Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [VC] AMD Presents Radeon HD 8970M Benchmarks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[VC] AMD Presents Radeon HD 8970M Benchmarks - Page 6

post #51 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1973 View Post

Anyone who thinks that 5kg is excessively heavy is extremely spoiled by modern technology. That used to be about standard for a performance laptop that was worth having.

Yep. A Clevo P570WM weighs 6kg.

2.7kg / 6lb is the norm these days though. Clevo P150EM (15") is 3.1kg
Edited by AlphaC - 4/5/13 at 9:59pm
Workstation stuff
(407 photos)
SpecViewperf 12.0.1
(158 photos)
 
Reply
Workstation stuff
(407 photos)
SpecViewperf 12.0.1
(158 photos)
 
Reply
post #52 of 68
MX... lol. how did they fail this?
post #53 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Usario View Post

The 4600M is a bottleneck on the GX60 so I'm assuming the 5750M is a bottleneck on the GX70 and am waiting for a proper review.

About the GTX 680MX and how it stacks up: It has an outrageously high TDP of 122W, which cannot be adequately cooled in a laptop (at least with the cooling systems currently being used). Though considering that the 680MX is quite literally what the 680 is to the 670, I'd imagine that if the benchmarks AMD is presenting are accurate that it's about on par with the 8970M.

I don't think cooling is a problem on high end gaming laptops. My M17x with an overclocked 7970M gets ~70C under Furmark.
post #54 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTRagnarok View Post

I don't think cooling is a problem on high end gaming laptops. My M17x with an overclocked 7970M gets ~70C under Furmark.

According to what I can find, the 7970M is a 100w TDP part with power consumption near the GTX 675M. A 680MX would undoubtedly use significantly more power and put out more heat. If it was put under the same cooling solution as your M17X, the 680MX would probably reach 100C and throttle itself due to the high temps.
Millenium Falcon
(24 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 4930k MSI Big Bang Xpower II EVGA GTX 690 Patriot Viper II Sector 7 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Deneva 2 Corsair Force 3 Maxtor Western Digital Green 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung BD/DVD-RW Swiftech MCP655 x2 Black Ice GTX 480 Black Ice GTX 280 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool Repack Dual D5 Watercool Heatkiller 3.0 Alphacool GTX 690 fullcover Bitspower Big Bang Xpower II fullcover 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 64-bit Professional 3x Dell S2340 Max Keyboard Durandal CoolerMaster V1000 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Azza Genesis 9000B Logitech G700 Roccat Alumic Onkyo HT-S9100THX 
  hide details  
Reply
Millenium Falcon
(24 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 4930k MSI Big Bang Xpower II EVGA GTX 690 Patriot Viper II Sector 7 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Deneva 2 Corsair Force 3 Maxtor Western Digital Green 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung BD/DVD-RW Swiftech MCP655 x2 Black Ice GTX 480 Black Ice GTX 280 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool Repack Dual D5 Watercool Heatkiller 3.0 Alphacool GTX 690 fullcover Bitspower Big Bang Xpower II fullcover 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 64-bit Professional 3x Dell S2340 Max Keyboard Durandal CoolerMaster V1000 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Azza Genesis 9000B Logitech G700 Roccat Alumic Onkyo HT-S9100THX 
  hide details  
Reply
post #55 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsumi View Post

According to what I can find, the 7970M is a 100w TDP part with power consumption near the GTX 675M. A 680MX would undoubtedly use significantly more power and put out more heat. If it was put under the same cooling solution as your M17X, the 680MX would probably reach 100C and throttle itself due to the high temps.

I'm not sure how you figure that. It's supposed to be 100W, but I have mine OC'ed about 12% so it's going to be even higher. Yet it still produces only 70C. Similarly, people have OC'ed their 680M 15%+ and achieve the same low 70s. There's a ton of thermal headroom there. The 680MX just has a bit more cores enabled than the 680M (1536 vs 1344). On the desktop side, those extra cores only increase the temp by a few degrees. I doubt it would be any different here.

BTW, the 675M is old Fermi tech, so it shouldn't be compared to the new stuff.
Edited by GTRagnarok - 4/5/13 at 11:48pm
post #56 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTRagnarok View Post

I'm not sure how you figure that. It's supposed to be 100W, but I have mine OC'ed about 12% so it's going to be even higher. Yet it still produces only 70C. Similarly, people have OC'ed their 680M 15%+ and achieve the same low 70s. There's a ton of thermal headroom there. The 680MX just has a bit more cores enabled than the 680M (1536 vs 1344). On the desktop side, those extra cores only increase the temp by a few degrees. I doubt it would be any different here.

BTW, the 675M is old Fermi tech, so it shouldn't be compared to the new stuff.
The GTX 680M has a 100W TDP and the 680MX a 122W TDP.

I read an article a while back discussing what TDP actually means for CPUs, and if I remember correctly, it's a rough category that OEMs can use to design their products around. I imagine the same is true for GPUs.

In other words we don't really know how much power consumption the 680M and 680MX are using, or how much heat they generate. We also don't know how that changes for the 680M with an overclock.

If it is possible to fit a 680MX in a large laptop then I'm sure it'll be done at some point. On another note, they can fit 2 GTX 680M's in a laptop (2x100W) so why not a single 122W card?
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #57 of 68
So basically we have a comparison of two horrible gpu pairings. The 8970m on a weak cpu, and a 680mx on an apple imac. I consider these cards irrelevant with what computer models they are currently in for any serious gaming!
Edited by BankaiKiller - 4/6/13 at 1:41am
bankaikiller
(16 items)
 
Bankai laptop
(11 items)
 
Glowing Reaper
(15 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500k @4.1ghz Gigabyte GA-Z68A-D3H-B3 (3waysli) 2 gtx 560 ti's evga super clocked G.Skill 8gigs 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gig 7200rpm hdd + corsair force gt SSD 120 gig corsair h60 Windows 7 acer S231HL 
PowerCaseAudioOther
800 watt corsair NZXT Tempest EVO  USB Creative sound blaster X-FI Go Pro Razer Carcharias headphones 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD K12 quadcore processor 4MB l2 cache 358D AMD Radeon(TM) HD 6620G integrated  AMD Radeon 6750M dedicated (crossfired with 6620g) 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
6gigs 640 5,000 RPM Blue ray player Coolin pad and hp coolsense tempature control 
OSKeyboardAudio
Windows 7 Asus Beats 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom 6core 1045T @ 3.2 Ghz ASUS M4A89TD PRO/USB3 AM3 AMD 890FX Amd radeon 6870 8gigs ddr3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
1TB sata Barracuda Compact disk DVD+RW air  Windows 7 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
S231HL LCD Monitor Asus 800 Watt corsair GS 800 Roswell 
MouseAudio
Asus realtek 
  hide details  
Reply
bankaikiller
(16 items)
 
Bankai laptop
(11 items)
 
Glowing Reaper
(15 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500k @4.1ghz Gigabyte GA-Z68A-D3H-B3 (3waysli) 2 gtx 560 ti's evga super clocked G.Skill 8gigs 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
500gig 7200rpm hdd + corsair force gt SSD 120 gig corsair h60 Windows 7 acer S231HL 
PowerCaseAudioOther
800 watt corsair NZXT Tempest EVO  USB Creative sound blaster X-FI Go Pro Razer Carcharias headphones 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD K12 quadcore processor 4MB l2 cache 358D AMD Radeon(TM) HD 6620G integrated  AMD Radeon 6750M dedicated (crossfired with 6620g) 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
6gigs 640 5,000 RPM Blue ray player Coolin pad and hp coolsense tempature control 
OSKeyboardAudio
Windows 7 Asus Beats 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom 6core 1045T @ 3.2 Ghz ASUS M4A89TD PRO/USB3 AM3 AMD 890FX Amd radeon 6870 8gigs ddr3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
1TB sata Barracuda Compact disk DVD+RW air  Windows 7 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
S231HL LCD Monitor Asus 800 Watt corsair GS 800 Roswell 
MouseAudio
Asus realtek 
  hide details  
Reply
post #58 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post

The GTX 680M has a 100W TDP and the 680MX a 122W TDP.

I read an article a while back discussing what TDP actually means for CPUs, and if I remember correctly, it's a rough category that OEMs can use to design their products around. I imagine the same is true for GPUs.

In other words we don't really know how much power consumption the 680M and 680MX are using, or how much heat they generate. We also don't know how that changes for the 680M with an overclock.

If it is possible to fit a 680MX in a large laptop then I'm sure it'll be done at some point. On another note, they can fit 2 GTX 680M's in a laptop (2x100W) so why not a single 122W card?

TDP is generally the worst case scenario. If you have a chip rated for 140W TDP, worst case scenario is going to be 140W. That's how I have read into things, generally the cards run much much cooler than that. In mechanics stuff like this happens all the time, it's best to prepare for worst case and use that as the definite model than to use a lower standard. This keeps those worst case scenarios at bay, users who may get a chip that might be in spec voltage wise but a bit hotter than normal. It isn't an exact science per chip, as many people on here can chime in about how the same stepping can have extreme variances. It's just how things work. TDP gives you heat dissipation, which can translate into a rough estimate of watts used. I don't remember the forumla, anyways it's not that important.
Current Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 4.6GHz@1.44v GA-990FXA-UD3 R4.0 HD 7950 (1100/1450) 8G Muskin DDR3 1866@8CLS 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB WD LiteOn DVD-RW DL Linux/Windows 19" Phillips TV 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ 600W Generic Junk Logitech MX400 Generic Junk 
Audio
SBL 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
Current Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 4.6GHz@1.44v GA-990FXA-UD3 R4.0 HD 7950 (1100/1450) 8G Muskin DDR3 1866@8CLS 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB WD LiteOn DVD-RW DL Linux/Windows 19" Phillips TV 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ 600W Generic Junk Logitech MX400 Generic Junk 
Audio
SBL 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #59 of 68
I sense a great CPU bottleneck
post #60 of 68
Not the performance gain that I was hoping for, but hopefully it was being bottlenecked by the APU. I'll probably buy it if it stays at the price point of the 7970m, IF (and a big IF) they sorted out the bloody Enduro issues.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [VC] AMD Presents Radeon HD 8970M Benchmarks