Power consumption: Comparison of all cards
| Leistungsaufnahme | |
|
|
|
| MSI RX2400PRO-TD256EH | |
| Radeon HD 4670 | |
| Sapphire Radeon HD 3450 | |
| MSI R3650-T2D512-OC | |
| MSI NX8500GT TD256E | |
| Radeon HD 3870 | |
| ASUS EN9600GT/HTDI/512M/A | |
| MSI R4830-T2D512-OC | |
| Palit GeForce 9800 GTX+ | |
| GeForce GTX 285 | |
| GeForce GTX 260 (65nm) | |
| GeForce 8800 GT | |
| GeForce GTX 280 | |
| Radeon HD 4850 | |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 512 | |
| Radeon HD 4870 1024 MB | |
| GeForce GTX 295 | |
| GeForce 9800 GTX | |
| Radeon HD 4870 X2 | |
| GeForce 9800 GX2 | |
| Watt |
On idle you can see clearly that the power consumption generally rises in complexity with the chip. As expected the dual-GPU-cards flop in this discipline, where the GeForce GTX 295 does well with its "capabilities". As well, the low power consumption of the GTX 285 has to be highlighted, which is the new flagship of Nvidia. Almost 30 Watt is certainly not bad in respect of the offered performance. Apart from the entry-cards, AMD definitely shows with the Radeon HD 4670 that graphic cards can also be economical for occasionally gamers.
| Leistungsaufnahme | |
|
|
|
| MSI RX2400PRO-TD256EH | |
| Sapphire Radeon HD 3450 | |
| MSI NX8500GT TD256E | |
| MSI R3650-T2D512-OC | |
| Radeon HD 4670 | |
| ASUS EN9600GT/HTDI/512M/A | |
| MSI R4830-T2D512-OC | |
| GeForce 8800 GT | |
| Radeon HD 3870 | |
| Palit GeForce 9800 GTX+ | |
| Radeon HD 4850 | |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 512 | |
| GeForce GTX 260 (65nm) | |
| GeForce 9800 GTX | |
| Radeon HD 4870 1024 MB | |
| GeForce GTX 285 | |
| GeForce GTX 280 | |
| GeForce 9800 GX2 | |
| GeForce GTX 295 | |
| Radeon HD 4870 X2 | |
| Watt |
Under load the Radeon HD 4870 X2 shows results which were never be seen before. Results over 370 Watt are beyond good and evil and the system power measurement on the power supply displays peaks around 550 Watt in comparison to maximum values from about 410 Watt in 3DMark06. Measuring the card "exactly" with 3DMark06 (1600X1200 4x/16) it exposes that the HD 4870 X2 makes it with "just" 251 Watt within the specifications. This confirms again our thesis: The 3DMark06 is not suitable for measuring the maximum power consumption.
Compared with the Radeon HD 4870 X2, the GTX 295 doesn't get even better results with 320 Watt consumption; however it performs much better than the dual GPU card from AMD. The positive effects of a die-shrink can be seen on the basis of a GTX 285, compared to a GTX which needs at least 12 Watt less although its higher clock speed.
Finally, lets take a look at the observance of PCI-Express specifications to which neither NVIDA nor AMD stick to with each 2 cards in our present test. The latest dual GPU cards of both companies have to be ranked first. Evidently is the disregarding of specifications of the Radeon 4870 X2: Using over 200 Watt on the 8-pin plug (specified for 150 Watt) and over 97 Watt on the 6 pin plug (75 Watt) is far beyond the specifications. Additionally the 6 pin power supplying of the Radeon HD 4850 with 93 Watt is out of specifications as well.
It is also a dual GPU card which worries us regarding Nvidia. The 8 pin power supply for the GeForce GX 295 is admittedly within the specifications but the power consumption on the 6 pin plug (104 Watt) is obviously too high. Analogical the GTX 285 charging the 6 ping plug with 107 Watt is over the maximum.
Apparently the cooling solutions in places on the boards are not prepared for such a load which Furmark is able to produce for a long time. Hence these cards which want to be the best on the market or are going to battle the competition sail close to the wind.





Power consumption of current graphics cards



Festplatten:
Grafikkarten:
Grafikkarten:
Grafikkarten: