3 ms·

450 W vs 355 W is not "miles away". They both are hogs.

paulmd 4y ago
Meta-analysis: https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/launch-analyse-amd-radeon-rx-7900-xt-xtx/launch-analyse-amd-radeon-rx-7900-xt-xtx-seite-3 https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/launch-analyse-amd-radeon-r... across all launch reviews, 7900XTX averages 351W during gaming, while 4090 averages 418W for 127.7% of the performance (in raster-only 4K, on previous page), working out to 107% of the perf/w. 4080 is actually even more efficient, 297W actual power for 96.9% of 4K performance, giving 115% of the perf/w of the 7900XTX. 7900XT actually falls a bit farther behind, at only 96% of the perf/w. Compared to a 3080 10GB (which is not a power-hog, that's one of the original fairly-efficient configs) being 70% of the perf/w, that makes the 4080 115/70 = 164% of the perf/w, they are significantly more efficient than previous gens, not at all "power hogs". 6800XT (probably the most efficient card of last gen) is 74% of the perf/w of 7900XTX and that puts the 4080 at 155% of the perf/w of the 6800XT. Here's the 4070 Ti data but it doesn't really change anything (conveniently the 4070 Ti efficiency works out just about exactly the same as 7900XTX): https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/launch-analyse-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti/launch-analyse-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-seite-4 https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/launch-analyse-nvidia-gefor... And please don't whip out the "X watts is too much", arguing that products that you don't want to purchase personally shouldn't be manufactured is a shitty thing to do. If you want a 300W card, buy the 4080. If you want a 270W card, the 4070 Ti is right there. Lower-end cards will be launched over time, it's not going to be high-end-only forever. Ada Lovelace is by a large margin the most efficient generation that has ever launched. The problem is clearly pricing and not efficiency, people just listed to a bunch of dumb techtubers last summer and earnestly believed that a 900W TBP card was going to be a mainstream product and once gamerzzz latch onto an NVIDIA conspiracy theory they're sure as hell not going to renounce it. Efficiency bad, it doesn't matter what the numbers say. Oh, efficiency is good? Well still too much power. Oh there's cards available at the same power as last gen? Listen here buddy NVIDIA bad, did I stutter?
- EugeneOZ 4y ago
  Maybe if your tone wouldn't be so toxic, I wouldn't lose my curiosity and would read all the links you provided to change my mind and start thinking that my RTX 4090 is not a hog. I’ve tested it not so thoroughly - in RDR2 and Cyberpunk it eats even more than 450 W sometimes. My only concern is the amount of heat - I’m not trying to save some money by buying high-end gaming card.
mardifoufs 4y ago
I think I wasn't clear, sorry about that. What I meant is that even if you run both at the wattage, the 4090 would still pull way ahead in most situations. The performance per watt is higher, and in both cases it seems like Amd and Nvidia cranked the power way higher even if it meant hitting diminishing returns. A 4090 running at 400w isn't much more performant than a 4090 running at 290-300w. In both cases though, you are right that they are both absolute hogs. If thermals are a concern, these are pretty much unusable.

Meta-analysis: https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/launch-analyse-amd-radeon-rx-7900-xt-xtx/launch-analyse-amd-radeon-rx-7900-xt-xtx-seite-3 https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/launch-analyse-amd-radeon-r... across all launch reviews, 7900XTX averages 351W during gaming, while 4090 averages 418W for 127.7% of the performance (in raster-only 4K, on previous page), working out to 107% of the perf/w. 4080 is actually even more efficient, 297W actual power for 96.9% of 4K performance, giving 115% of the perf/w of the 7900XTX. 7900XT actually falls a bit farther behind, at only 96% of the perf/w. Compared to a 3080 10GB (which is not a power-hog, that's one of the original fairly-efficient configs) being 70% of the perf/w, that makes the 4080 115/70 = 164% of the perf/w, they are significantly more efficient than previous gens, not at all "power hogs". 6800XT (probably the most efficient card of last gen) is 74% of the perf/w of 7900XTX and that puts the 4080 at 155% of the perf/w of the 6800XT. Here's the 4070 Ti data but it doesn't really change anything (conveniently the 4070 Ti efficiency works out just about exactly the same as 7900XTX): https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/launch-analyse-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti/launch-analyse-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-seite-4 https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/launch-analyse-nvidia-gefor... And please don't whip out the "X watts is too much", arguing that products that you don't want to purchase personally shouldn't be manufactured is a shitty thing to do. If you want a 300W card, buy the 4080. If you want a 270W card, the 4070 Ti is right there. Lower-end cards will be launched over time, it's not going to be high-end-only forever. Ada Lovelace is by a large margin the most efficient generation that has ever launched. The problem is clearly pricing and not efficiency, people just listed to a bunch of dumb techtubers last summer and earnestly believed that a 900W TBP card was going to be a mainstream product and once gamerzzz latch onto an NVIDIA conspiracy theory they're sure as hell not going to renounce it. Efficiency bad, it doesn't matter what the numbers say. Oh, efficiency is good? Well still too much power. Oh there's cards available at the same power as last gen? Listen here buddy NVIDIA bad, did I stutter?

EugeneOZ 4y ago
Maybe if your tone wouldn't be so toxic, I wouldn't lose my curiosity and would read all the links you provided to change my mind and start thinking that my RTX 4090 is not a hog. I’ve tested it not so thoroughly - in RDR2 and Cyberpunk it eats even more than 450 W sometimes. My only concern is the amount of heat - I’m not trying to save some money by buying high-end gaming card.

mardifoufs 4y ago

I think I wasn't clear, sorry about that. What I meant is that even if you run both at the wattage, the 4090 would still pull way ahead in most situations. The performance per watt is higher, and in both cases it seems like Amd and Nvidia cranked the power way higher even if it meant hitting diminishing returns. A 4090 running at 400w isn't much more performant than a 4090 running at 290-300w. In both cases though, you are right that they are both absolute hogs. If thermals are a concern, these are pretty much unusable.