A R7 370 faster than a R9 285?
Something is wrong!
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Most Power Efficient & Best Value Of AMD GPUs For Linux Gamers
Collapse
X
-
AFAIK (and if I understood everything correctly), the estimation of the power consumption as done today is flawed...
If a device consume 100W during 2 seconds and another 50W during 20 seconds, current test will say that the second card is the most efficient. However it isn't because the second one takes much more time to perform the same work.
That's plain obvious for CPUs: the average power is not the good value.
For GPUs, it could be much more complicated: the benchmarks need to be
1) either at constant fps (to compare the power consumption displaying the same thing, not at 30 fps for card X and one at 180 fps for card Y with card Y being obviously much more power hungry);
2) or at constant frame number: this way, you measure the time it takes to get the job done (i.e. displaying X frames in total on either GPU).
But in both case (even in the first one), it is far better to intergrate the power consuption over time instead of calculating an average.
To the bystander: if you really want to consume less power, either try to play your game on a raspberry pi OR choose any card you want but limit the FPS number. You can't possibly compare the power consumption of one GPU and the other that does twice as much work and saying "OMG, I won't by that second card that consumes twice as much power".
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
What I miss here is some APUs. When looking at power efficiency, they should at least be contenders. When looking at price, they should at least be contenders.
FPS though, probably not so much
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Klassic Six View Post
Have you seen the benchmark results?
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostNo it isn't - if you care strictly about performance, go for the Fury. If you care about performance but you're on a budget, go for the 290. The Fury might not be too impressive at the moment, but most distros don't even have drivers that support it yet, so give it some time and it'll always outperform the others. Generally speaking, if you have a 1080p screen, the 290 is good enough for almost anything.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Klassic Six View PostYou're right but still if someone just care about performance it's hard to decide.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Klassic Six View PostYou're right but still if someone just care about performance it's hard to decide.
Regardless what some benchmarks said people interested in performance should buy whatever AMD official price range said, as those are scaled fine by performance. Obviously not all benchmark situations show the difference, but some will.Last edited by dungeon; 26 August 2015, 03:33 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostThat's for you to decide. Some people care about power consumption, others care about achieving the highest FPS, while others remain on a budget.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mike Frett View PostSomebody here told me a R7 360. Of course I was asking for a replacement for a 6670. Finding a replacement in the same price range but with better performance can get quite difficult.
With Catalyst situation is more stable across asics and more scalable, but that claim depends on running apps which are scalable in perfromance and do it properly (if i can say that for eONs ). As both Dirt and Bioshock tested here tell the different story if you enable game engine switch --eon_disable_catalyst_workarounds
Without that switch Bioshock missrender and Dirt does not have all options available/enabled... and also runs slower.Last edited by dungeon; 26 August 2015, 02:35 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Klassic Six View PostCan't say which gpu is the best??
- Likes 2
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: