Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › Truth on GTX580 Furmark Temps and Consumption
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Truth on GTX580 Furmark Temps and Consumption - Page 2

post #11 of 80
personaly dont care about the power consumption only care about the end results...if they built a card that drew 600 watts and blew away the compitition i'd buy it...i believe this is the same with any real enthusist...power draw is not the concern functionality is..
junker
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
pentium dual core e2140 asus lancaster8 evga 240gt 2x1gb samsung 6400 ddr2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250gb western digital sata liteon dvd/cd burner/lightscribe vista 32bit emachines 19inch 1280x1024 flat screen crt 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
dell sk8110 abit 400watt generic black steel midtower logitech laser usb 
Mouse Pad
arm of a leath lazyboy chair 
  hide details  
Reply
junker
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
pentium dual core e2140 asus lancaster8 evga 240gt 2x1gb samsung 6400 ddr2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250gb western digital sata liteon dvd/cd burner/lightscribe vista 32bit emachines 19inch 1280x1024 flat screen crt 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
dell sk8110 abit 400watt generic black steel midtower logitech laser usb 
Mouse Pad
arm of a leath lazyboy chair 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 80
I think it's a little foolish to get all bent out of shape at nvidia & each other for something so trivial. Don't you guys have anything better to do?
post #13 of 80
Thats pretty sad, they have to resort to something like that to kinda hide real results..
Blue Dragon
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K | 5GHz ASUS P8P67 Pro Rev (3.1) Gigabyte GTX 1070 G1 GAMING Kingston HyperX Black 16GB 1866 (10,10,10,25)  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
SanDisk Ultra II 480GB OCZ Vertex 460 Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB 64MB ASUS DRW-24B1ST 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H100i Push/Pull Cougar Vortex 120mm Fans Windows 8.1 Pro x64  DELL UltraSharp U2312HM, Dual Dell E207WFP Tt eSPORTS POSEIDON Cherry MX Blue 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Thermaltake TOUGHPOWER TPD-0750M Anidees AI7WW Cube Logitech G502 Proteus Core/ Logitech G500s Corsair Vengeance MM400 Hard Plastic Gaming Mou... 
Audio
Sound Blaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
Blue Dragon
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K | 5GHz ASUS P8P67 Pro Rev (3.1) Gigabyte GTX 1070 G1 GAMING Kingston HyperX Black 16GB 1866 (10,10,10,25)  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
SanDisk Ultra II 480GB OCZ Vertex 460 Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB 64MB ASUS DRW-24B1ST 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H100i Push/Pull Cougar Vortex 120mm Fans Windows 8.1 Pro x64  DELL UltraSharp U2312HM, Dual Dell E207WFP Tt eSPORTS POSEIDON Cherry MX Blue 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Thermaltake TOUGHPOWER TPD-0750M Anidees AI7WW Cube Logitech G502 Proteus Core/ Logitech G500s Corsair Vengeance MM400 Hard Plastic Gaming Mou... 
Audio
Sound Blaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 80
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draygonn View Post
Maybe this is an attempt to eliminate Furmark? I doubt AMD will follow suit.

Huge difference in temps reported!
ATI actually did this two years ago using Catalyst.






Source
post #15 of 80
Thread Starter 
Anyone else experiment with this yet? Would love to see more results.
post #16 of 80
im an ati fanboy (okay not a fanboy but i generally look at ati's offerings before nvidias) and i think its Ludicrous that nvidia would do this... we all know that furmark stresses the gpu futher than any real world application but as you can see AVP pushed it pretty close to the furmark levels! why not just have it auto-downclock when it reaches a certain temperature no matter what? and just because ati did it doesn't make it any less wrong
intel-a-thon
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5820k Gigabyte x99-UD4- CF Powercolor R9 290 4x4GB G. Skill 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Intel 730 Series NZXT Kraken X61 Windows 10 Acer K272HULbmiidp 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x asus 21.5" Varmilo VA87MD Corsair RM850 Corsair Air 540 
MouseMouse Pad
Func MS-1 Roccat Taito 
  hide details  
Reply
intel-a-thon
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5820k Gigabyte x99-UD4- CF Powercolor R9 290 4x4GB G. Skill 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Intel 730 Series NZXT Kraken X61 Windows 10 Acer K272HULbmiidp 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x asus 21.5" Varmilo VA87MD Corsair RM850 Corsair Air 540 
MouseMouse Pad
Func MS-1 Roccat Taito 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 80
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by twich12 View Post
im an ati fanboy (okay not a fanboy but i generally look at ati's offerings before nvidias) and i think its Ludicrous that nvidia would do this... we all know that furmark stresses the gpu futher than any real world application but as you can see AVP pushed it pretty close to the furmark levels! why not just have it auto-downclock when it reaches a certain temperature no matter what? and just because ati did it doesn't make it any less wrong
Apparently NVIDIA (just like ATI) caught on with reviewers "overstating" the power consumption and heat their previous cards produced due to Furmark being "too intensive" and they decided to mascarade the Furmark results this time (pointing out that Furmark doesn't accurately represent the real world results, which is what most people care about). Personally, I agree, this was a pretty poor decision (from both companies). However, I will give NVIDIA credit for at least not-hiding the fact that this limitation exists and in fact pointing it out in their slides. Unfortunately back when ATI did this, they really said nothing about it (not really too much concern there though cause the workaround was just stupid easy - just renaming the Furmark.exe filename).
post #18 of 80
The the only good point GTX580 had over GTX480 (Lower power consumption, less heat) its a fake so from being not very impressive at start no its even more not impressive.
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AMD Radeon R9 16GB DDR3-2400MHz  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
Reply
Ishimura
(21 items)
 
Silent Knight
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 3770K @ 4.6GHz ASRock Z77E-ITX eVGA GTX 1080 Ti Hybrid AMD Radeon R9 16GB DDR3-2400MHz  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB Toshiba X300 5TB Corsair H100i GTX eVGA Hybrid Water Cooler  
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
4x GentleTyphoon AP-15 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Philips Brilliance BDM4065UC 4K Razer BlackWidow Chroma  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
eVGA SuperNOVA 750 G3 Define Nano S Logitech G502 Proteus Core PECHAM Gaming Mouse Pad XX-Large 
AudioAudioAudioAudio
Audioengine D1 DAC Mackie CR Series CR3 Audio-Technica ATH-M50 Sennheiser HD 598 
Audio
Sony XB950BT 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 4.2GHz ASUS M4A79XTD EVO AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB @ 1200/1500 2x 4GB G.SKILL Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 60GB WD Caviar Green 1.5TB 2 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB XSPC Raystorm 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
EK-FC7970 XSPC RS360 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit Corsair TX750 
Case
NZXT Switch 810  
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open1Your1Eyes0 View Post
ATI actually did this two years ago using Catalyst.






Source
It probably doesnt have a crossfire profile.
post #20 of 80
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kand View Post
It probably doesnt have a crossfire profile.
Would be true however, that test was done with a single card.

Also here is another site trying a different test:

Quote:
Expreview has done the test with Quake Wars: Enemy Territory and has renamed etqw.exe to FurMark.exe and saw performance drop from 141.3FPS to 93.7FPS!

In fact just the opposite happened:

Quote:
In our opinions when GPU makers “optimize” their driver, they just tried to let games or benchmarks runs better. But now it seems ATI driver team adds a “profile” for Furmark, make it run slower, and dont burn GPU anymore.
Source 1
Source 2
Edited by Open1Your1Eyes0 - 11/13/10 at 11:36am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: NVIDIA
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › NVIDIA › Truth on GTX580 Furmark Temps and Consumption