Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Anand] Ashes of the Singularity Revisited: A Beta Look at DirectX 12 & Asynchronous Shading
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Anand] Ashes of the Singularity Revisited: A Beta Look at DirectX 12 & Asynchronous Shading - Page 45

post #441 of 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

It all comes down to how you tested. If all you did was max out the Fury and then compared its maxed power usage to its avg frames per second you'd net that result.

What Hard OCP did was calculate the average power usage while playing those games. So all I had to do was compare it to the avg FPS numbers from HardOCP.

That gave me those results. Feel free to calculate it yourself.

Loking at Hardware.fr power efficiency number, Fiji is better than Hawaii but nVidia still got a big advantage in BF4 (reasonnable GPU load) and Anno 2070 (high gpu load) :



http://www.hardware.fr/articles/937-7/consommation-efficacite-energetique.html

Fury-X direct from the street (not an AMD sample) offers lesser good results but seeing variations between samples is quite normal.

If we're looking at Fury scores :



http://www.hardware.fr/articles/938-4/consommation-efficacite-energetique.html

Srix sample got better power efficiency than Sapphire, Maxwell cards are still ~28% better power efficient.

Nano scores now :



http://www.hardware.fr/articles/942-4/consommation-efficacite-energetique.html

By capping power consumption by 50%, Fiji is now able to play in the same ballpark than Maxwell regarding power efficiency.

What we can conclude from this graphs ?

Fiji, llike Hawai,offers great perfromance scaling with GPU clock, but to achieve higher clocks it costs a lot of power.
On the other hand, nVidia continue to offer great efficiency even with custom cards that allow another level of performance and tons of models possibility for partners.
A good old 7970 is a tiny more power effcient than a 390X for example and it's quite a sad achievment.
Not being able to reach high clocks without breaking all standards is a real massive problem for AMD, particulary when you know that their reference cards are already quite pushed high and clock margin is really low.

Power efficiency is no just a power bill question, it's a strategic factor. When nVidia saw the wall coming with Fermi, they turned back.
Now it's time for AMD to follow the same path and we will see what Polaris and derivates will bring to the PC gaming scene.
For the good of all, we can only hope that AMD will show a different face. Without competition things become boring.
Edited by Olivon - 2/29/16 at 2:45am
post #442 of 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon View Post

Loking at Hardware.fr power efficiency number, Fiji is better than Hawaii but nVidia still got a big advantage in BF4 (reasonnable GPU load) and Anno 2070 (high gpu load) :



http://www.hardware.fr/articles/937-7/consommation-efficacite-energetique.html

Fury-X direct from the street (not an AMD sample) offers lesser good results but seeing variations between samples is quite normal.

If we're looking at Fury scores :



http://www.hardware.fr/articles/938-4/consommation-efficacite-energetique.html

Srix sample got better power efficiency than Sapphire, Maxwell cards are still ~28% better power efficient.

Nano scores now :



http://www.hardware.fr/articles/942-4/consommation-efficacite-energetique.html

By capping power consumption by 50%, Fiji is now able to play in the same ballpark than Maxwell regarding power efficiency.

What we can conclude from this graphs ?

Fiji, llike Hawai,offers great perfromance scaling with GPU clock, but to achieve higher clocks it costs a lot of power.
On the other hand, nVidia continue to offer great efficiency even with custom cards that allow another level of performance and tons of models possibility for partners.
A good old 7970 is a tiny more power effcient than a 390X for example and it's quite a sad achievment.
Not being able to reach high clocks without breaking all standards is a real massive problem for AMD, particulary when you know that their reference cards are already quite pushed high and clock margin is really low.

Power efficiency is no just a power bill question, it's a strategic factor. When nVidia saw the wall coming with Fermi, they turned back.
Now it's time for AMD to follow the same path and we will see what Polaris and derivates will bring to the PC gaming scene.
For the good of all, we can only hope that AMD will show a different face. Without competition things become boring.


Power efficiency test are big failure.
Never trust power efficiency test, never!


So lest say my PC use around 210-225W while gaming.
PSU efficiecny is "gold".

I have put R9 390 is my system too and gaming power consumption was 310-340W.
While R9 390 was around 80% faster than whole PC with R9 390 used only 50% more W.
So basically PC with R9 390 was more efficient.

+ The problem about testing GPu efficiency.
I am truly sorry but everyone who is stating that PC with R9 390 is using 100W more W than same PC with GTX 970 is wrong!

Its around 40-50W and how much does that mean for PC?
Example:
PC with R9 390 is using 310-340W while gaming
PC with GTX 970 is using 260-290W while gaming


So PC with R9 390 is using 17% more.
Normally per year = 100$ for PC = 17$ more per year for AMD.

If you want power efficiency on GCN just clock it down to 850-925MHz and 5 years old architecture will do wonders.


Even R9 390 will use less than 200W in gaming if you just clock it around 10% lower.
Well I bet I can undervolt stock R9 390 for -50mv or more.
Edited by Themisseble - 2/29/16 at 3:42am
post #443 of 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

No, not at all, I'm talking about Fury vs. GTX 980 not FuryX vs. GTX 980 Ti.

When it comes to the R9 390/x, both have a lower performance per watt figure than the GTX 970.

Something tells me that when Polaris releases, and if its performance per watt is better than Pascal, many folks will stop caring about performance/watt just as they didn't care when Fermi was around. It's a game as old as 3Dfx, ATi and nVidia. It also resembles politics where Democrats will be all anti-war when Republicans are in power and then when they're in power and bombing some country they'll talk about respecting the Commander and Chief, disagreeing is treason, praise the National Security State. It's a complete reversal when Republicans are out of power. They yell "Benghazi", the "Economy" etc.

Partisanship likes to masquerade as having higher principles and morals but it never does. Its always about supporting your team no matter what.

We see that behavior across AMD and NVIDIA partisans.
power efficiency has its merit when u compare 2 product at the same speed. The one that consume lesser power will always look more attractive. AMD entire product stack below Fury are losing to Nvidia in this section. This is the biggest market. It is not surprise they loose the market share.

if u actually read my post, the overall value of product is actually more than just power efficiency. To win over the market, AMD need a complete package.(same for Nvidia)

So if Polaris are trumping pascal in every section including the driver + features etc, that includes WHQL driver release as frequent as Nvidia's, then it is a better product. wink.gif
Edited by Clocknut - 2/29/16 at 3:40am
Gaming Rig
(10 items)
 
Work/Web Rig
(11 items)
 
Web Rig
(8 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K @4GHz stock volt OC Asus P8Z77-V LK Palit GTX 750Ti StormX Dual Corsair Vengence 1600MHz_CL8 4GBx4 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 80GB 7200rpm Maxtor 250GB 7200rpm Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorCase
BenQ XL2720z @ 1920x1080 144Hz Silverstone Ps06 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core 2 Quad Q9650 Gigabyte EP41-UD3L Asus 1GB Radeon 7790 DirectCU OC Corsair Gaming Ram 2GBx2 DDR2-800 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 80GB 7200rpm Western Digital 200GB 7200rpm Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 pro 
MonitorPowerCase
Samsung 226bw 1680x1050 Acbel iPower 510w (450w PSU) LianLi PS05 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD E350 MSI E350IA-E45 AMD Radeon 6310 4GB Kingston DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Western Digital 80GB Linux Slackware 14.1 Samsung 22" 1680x1050 LCD Acbel 300w PSU 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(10 items)
 
Work/Web Rig
(11 items)
 
Web Rig
(8 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K @4GHz stock volt OC Asus P8Z77-V LK Palit GTX 750Ti StormX Dual Corsair Vengence 1600MHz_CL8 4GBx4 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 80GB 7200rpm Maxtor 250GB 7200rpm Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorCase
BenQ XL2720z @ 1920x1080 144Hz Silverstone Ps06 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core 2 Quad Q9650 Gigabyte EP41-UD3L Asus 1GB Radeon 7790 DirectCU OC Corsair Gaming Ram 2GBx2 DDR2-800 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 80GB 7200rpm Western Digital 200GB 7200rpm Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 pro 
MonitorPowerCase
Samsung 226bw 1680x1050 Acbel iPower 510w (450w PSU) LianLi PS05 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD E350 MSI E350IA-E45 AMD Radeon 6310 4GB Kingston DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Western Digital 80GB Linux Slackware 14.1 Samsung 22" 1680x1050 LCD Acbel 300w PSU 
  hide details  
Reply
post #444 of 1175
If google translate is correct, Hd.fr are measuring power consumption at the card which is just wrong. There was a test done and I hope someone here remembers so they link it, were the 680 and the 7970 showed a ~45W less advantage to the 680 when measured at the card. It dropped down to ~10W when power was measured at system level. Your card ain't nothing but an expensive paper weight outside of a system to feed it, so why measure it's power use in isolation?
post #445 of 1175
here is something.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/msi-afterburner-undervolt-radeon-r9-fury,4425.html

GCN1.0-3.0 wasnt design for P/W it was design for pure compute power...

GCN4.0 will be designed for P/W.
post #446 of 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahigan View Post

One thing worth mentioning, system power usage should always be higher when an NVIDIA card is present during gaming because of Static scheduling and a multi threaded driver.

The modest differences in CPU load aren't going to make much difference in total power on many systems, not anywhere near as much as differences in GPU power.

Even at 4.8GHz with no power saving features, gaming load on a 3770k is going to be under 100w, and the differences from driver threading/scheduling won't change that much. On a more conservatively clocked CPU and/or one with power saving features enabled, the CPU is such a tiny portion of total system load during gaming that it will probably fall within margin of error.
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #447 of 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

The modest differences in CPU load aren't going to make much difference in total power on many systems, not anywhere near as much as differences in GPU power.

Even at 4.8GHz with no power saving features, gaming load on a 3770k is going to be under 100w, and the differences from driver threading/scheduling won't change that much. On a more conservatively clocked CPU and/or one with power saving features enabled, the CPU is such a tiny portion of total system load during gaming that it will probably fall within margin of error.

Would be interesting to see how AMD's DX11 CPU overhead affects this in a CPU-heavy game.
U2
(13 items)
 
U1
(7 items)
 
SFF
(19 photos)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770 Z77N-WIFI GTX 970 Turbo Kingston Valueram VLP 2x4GB  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Kingston UV400 240GB ADATA XPG SX900 64GB Thermalright Macho Rev. B AC Accelero Mono Plus 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Thermalright TY-147A Windows 8.1 Enterprise 64-bit Dell P2416D Cooler Master V450S 
Case
Jonsbo U2 
MotherboardRAMHard DriveCooling
MSI N3150I ECO Samsung DDR3 SODIMM 2x2GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 500GB CHECKMATE. IT'S PASSIVE 
OSPowerCase
Windows 10 Professional Chieftec SFX 250VS Jonsbo U1 
  hide details  
Reply
U2
(13 items)
 
U1
(7 items)
 
SFF
(19 photos)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770 Z77N-WIFI GTX 970 Turbo Kingston Valueram VLP 2x4GB  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Kingston UV400 240GB ADATA XPG SX900 64GB Thermalright Macho Rev. B AC Accelero Mono Plus 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Thermalright TY-147A Windows 8.1 Enterprise 64-bit Dell P2416D Cooler Master V450S 
Case
Jonsbo U2 
MotherboardRAMHard DriveCooling
MSI N3150I ECO Samsung DDR3 SODIMM 2x2GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 500GB CHECKMATE. IT'S PASSIVE 
OSPowerCase
Windows 10 Professional Chieftec SFX 250VS Jonsbo U1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #448 of 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnek View Post

Good call on the bold part. The FX line was absolute trash. What the hell were they thinking sticking a Dustbuster fan on the card? kookoo.gif
I have a GSync monitor and I definitely wouldn't mind buying Polaris if they offer more performance/a better deal. Granted that's mainly because I'm not all that impressed with GSync, and could most certainly live without it.

Well, looking at your sig rig I'd say you have more money available for your hobby than most people, and it's those people that will keep using Nvidia BECAUSE of their Gsync monitor. They paid premium for the gsync module, they're going to want to use it.
My PC
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 - 5820k MSI X99S Plus SLI Sapphire R9 Fury NITRO Corsair Vengeance 16GB DDR4 2800Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung SM951 512GB Seagate Barracuda 500GB Noctua NH-U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit Asus MG279Q Logitech G510 Corsair RM750 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Obsidian 700D Logitech G700 Outplay Sennheiser HD598 
Audio
Tritton PC510HDA (Microphone use only) 
  hide details  
Reply
My PC
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 - 5820k MSI X99S Plus SLI Sapphire R9 Fury NITRO Corsair Vengeance 16GB DDR4 2800Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung SM951 512GB Seagate Barracuda 500GB Noctua NH-U14S 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit Asus MG279Q Logitech G510 Corsair RM750 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Obsidian 700D Logitech G700 Outplay Sennheiser HD598 
Audio
Tritton PC510HDA (Microphone use only) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #449 of 1175
Tom has a review out about ashes of the singularity. It´s an interesting read , particularly the power consumption part.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ashes-of-the-singularity-beta-async-compute-multi-adapter-power-consumption,review-33476.html
post #450 of 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by sages View Post

Tom has a review out about ashes of the singularity. It´s an interesting read , particularly the power consumption part.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ashes-of-the-singularity-beta-async-compute-multi-adapter-power-consumption,review-33476.html

So Nvidia has a bigger drop in CPU draw going to DX12. That's interesting. (edit: On second thought, maybe not so surprising.)

But 100W extra for the 390X in DX12. Oh my.
Edited by Forceman - 2/29/16 at 8:19am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Software News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Anand] Ashes of the Singularity Revisited: A Beta Look at DirectX 12 & Asynchronous Shading