OC boards with two year old drivers that nvidia is about to dump
>$100 less
Yeah, okay. Assuming you're talking about the US.
Keep shilling assmad permavirgin. The card will sell well regardless :^)
>>55348412
Say again?
>>55346541
wait 1060
>>55348434
are you colorblind and illiterate?
>>55348395
Are you sure you're not talking about voltage for the controller or something retarded like that because there is no reason why a mobo would be able to control current going to PCIe slots. I've never seen a motherboard that allows you to configure that and I can't think of a single valid reason why you'd want to either.
Mobo 12v isn't even relevant to a GTX980 because it takes power from the 2 6 pins. It only draws around 40-50W from the mobo.
Oh, and you can't sustain 300W out of the mobo without supplementary 12V connectors. Or you can, but it's pants on head retarded to do that and any manufacturer that supports it either has a supplementary connector which can be turned on/off (which could explain having a setting like that) or is just mental.
>>55348434
It says 64W. That's 5.3A which is below the spec (5.5A).
>A-anon don't buy GTX 970 for 200$, RX480 will surely be better!... b-but DX12!!!
>i bought it anyway.
>now i am the one who laughts
>>55342215
> having to reach so far into the past that you're bringing up the 750 ti
Wew fucking lad.
>>55348496
Are you? Over 40% of a time the card draw more than the standard PC-E spec while constantly spiking over 100watt.
>>55348548
>970cucks laughing at anyone
You're AMD tier.
>>55348551
>its a non issue before
>but now its an issue because...
>>55348563
Power draw is averaged. Spikes don't matter to copper.
>>55348582
Sad thing is the 970 is both cheaper and faster than a 480
>>55348616
>cheaper
In the third world.
>>55348434
That's well within spec.
The 480 is literally the only card that has done this, that's why it's a really big deal.
>>55348538
>Oh, and you can't sustain 300W out of the mobo without supplementary 12V connectors
Theoretically a single motherboard can go up to 600watt with HCS Terminals with just the 24pin connector.
>>55348626
Even in USD, the 970 is $250, while the 480 is $350
Well that settles it, I'm going to wait until an AIO cooled 1070 hits the market in aus and buy it. Fuck you amd.
>>55348582
>970
>200$
it's literally an overkill
>>55348631
The 24 pin connector has 2 12VDC pins, you really don't want to do 600W on that. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. The EPS12V connectors are irrelevant as those only supply the CPU.
>>55346658
>spouting this much BS
>trusting the poo in loo
fucking hell did they honestly think they could get away with this BS? Those bench marks are finely tuned and its cherry picking at its fucking finest. The RX480 sucks and barely compares to a 970 let alone a TEN fucking Eighty
>>55347596
So does this mean, when that Polaris chip gets more power and beter cooling than refrence model, it's going to blow the numbers through the roof?
>>55348629
>>55348538
64 watt average you mongoloids. 140 watts with no pin connectors is definitely not in spec. And check out that harmonic feedback.
>>55348881
You don't understand, every GPU power spikes, the average is what matters.
Now look at the average sustained power draw of a 480 to see something that really goes out of spec here: >>55346548
>>55348881
The fucking copper doesn't care about any of that shit you pretentious fool. If you spiked to 1000W but averaged out at 64W you wouldn't produce more heat in the connections than you would if you held steady at 64W.
>>55340677
>>55340663
>>55342150
>>55342054
>>55346430
take your shitposting back to /v/
PCI-E temp warnings pop up, 60c, on Diablo 3, weird and why? didn't buy the card was sent to me and I haven't even done any testing, I am not in the press. but this seems odd on a game like that
>>55340690
RX 480 AVERAGE = 80
GTX 960 AVERAGE = 60
>>55349104
Diablo 3 is an unoptimized fucking turd. Think nothing of it.
>>55349135
heh noted, I was just farting around on it but otherwise the card does seem to nail what it ried to....but I am no expert
>>55342215
AVERAGE = 60 WATTS!
>>55349104
Better have your fire extinguisher on hand
Why does AMD keep fucking up?
>>55348875
plz answer faggots!
lul
>>55349353
Hopefully they will fix this issue before the next cards come out
>>55349172
Average. Peak is 140w draw on slot, far and away beyond the 480s peak 95w draw on the pcie.
Please take a math course.
>>55349399
See >>55346548
That's not 95w peak.
>>55347456
Been reading a lot about this today and just found that undervolt twist.
ctrl+f got your post.
from what I could gather the voltage values are higher in order to pass more chips on the binning process. So it's possible that a good portion of the cards could benefit from turning the P states down a notch.
>>55349399
Do we really have to go over this again? Every GPU has power spikes, the problems arise when it has sustained power draw above the PCIE specs - literally only the 480 does this.
>>55349399
Do you even know what is PWM dumb shit?
>>55349302
stop shilling
>>55345819
fuck u m8
dont remind me
So I'm thinking about updating me GPU, is there a card that won't fuck my mobo, and isn't shite? AMD or nVidia. Doesn't matter to me.
some one set up a general.
they're comfier
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rHG9hfTCGw
pcper livestream 29th
>nvidia gpu boost - set a baseline which the guarantee to not fall under
>amd boost - set a limit at which the card will run in the best case scenario.
that explains the underwhelming OC since the boost is already close to the ceiling.
>>55349935
or rather the boost is the OC.
>>55349792
>basic electrical motor functionality
>implying its hard to understand
>broken engrish
U 12 m8?
>>55340638
looks like the 480 is living up to it's geforce counterpart.
>>55340638
not only the PCI-E, they also massively failed their price specification of 199$
but it's amd, no surprise
>>55346541
unless you're gaming at 4k at high settings (meaning you can afford a 980 Ti or better)
You will NEVER have to worry about the 3.5 problems
>>55346890
>implying they weren't novidia shills
>>55347306
There are people getting normal results. Just saw one clocked to 1300 drawing only 95W to the GPU.
>>55340638
So what?
Not a problem unless you have a really shitty or ASRock motherboard.
>>55342054
>>55342150
lol no one cares
>buying reference designs
why, why do you do this. fucking wait for the better partner boards
>>55350607
It's fine by me.
The sooner the reference models sell out the sooner aftermarket cards start selling for MSRP.
>>55350546
>I don't want to suffer from post purchase rationalization so I'll believe no one cares
Why was it so hard to add a 8 pin connector instead a 6 pin one?
>>55350642
nvidia shill go back to /v/
>>>/v/
>>55350756
AMD wanted the card to seem to have a low TDP, and tried to cheat
>>55350948
This, they cut corners and got caught
>>55350546
Say goodbye to your motherboard
>>55350800
Don't be a fool and assume anyone who criticizes your post is a fanboi of the other company
>>55340690
DELET THIS
>>55351965
960 never went out of spec, the 480 does
>>55340638
/gcg/
>>55352092
>>55340638
>goes to nvidias own forums
https://forums.geforce.com/default/board/172/geforce-1000-series/
>wanted to find constructive posts
>half of them is saying they cant boot because dual link dvi doesnt work
>others have the same issues with the drivers
>some have fan issues again
>many have low fps on 1080 at overwatch
>many people are talking about very high default clocks at idle
>nvidia shills being on 4chan steering the real issues away
>>55346976
obviously he forgot to mention that 750ti was beating 480
but then again 750ti is a nvidia card and toms never shills on nvidia
hmmm
>>55340690
The RX 480 was supposed to be our savior from the tyranny of Nvidia. And AMD failed us.
hmmmmm
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
hmmmmmmmmmmmm?
>>55352192
DX12
>>55352210
DX11, why didn't they test it on DX12
