4 ms·
> But I think you're missing the wider point of my complain: it's been from Maxwell that Nvidia hasn't produced major updates on the power consumption side of t
by lukeschlather 2y ago
> But I think you're missing the wider point of my complain: it's been from Maxwell that Nvidia hasn't produced major updates on the power consumption side of their architecture.
Is this true or is it just that the default configuration draws a crazy amount of power? I wouldn't imagine running a 5090 downvolted to 75W is useful, but also I would like to see someone test it against an actual 75W card. I've definitely read that you can get 70% of the performance for 50% of the power if you downvolt cards, and it would be interesting to see an analysis of what the sweet spot is for different cards.
- bb88 2y agoToday's hardware typically consumes as much power as it wants, unless we constrain it for heat or maybe battery. If you're undervolting a GPU because it doesn't have a setting for "efficiency mode" in the driver, that's just kinda sad. There may be times when you do want the performance over efficiency.
- epolanski 2y agoI remember various benchmarks in the years since Maxwell, when they took GPUs with comparable number of cuda cores and clocked them the same, the performance were in the delta of error suggesting that (raw) performance wise you're not getting much more since Maxwell (and that was what, 2013?). I can confirm you that downvolting can get you the same tier of performance (-10%, which by the way is 3 fps when you're making 3 and 10 when you're making 100, negligible) by cutting power consumption by a lot, how much is that a lot depends on the specific gpu. On the 4090 you can get 90% of the performance at half the power draw, lower tier car have smaller gain/benefits ratios.