PHY speeds are 2x under PCIe3, so yes it does save power. And, yes, even on desktop we routinely switch between PCIe speeds and lane widths between low power "desktop" modes and the high performance modes precisely in order to save power.
AMD: Southern Islands (7*** series) Speculation/ Rumour Thread
- Thread starter UniversalTruth
- Start date
But doesn't AMD also argue that PCI-E 3 with half the number of lanes saves power? Damien seems to be under this impression, and therefore quite confused.
http://www.hardware.fr/news/12255/amd-lance-radeon-hd-7000m-enduro.html
Same link as above: http://www.hardware.fr/news/12255/amd-lance-radeon-hd-7000m-enduro.html
This piece of news includes a nice chart featuring the TDP of all parts. I don't want to hotlink it without permission, but it's worth a look.
Probably the difference between power consumption at low load and high load.Alexko said:
Ummm.... 7970m should be ~70-80w not 100w...
That aside - did I read wrong or is PowerTune now indeed overclocking the chip if it's running under TDP? "Calculates active power to utilize thermal headroom"
So your saying that if it ran at full pcie3 speed it would use too much power and making it pcie2.1 prevents that from happening ?
in other words a gpu that supports pcie3 but running in pcie 2.1 mode uses more power than a gpu suporting pcie 2.1 ?
I dont think, basically the translation can give this impression, but i think this work the same way of PT for the 6900 and 7970. With some specificity for laptop environnement.
Powertune:
- Power sensing and management built in the Asic
- Calculate active power to utilize thermal headroom.
This is for keep at maximum the clock frequency, and performance.. but not overclocking the frequency. Just try calculate the best way to maximise the time it will work at the max clock speed fixed.
I can be wrong. ( or my english is really not good today )
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess he means PCI-E 3 X16 has a same power consumption as PCI-E 2.1 X16 does. Which means PCI-E 3 X8 may reduce power?
There are several reasons to use PCI-E 2 instead of 3:
1. The bandwidth isn't needed at all for mobile
2. Lower cost board
3. Less area for the PHY
4. Easier validation
5. Design re-use with prior systems
I don't see why you'd use PCI-E 3.0 in mobile yet...
PCI-E 3.0 is faster and more efficient for transferring lots of data. But you can't saturate it in a desktop card, let alone mobile.
DK
1. The bandwidth isn't needed at all for mobile
2. Lower cost board
3. Less area for the PHY
4. Easier validation
5. Design re-use with prior systems
I don't see why you'd use PCI-E 3.0 in mobile yet...
PCI-E 3.0 is faster and more efficient for transferring lots of data. But you can't saturate it in a desktop card, let alone mobile.
DK
There is no board cost difference. The main reason for it on notebook is the power.
raghunathan
Newcomer
Dave Baumann
If I am right you are an AMD employee and I have a few questions for you. Seeing the perception in the market that GTX 680 is superior than HD 7970 (though I believe the HD 7970 is better when looking at both cards OCed and across a wide range of games) I am keen to know how AMD is looking to combat this market perception ? I feel AMD hasn't been aggressive enough in marketing HD 7970 compared to Nvidia with GTX 680. AMD should have asked websites to look at the benchmarks when both cards are OC'd. Given the OC headroom on HD 7970 it would definitely have made an impact on the market's perception of HD 7970 wrt GTX 680.
Also there seems to be severe criticism on drivers for AMD HD 7900, especially in multi GPU situations ? Tri-Fire + Eyefinity does not work on the 12.3 WHQL drivers. Even with HD 7900 RC11 drivers there are subjective opinions raised here like better smoothness of gameplay in SLI when compared with Crossfire. There are lots of complaints also about the quality of drivers on forums .
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/25/geforce_gtx_680_3way_sli_radeon_7970_trifire_review/10
Is AMD taking these criticisms seriously and doing something to improve the user experience. Its very discouraging to see good silicon being held back by software. I hope AMD does improve the situation soon. I have always been a believer in good competition within the PC industry. And we need a strong AMD to keep Nvidia and Intel honest.
If I am right you are an AMD employee and I have a few questions for you. Seeing the perception in the market that GTX 680 is superior than HD 7970 (though I believe the HD 7970 is better when looking at both cards OCed and across a wide range of games) I am keen to know how AMD is looking to combat this market perception ? I feel AMD hasn't been aggressive enough in marketing HD 7970 compared to Nvidia with GTX 680. AMD should have asked websites to look at the benchmarks when both cards are OC'd. Given the OC headroom on HD 7970 it would definitely have made an impact on the market's perception of HD 7970 wrt GTX 680.
Also there seems to be severe criticism on drivers for AMD HD 7900, especially in multi GPU situations ? Tri-Fire + Eyefinity does not work on the 12.3 WHQL drivers. Even with HD 7900 RC11 drivers there are subjective opinions raised here like better smoothness of gameplay in SLI when compared with Crossfire. There are lots of complaints also about the quality of drivers on forums .
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/25/geforce_gtx_680_3way_sli_radeon_7970_trifire_review/10
Is AMD taking these criticisms seriously and doing something to improve the user experience. Its very discouraging to see good silicon being held back by software. I hope AMD does improve the situation soon. I have always been a believer in good competition within the PC industry. And we need a strong AMD to keep Nvidia and Intel honest.
I found this information indicating why the 680 is so efficient.
Will the 7000 series use TMSC new HP Process that allows for their first-generation high-K metal gate (HKMG) technology and second generation SiGe or something similar?
I always want to see cards benched at stock otherwise how can i get an fair idea of how they perfrom
whats fair do both cards have to run at same gpu clock and same mem clock ? what if 1 card cant overclock to the base speed of the other?
by percentage , do both card have to be overclocked by the same percentage if so what if 1 card can go higher percenatge wise than the other eg: 1 card o/c's by 30% 1 card by 50% do you stop the test at 30% oc ?
max o/c ?
what if i dont want to o/c what does that tell me ? every card will o/c by differing amounts depending on cooler and the cooling of the case they are in
sure o/c ability is important to know for some people, but o/c'd boards shouldnt be the standard
some thoughts..
1. true
2. how? if it was pcie3 it would run fine in a pcie2.1 board
3. no idea what a phy is
4. for who amd all their other 7 series are pcie3 you'd think it would be easier keeping them all the same
5. no problem reusing a pcie3 gpu in a pcie2.1 system
For what i know, so far, AMD and Nvidia use exactly the same process, they have both work for optimize it with TSMC with their chips.
The 680 have been sorted after the 7970 have been sorted, you have just to see the result of the 7970 lightning or other 7970 who have a clock speed of 1020-1050mhz, who will pass over the 680 with his turbo at 1053-1110mhz ) and see what happend.. It is not a stock card, but this is a retail card. if you want a 7970 who is faster of the 680, you dont have to overclock it yourself, just choose the good one ( and if you want a 680, you can find one overclocked too ) Nobody tell you the stock 680 is not faster of the stock 7970, just it is not so much faster. I think ( i can be wrong ), what he refer about is the 7970 scale better with the increase of clock vs the 680 ( with the addition the 680 is limited by his voltage control ).. So on final the 7970 pass clearly higher, if you use a 7970 with H2o, you will attain some performance level who will be impossible with the 680 under H2o... this is not changing the fact the 680 is faster at clock speed. ( not in all games, and not by far )
But history repeat: if AMD have set the 7970 at 1020mhz, Nvidia who have release this card 3 months later, will have set the base clock higher. If Nvidia had release his card 3 months before AMD, AMD will have set the clock speed of the 7970 higher...
Personally in term of performance in games ( and we know how hard it is now for test real performance in games ), i have never seen a nvidia card and a AMD gpu so close at the exact same speed.. you clock both cards at the same core speed and memory.. the cards are just purely equal in the games in term of performance.. ( one will win a bench, the other another one, but it is for some few fps only in each case, nobody can detect a difference of 1-2 fps difference average ) ..
Last edited by a moderator:
nexus_alpha
Newcomer
Opencl benchmark
http://www.clbenchmark.com/result.jsp not sure if this has been posted before but the opencl performance of the radeon 7000 series is staggering. Download the benchmark and try for yourself. Theres also a pulldown menu to show u how the cards do in different scenarios.
THanks Alexko its fixed now I hope
http://www.clbenchmark.com/result.jsp not sure if this has been posted before but the opencl performance of the radeon 7000 series is staggering. Download the benchmark and try for yourself. Theres also a pulldown menu to show u how the cards do in different scenarios.
THanks Alexko its fixed now I hope
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
