390x vs....... Considering upgrade

[akeefer]

Hey all,

I don't game too much beyond Flight Sim X and XPlane 11, but I would like to have something good. I'm building a new system with a Ryzen for video rendering. I currently have a 390x, but that is power hungry. What card would I need to get in order to be equivalent or better with lower power draw? I was thinking a 1060 6GB would do the job just fine.

Need to know if I'm throwing away anything by selling the 390x and getting that card. If you have other opinions, please let me know!

Thanks!

 

[Bacon1]

The 390x is still pretty good, a 480/1060 would often be a side grade depending on the game. They would use less power for sure, but performance wouldn't go up much.

AMD is announcing the 500 series which will likely be rebrands but might either be faster / cheaper, and Vega is coming in the next few months which will also potentially drive down pricing on all the cards under $500.

If you really want to upgrade now 480 / 1060 will be sidegrade but more efficient.

 

[tamz_msc]

If you get a good price on the 390X, then the best upgrade option that you have right now is to get a GTX 1070. It will be 30-40% faster and consume 100W less power in a typical gaming scenario.

 

[Dave2150]

If you get a good price on the 390X, then the best upgrade option that you have right now is to get a GTX 1070. It will be 30-40% faster and consume 100W less power in a typical gaming scenario.

A 1070 will use 200w+ less power than a 390X. Many 390X's breached the 500W mark during full load (for example the MSI 390X Gaming X). The RX480 will be slightly faster, much quieter, run much cooler and consume far less electricity.

That said I'd wait for Vega, assuming it's within your budget (hopefully more than one Vega card, a cut down one could be nice, 1070 performance for a similar/cheaper price).

 

[tamz_msc]

A 1070 will use 200w+ less power than a 390X. Many 390X's breached the 500W mark during full load (for example the MSI 390X Gaming X).

That is completely false. 390X consumes 500W only during extreme OC with modded BIOS and custom volt-mods. A typical GTX 1070 (non-FE) would consume around 140-180W in normal gaming scenarios.

 

[Dave2150]

That is completely false. 390X consumes 500W only during extreme OC with modded BIOS and custom volt-mods. A typical GTX 1070 (non-FE) would consume around 140-180W in normal gaming scenarios.

I'm obviously referring to total system power consumption, such is the norm when reviewers typically measure power consumption (with the same configuration cpu/mobo/storage etc)

Here is some evidence to show that some 390X's (MSI'S Gaming X) at stock consuming over 500W at the wall:

Here's the 1070 FE's power consumption at the wall, at stock (from the same reviewer, using the same test setup)

I'll do the maths for you, since you seem easily confused:

510-284=226w

So you are indeed incorrect in saying that the 390X only uses 100W less than a 1070. As I've demonstrated, some 390X's at stock (MSI 390X GamingX) draw 226w additional power, compared to the 1070FE. There are some 390X's that consume even more power than this at stock - take a look at the XFX 390X Black Edition in the graphs!

 

[Yakk]

Yeah a 480 or 1060 would be side grades, more of changing for the sake of change. And you would still pay a premium for very similar performance and take quite a while for the power reduction to offset the money loss.

 

[tamz_msc]

I'm obviously referring to total system power consumption, such is the norm when reviewers typically measure power consumption (with the same configuration cpu/mobo/storage etc)

Here is some evidence to show that some 390X's (MSI'S Gaming X) at stock consuming over 500W at the wall:

Here's the 1070 FE's power consumption at the wall, at stock (from the same reviewer, using the same test setup)

I'll do the maths for you, since you seem easily confused:

510-284=226w

So you are indeed incorrect in saying that the 390X only uses 100W less than a 1070. As I've demonstrated, some 390X's at stock (MSI 390X GamingX) draw 226w additional power, compared to the 1070FE. There are some 390X's that consume even more power than this at stock - take a look at the XFX 390X Black Edition in the graphs!

There is no scope of confusion. The test system of OC3D.net changed from a 4960X to a 6850K. How about you do better research?

Here is the data for the MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X:

101W less than the R9 290X reference; depending on the model (no reference 390X) the R9 390X can be either below or above this number. Or you can look at AT's own numbers.

 

[Mercennarius]

390X still holds it's own for sure. An AMD RX 480 will have about equal performance but significantly less power consumption. Though personally like others have mentioned I would wait just a bit longer as Vega is fixing to release and you will have more options. Though if you want to upgrade now I would recommend the RX 480 over the 1060 personally...

 

[Dave2150]

There is no scope of confusion. The test system of OC3D.net changed from a 4960X to a 6850K. How about you do better research?

Here is the data for the MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X:

101W less than the R9 290X reference; depending on the model (no reference 390X) the R9 390X can be either below or above this number. Or you can look at AT's own numbers.

I think you're just trolling at this point. You keep mentioning different GPU's - the OP has a 390X and that's what we're talking about here. Not a 290X, as they use less power etc.

We're discussing your statement that a 390X uses only 100W more power than a 1070FE.

Are you still suggesting the 390X at stock uses only 100W more than a 1070FE at stock? If so, provide evidence to support your claims like I did.

There are countless other reviews showing the 390X at stock drawing between 150-200W more than a 1070FE does, go ahead and google them if you know how.

 

[Krteq]

There are countless other reviews showing the 390X at stock drawing between 150-200W more than a 1070FE does.

Whaaa? Can you link some of them pls?

 

[Mercennarius]

I thought I remember reading the 390X was "slightly" more power efficient than the 290X at the same clock speeds.

 

[tamz_msc]

I think you're just trolling at this point. You keep mentioning different GPU's - the OP has a 390X and that's what we're talking about here. Not a 290X, as they use less power etc.

We're discussing your statement that a 390X uses only 100W more power than a 1070FE.

Are you still suggesting the 390X at stock uses only 100W more than a 1070FE at stock? If so, provide evidence to support your claims like I did.

There are countless other reviews showing the 390X at stock drawing between 150-200W more than a 1070FE does, go ahead and google them if you know how.

You gloss over so many things that its almost pointless to reply, but this is going to be my last attempt.

1. There is no reference R9 390X. Hence I use the R9 290X as a baseline. AnandTech says that AMD labels the 390X typical board power at 275W, while they didn't officially publish the data for the 290X, AnandTech's testing pegs it at 250W. Of course these mean noting in the real world.
2. TPU's graphs shows a worst case AIB GTX 1070 and a 1070 FE consuming 100W and 140W less than the reference R9 290X, respectively.
   
3. Even if we consider the fact that there is a wild variation between AIB 390X cards, (see HardOCP and TweakTown) it will typically consume 100-150W more than an aftermarket GTX 1070 with moderate to large factory OC in a typical gaming scenario.
   
4. Your original 226W claim is wrong because the testbench configuration of your source changed between the two graphs you showed.

 

[Bacon1]

Its interesting you keep saying 1070 FE... because all aftermarket cards use a LOT more power than the FE

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-10...tt_so_viel_watt_kosten_die_hoeheren_taktraten

 

[crisium]

Well, now that the fud's been squashed, back to issue?

The first 2 posts are all you need, OP. If all you care about is reducing power consumption, then the 1060 6GB will give you the same performance for much less wattage. If you want to improve both performance and power consumption, try the GTX 1070.

 

[Dave2150]

Its interesting you keep saying 1070 FE... because all aftermarket cards use a LOT more power than the FE

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-10...tt_so_viel_watt_kosten_die_hoeheren_taktraten

The FE's boost to very similar levels to the AIB cards, making the custom cards less attractive compared to previous generations.

I'd recommend reading up on Pascal - all the extra power phases, dual 8 pin PCI-E power connectors etc hardly benefit the boost clocks at all.

Also, the 1070FE completely smokes the 390X, and is only 150W TDP, so why on earth wouldn't I mention the FE?

 

[Dave2150]

I thought I remember reading the 390X was "slightly" more power efficient than the 290X at the same clock speeds.

The 390X has significantly faster memory than the 290X, which increases the GPU's overall power consumption significantly.

 

[Bacon1]

Also, the 1070FE completely smokes the 390X, and is only 150W TDP, so why on earth wouldn't I mention the FE?

Because no one recommends the FE as it is super loud or throttles during gameplay, and also more expensive.

 

[Dave2150]

Because no one recommends the FE as it is super loud or throttles during gameplay, and also more expensive.

Super loud? The 1070FE is much quieter than any 390X out there. I'm guessing you haven't owned either of these cards, I have. My MSI 390X is the loudest card I've ever had, also the hottest running. My 1070FE is much quieter, and obviously is capped at 83C at stock, so much cooler running also.

1070FE is a much better card than a 390X, obviously it's more expensive as you get what you pay for.

 

[Bacon1]

Super loud? The 1070FE is much quieter than any 390X out there. I'm guessing you haven't owned either of these cards, I have. My MSI 390X is the loudest card I've ever had, also the hottest running. My 1070FE is much quieter, and obviously is capped at 83C at stock, so much cooler running also.

http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2016/gpu/gtx-1070/gtx-1070-rev-teq.png
http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2016/gpu/gtx-1070/gtx-1070-rev-tot.png

NVidia's GTX 1070 doesn't excite us from a thermal control standpoint. It does what it should – keeps the card at a reasonable temperature and with a VRM fan noise level just under 50dB

Seems like the 390x runs cooler to me...

If you're running something like a GTX 970 and up, or R9 390X and up, on a 1080p display, there's really not much need to upgrade to the GTX 1070....
Now, as for the Founders Edition, we're taking the same stance we took with the GTX 1080: Buy an AIB card

http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2453-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-founders-edition-review/page-2

I don't think paying $400 for a ~33% performance boost is really worth it, considering the 1070 is so old now. But that is just me.

https://www.computerbase.de/thema/grafikkarte/rangliste/#diagramm-performancerating-1920-1080

For the OP I'd say just undervolt -48 to -72 if power usage is really a big deal. Buying a new card isn't going to make up the difference in price vs power.

 

[tamz_msc]

The FE's boost to very similar levels to the AIB cards, making the custom cards less attractive compared to previous generations.

I'd recommend reading up on Pascal - all the extra power phases, dual 8 pin PCI-E power connectors etc hardly benefit the boost clocks at all.

Also, the 1070FE completely smokes the 390X, and is only 150W TDP, so why on earth wouldn't I mention the FE?

I've seen this FUD thrown around in a lot of discussions on Pascal GPUs - how the FE apparently boosts the same as AIB cards. It does not.

If it were the case then, there would be no point in buying AIB cards and overclocking them.

 

[Bacon1]

Also remember that the OP is looking at playing two flight sims and not lots of other games.

He doesn't need the power of a 1070 for FSX which is very old and ran amazing even with the 5000 series:

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/01/05/amds_ati_radeon_eyefinity_performance_review/6

5760 x 1200 resolution avg of 46fps with a 5970...

 

[happy medium]

Well, now that the fud's been squashed, back to issue?

The first 2 posts are all you need, OP. If all you care about is reducing power consumption, then the 1060 6GB will give you the same performance for much less wattage. If you want to improve both performance and power consumption, try the GTX 1070.

This guy has the right answer.

 

[akeefer]

Well, glad to see all these posts! Haha. Anyway, I guess I probably put a little too much emphasis on power usage, it's really not that big of deal for me. I just don't want to go backwards. XPlane 11 is new and it appears works well with newer cards. I am going to be using DaVinci Resolve, OBS Studio, Adobe CC Suite, etc. I know Adobe really favors nVidia it seems? That might have actually been the reason behind considering the 1060, plus the fact the 390x is a older card. That's why I don't think getting a 480 would be that great of idea. Really not benefiting much beyond the power consumption. But maybe I'm reading into that nVidia advantage too much...

 

[happy medium]

Well, glad to see all these posts! Haha. Anyway, I guess I probably put a little too much emphasis on power usage, it's really not that big of deal for me. I just don't want to go backwards. XPlane 11 is new and it appears works well with newer cards. I am going to be using DaVinci Resolve, OBS Studio, Adobe CC Suite, etc. I know Adobe really favors nVidia it seems? That might have actually been the reason behind considering the 1060, plus the fact the 390x is a older card. That's why I don't think getting a 480 would be that great of idea. Really not benefiting much beyond the power consumption. But maybe I'm reading into that nVidia advantage too much...

The gtx1060 is as fast or faster than a 390x but uses about half the power.