1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

DirectX10 GPUs (R600, G80) to Consume up to 300W

Discussion in 'ATI' started by AirRaid, Jun 7, 2006.

  1. AirRaid

    AirRaid Guest

    http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2770

    _________________________________________________________________________


    It's almost like we say this every year, but Computex hasn't even
    officially started yet and we already have a lot to talk about.
    Everything from the power requirements of next year's GPUs from ATI
    and NVIDIA to the excitement surrounding Intel's Conroe launch is
    going to be covered in today's pre-show coverage so we'll save the
    long winded introduction and get right to business.

    We will first address some of the overall trends we've seen while
    speaking to many of the Taiwanese manufacturers and then dive into
    product specific items. We'll start with the most shocking news
    we've run into thus far - the power consumption of the
    next-generation GPUs due out early next year.

    DirectX 10 GPUs to Consume up to 300W

    ATI and NVIDIA have been briefing power supply manufacturers in Taiwan
    recently about what to expect for next year's R600 and G80 GPUs.
    Both GPUs will be introduced in late 2006 or early 2007, and while we
    don't know the specifications of the new cores we do know that they
    will be extremely power hungry. The new GPUs will range in power
    consumption from 130W up to 300W per card. ATI and NVIDIA won't confirm
    or deny our findings and we are receiving conflicting information as to
    the exact specifications of these new GPUs, but the one thing is for
    sure is that the power requirements are steep.

    Power supply makers are being briefed now in order to make sure that
    the power supplies they are shipping by the end of this year are up to
    par with the high end GPU requirements for late 2006/early 2007. You
    will see both higher wattage PSUs (1000 - 1200W) as well as secondary
    units specifically for graphics cards. One configuration we've seen
    is a standard PSU mounted in your case for your motherboard, CPU and
    drives, running alongside a secondary PSU installed in a 5.25" drive
    bay. The secondary PSU would then be used to power your graphics
    cards.


    http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tradeshows/2006/computex/day1/Small/PICT0239.jpg

    OCZ had one such GPU power supply at the show for us to look at. As you
    can see above, the 300W power supply can fit into a 5.25" drive bay and
    receives power from a cable passed through to it on the inside of your
    PC's case.


    http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tradeshows/2006/computex/day1/Small/PICT0242.jpg

    OCZ is even working on a model that could interface with its
    Powerstream power supplies, so you would simply plug this PSU into your
    OCZ PSU without having to run any extra cables through your case.


    http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tradeshows/2006/computex/day1/Small/PICT0240.jpg

    In order to deal with the increased power consumption of this
    next-generation of DirectX 10 GPUs apparently manufacturers are
    considering the possibility of using water cooling to keep noise and
    heat to a minimum.

    As depressing as this news is, there is a small light at the end of the
    tunnel. Our sources tell us that after this next generation of GPUs we
    won't see an increase in power consumption, rather a decrease for the
    following generation. It seems as if in their intense competition with
    one another, ATI and NVIDIA have let power consumption get out of hand
    and will begin reeling it back in starting in the second half of next
    year.

    In the more immediate future, there are some GPUs from ATI that will be
    making their debut, including the R580+, RV570 and RV560. The R580+ is
    a faster version of the current R580, designed to outperform NVIDIA's
    GeForce 7900 GTX. The RV570 is designed to be an upper mid-range
    competitor to the 7900GT, possibly carrying the X1700 moniker. The
    only information we've received about RV570 is that it may be an 80nm
    GPU with 12-pipes. The RV560 may end up being the new successor to the
    X1600 series, but we haven't received any indication of
    specifications.

    http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tradeshows/2006/computex/day1/Small/PICT0082.jpg


    After the HDMI/HDCP fiasco that both ATI and NVIDIA faced earlier this
    year, we're finally seeing video cards equipped with HDMI outputs and
    full HDCP support. The HDCP solution of choice appears to be a TMDS
    transmitter by Silicon Image that has found its way onto almost all of
    the HDMI equipped video cards we've seen.

    http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tradeshows/2006/computex/day1/Small/PICT0085.jpg
    http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tradeshows/2006/computex/day1/Small/PICT0084.jpg


    While some of the HDMI equipped graphics cards simply use the HDMI
    output as a glorified DVI connector, other companies have outfitted
    their designs with a SPDIF header to allow for digital audio
    passthrough over HDMI as well. Remember that the HDMI connector can
    carry both audio and video data, and by outfitting cards with a header
    for internal audio passthrough (from your soundcard/motherboard to the
    graphics card) you take advantage of that feature of the HDMI
    specification.

    http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/tradeshows/2006/computex/day1/Small/PICT0182.JPG

    Alongside HDMI support, passively cooled GPUs are "in" these days
    as we've seen a number of fanless graphics cards since we've been
    here. The combination of HDMI output and a passive design is a
    definite winner for the HTPC community, who are most likely to be after
    a video card equipped with a HDMI output at this point.
     
    AirRaid, Jun 7, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. AirRaid

    Gank Guest

    Yea, and I won't be buying any first gen DX10 card either. This is a win-win
    situation for me. I sit out Vista and DX10 cards until most of the bugs and
    foibles are fixed and I save money too. That's cool with me.
     
    Gank, Jun 8, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. AirRaid

    John Lewis Guest

    Yeah... much cooler (physically, financially and metaphorically) than
    being the suckers that buy the first bleeding-edge DX10 cards.

    John Lewis
     
    John Lewis, Jun 8, 2006
    #3
  4. AirRaid

    Chingy Guest

    Your links don't work whoever you are LoL



     
    Chingy, Jun 8, 2006
    #4
  5. AirRaid

    chrisv Guest

    Indeed. I'm planning on building a new PC in a month or two,
    featuring an Intel Core 2 and a 7900GT. OS will be dual-boot Linux
    and XP.
     
    chrisv, Jun 8, 2006
    #5
  6. Well the first link worked for me, but the rest no.
     
    Mickey Skuczas, Jun 8, 2006
    #6
  7. AirRaid

    chrisv Guest

    Good thing you stupid top-posters kept the 100+ lines hanging
    uselessly below...
     
    chrisv, Jun 8, 2006
    #7
  8. Holy Shit!

    That kinda sucks. I don't get it though. A GPU card is nothing more than
    like a CPU with a motherboard, and no stinking motherboard/CPU combo I know
    of sucks down 300W alone.
     
    HockeyTownUSA, Jun 9, 2006
    #8
  9. AirRaid

    Mark Guest

    Current graphics cards actually have more transistors than current CPUs -
    though I can't remember the exact figures off the top of my head. The reason
    they are able to have more transistors is that graphics processors are
    naturally a lot more parallel, so they work out a circuit and then just
    repeat it many times. On the other hand, CPUs are much more flexible, but
    this means that it is much more complicated to design them - so that
    designing a CPU with half as many transistors actually takes many more
    man-hours to design.
     
    Mark, Jun 9, 2006
    #9
  10. AirRaid

    NuQ Guest

    I'm still on NT4 SP3. I just don't trust anything beyond that just yet. ;-)
     
    NuQ, Jun 9, 2006
    #10
  11. AirRaid

    Gank Guest

    I hear ya! I've been thinking about dumping XP and going back to Win2K but
    XP has better game support, and some game developers have made it so their
    games only run on XP. If it wasn't for games I wouldn't bother with XP even,
    never mind Vista.
     
    Gank, Jun 9, 2006
    #11
  12. AirRaid

    GT-Force Guest

    And, when people say "A tablet", instead of a Wacom GraphPad or a Tablet PC,
    you think that it is a block of mud onto which you write with a bamboo or a
    metal-rod -pen, and after you are done, you bake it to preserve your
    writing; right? Geez... >:>
    GT
    PS: I am installing Vista Beta 2 to try, as I write this ;)
     
    GT-Force, Jun 11, 2006
    #12
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.