X-bit labs reviews the 9600GT

[Matija]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/ ... 512gs.html

The power consumption for *this* card is here:



"This version of Nvidia GeForce 9600 GT has an original PCB design and its distribution of loads among the power channels may be different than that of the reference card."

Still, that's pretty damn impressive.

[lm]

Impressive? I don't think so. It's about time gfx cards start implementing something that makes their idle loads as good as CPUs.

[rpsgc]

Still, that's pretty damn impressive.

9600GT (mid-end) idle 25,5W
HD3870 (high-end) idle 18,7W

hardly impressive...

[Matija]

I was thinking of power consumption under load. The card is roughly as fast as the HD3870 and uses over 20W less. This makes it more suitable for passive cooling and low-airflow conditions.

Idle is a different thing... Nvidia should sort it out soon.

[JazzJackRabbit]

Still, that's pretty damn impressive.

9600GT (mid-end) idle 25,5W
HD3870 (high-end) idle 18,7W

hardly impressive...

Except for the fact that this mid-end part trades blow with high end 3870 while being priced $20-30 lower.

I wouldn't put too much on the mid/high end part classification. Bottom line 9600GT competes with 3870 performance wise and many times comes out on top, especially in <= 1600 resolutions.

[smilingcrow]

AMD have big plans for their next generation GPUs which they predict/hope will hit 10W at idle even for the top end single chip cards. Combine that with the hybrid graphics (or whatever it’s called) which disables the external card when in 2D mode and uses the IGP and things are looking good.
Of course Nvidia have their own hybrid graphics solution as well so it will be interesting to see how this pans out.

I’d like to see a decent card that idles at 10W regardless of which chipset your motherboard uses so that I can match it with whatever platform I prefer. I don’t want to choose the GPU before the CPU/chipset.

[FartingBob]

With the latest offerings from ATI and nvidia we are finally seeing an attempt at reducing power. The graphics card industry was starting to resemble the prescott days over at intel. Full power to the engines, very big, inefficient designs that simply focused on max output and not much else. Core2 changed all that for the CPU thank god, i hope that in the next year GPU power consumption drops significantly. Less power means cheaper to run, easier to cool, less fan noise and more stability. Id take losing a few FPS on crysis for all that.

[Vicotnik]

Like lm, I find the numbers less than impressive. Anything with an idle power consumption higher than the HD3870/HD3850 feels old today. Power consumption at load is not that important really, as long as it is low enough to enable passive cooling.

Core2 changed all that for the CPU thank god

I would hardly say that Core changed that. AMDs A64 line was very efficent from the start and Intel finally "got it" with the Core architecture.

[PretzelB]

Power consumption at load is not that important really, as long as it is low enough to enable passive cooling.

If you ever had to debug a system that would crash while gaming you'd change your tune about how important power consumption under load is. I know most cards don't need the excessive PSUs we see today but there is always that nagging thought that maybe just maybe you're not getting enough power under load. Even when you stick with good brands like Seasonic and Corsair.

I agree it's a waste to burn all that power when idle but under load is where I always find issues and that's where I want to keep things smooth as possible.

[Vicotnik]

I'm not saying it's never important. My point is that even if 9600GT is ~60W while HD3870 is ~80W at full load, HD3870 is still a more efficient card thanks to its lower draw at idle. For most systems; not a system used 100% for gaming for example.

Sure that extra 20W demands more of the PSU but choosing 9600GT over HD3870 only "just to be sure" doesn't make much sense imho. With a power efficient system overall and a good PSU the risk of problems are minimal.

[PretzelB]

Sure that extra 20W demands more of the PSU but choosing 9600GT over HD3870 only "just to be sure" doesn't make much sense imho. With a power efficient system overall and a good PSU the risk of problems are minimal.

You'd think so, or at least I used to think so. I picked nearly all my parts for my current system based on experience and/or information posted here. I have the Abit IP35 Pro, a Corsair PSU, an Intel CPU, Nvidia 8800GT video card, Corsair memory and even the Antec P182 case. Yet I'm having tons of stability issues when gaming. Just Google for "nvlddmkm has stopped working" to see the long list of problems others have had with what should be solid equipment.

That isn't to say that my problems would be solved with 20w less demand, but it's possible when you're looking at a long list of supposedly solid pieces of hardware.

Don't mind me, just frustrated.

[mattthemuppet]

AMD have big plans for their next generation GPUs which they predict/hope will hit 10W at idle even for the top end single chip cards. Combine that with the hybrid graphics (or whatever it’s called) which disables the external card when in 2D mode and uses the IGP and things are looking good.

that's what I'm hoping for, that way idle draw of the discrete card is irrelevant.

[vick1000]

I'm not saying it's never important. My point is that even if 9600GT is ~60W while HD3870 is ~80W at full load, HD3870 is still a more efficient card thanks to its lower draw at idle. For most systems; not a system used 100% for gaming for example.

Sure that extra 20W demands more of the PSU but choosing 9600GT over HD3870 only "just to be sure" doesn't make much sense imho. With a power efficient system overall and a good PSU the risk of problems are minimal.

Why would you buy a 3870 if not for gaming?

[Vicotnik]

Why would you buy a 3870 if not for gaming?

What do you mean?

I bought my 3870 for gaming, but the system is not used mainly for that. When I just download something, listen to music, watch a movie or whatever, it's nice if the graphics card don't consume more power than it has to. Same with the rest of the components of course.

[Cov]

... When I just download something, listen to music, watch a movie or whatever, it's nice if the graphics card don't consume more power than it has to. Same with the rest of the components of course.

I was hoping that this subject would come up one day.

I intend to get the 8800GT or the 9600GT soon, of course for gaming ... but what if I do things like browsing around for example, which only require a low spec system ?

Could I reboot and switch the external graphics card in the BIOS off and activate the onboard graphics ?
Or would I have to remove the external graphics card physically everytime ?

That would suck of course ... maybe I should get a X-Box instead ?

One thing is for sure ... the manufacturer have to think of how to customize their hardware easier in regards to power consumption.

Talking about this subject, the hard drive doesn't need to spin 7200 rpm all the time and neither do I need top transfer speed when saving the one or the other document and picture. Well, that will resolve itself once SSD becomes a serious alternative. But until then our HDDs spin 99% of the time unnecessary ... strange I think.
The CD/DVD in the drive doesn't spin all the time but only on demand.

I find it very fascinating that fans of CPU & PSU cooler can vary their speeds depending on the temperature. That's a simple but smart way, isn't it ?

[Das_Saunamies]

--offtopic
OS' have their power control options that you can use to put your drives to sleep when they are unneeded (admittedly could use drive-specific timings, storage drive 2hrs gaming drive 30min). Having them shift gears or states constantly would wear them down faster than just having them spin in idle. In servers you never turn off the drives unless absolutely necessary, as terminal hiccups are more likely when trying to start a drive - usually the motor or bearings just won't start spinning anymore. One also has to remember that the HDD discs are but the core part of a complex orchestra of heads and plates - they need to spin at a constant speed for the heads to be able to do their job. Every change in speed would mean heads would get nothing but read and write errors until speed was constant and within head operating parameters again.

It's true that drives mostly spin in idle, but that's the way they work (best). Glad WD brought out the 5400 RPM drives for those who actually care about power consumption more than a 0.8 ms advantage. And it's not like the numbers are completely unacceptable compared to the draw of other system components.

And you can't really compare optical drives to HDDs. Optical drives are made for a very specific purpose: random dedicated read tasks of external media and the odd dedicated write. HDDs on the other hand have to be ready to write or read at any given moment, having to constantly cater to the full range of applications that might be demanded of them. System (constant r&w), storage(more r less w, rare use), network(completely random use), RAID(max. use with random tasks), intensive (Photoshop dump, CAD, gaming)... drives have to function in all sorts of roles that have conflicting objectives with each other, so all they can do is look their best and leave it up to the end user to decide when they need to be around. Most important of all, they have to be there, available 24/7. An optical drive can just sit back and wait for you to put in a disc - ever timed yourself and a drive when you do that? It's not a two second start and an 8.9 ms seek time!

Different systems have different advantages and disadvantages. I'm pretty sure we'll never see a variable-speed HDD in our lifetime, as it would require insanely precise head control or long wait times between speed changes, which would stress out the disc motor. I'd say the 3-11 W consumption of a HDD is nothing to worry about, even if they do spend the odd hour or two doing nothing.
-- /offtopic

If you want low idle power, hybrid graphics is the best bet. In the mean time, however, I think the OP's table is a good clue to what you want. I don't like recommending Ati as I'd never buy one myself, but if power consumption is important to you...

AFAIK you can't turn off card slots in BIOS. You can switch IGP on and off, but I at least haven't seen a BIOS where you could make it override a graphics adapter.

[Cov]

Das_Saunamies ... thank you very very much for your detailed explanation.

It appears very logical to me ...

(Incredible how many knowledgeable people are out there)

[Matija]

Although I have no idea how much electricity costs over in the UK, somehow I don't think you should sweat over one card using 15-20W more than the other when idle.

Let's say that card B is at +20W over card A. So that's 50 hours for 1 kWh.

My computer is on for about 5 hours during weekdays, and about 10 on weekends (I like my music). So, that's 45 hours per week, or let's say 200 hours per month.

Card B would therefore be responsible for 4 kWh per month if idle all the time. In GBP, I would pay a whopping £0.3 per month for that. It's not something I'd notice in my budget, quite frankly. Maybe it's different for you.

The 9600GT is about as fast as the HD3870, uses only 6.8W more when idle (£0.1 extra per month), and that is offset by lower consumption under load. Plus you have headroom due to the 9600 costing less than the 3870 to begin with.

Do the math and see if you need to worry about anything.

[ryboto]

Although I have no idea how much electricity costs over in the UK, somehow I don't think you should sweat over one card using 15-20W more than the other when idle.

Let's say that card B is at +20W over card A. So that's 50 hours for 1 kWh.

My computer is on for about 5 hours during weekdays, and about 10 on weekends (I like my music). So, that's 45 hours per week, or let's say 200 hours per month.

Card B would therefore be responsible for 4 kWh per month if idle all the time. In GBP, I would pay a whopping £0.3 per month for that. It's not something I'd notice in my budget, quite frankly. Maybe it's different for you.

The 9600GT is about as fast as the HD3870, uses only 6.8W more when idle (£0.1 extra per month), and that is offset by lower consumption under load. Plus you have headroom due to the 9600 costing less than the 3870 to begin with.

Do the math and see if you need to worry about anything.

Well, you're one of the few I know who turn their PC off. For those that keep it on, use it for media/number crunching in the idle time while not gaming, the difference in watts at idle can be of larger consequence, the PC is going to be in that 3d-idle state 90% of the time. On the whole, 1 million computers that sit idle and use 5-10W less than they would saves quite a bit of power.

[Schlotkins]

Stupid question: Doesn't Vista use the 3D portion of the chip for it's 'standard' graphics?

[jessekopelman]

Do the math and see if you need to worry about anything.

Since this is SPCR, cost is not the only factor when it comes to power draw -- there is also heat and the noise required to dissipate it. If you are using temperature controlled fans, having lower idle temps means a potential quieter system at idle.

[jessekopelman]

Stupid question: Doesn't Vista use the 3D portion of the chip for it's 'standard' graphics?

Yes, but very rarely. If you are just sitting there browsing the web, no 3D. If you start moving windows around and dragging them on top of each other, 3D. Also, the requirements for Aero are infinitesimal compared to the capabilities of even a mid-range discrete card. It is doubtful that anything Aero does would take the card out of "idle" mode.

[smilingcrow]

Since this is SPCR, cost is not the only factor when it comes to power draw -- there is also heat and the noise required to dissipate it. If you are using temperature controlled fans, having lower idle temps means a potential quieter system at idle.

If your system can’t handle an extra 10 to 20W GPU power consumption at idle without becoming too noisy it’s not really an SPCR class PC in the first place. From what I’ve seen even the stock coolers won’t be affected by the extra power consumption with regard to fan noise.

[Vicotnik]

If your system can’t handle an extra 10 to 20W GPU power consumption at idle without becoming too noisy it’s not really an SPCR class PC in the first place. From what I’ve seen even the stock coolers won’t be affected by the extra power consumption with regard to fan noise.

Yes, but if I allow the GPU to consume an extra 10-20W, why not allow the CPU to do the same. And the HDDs, and the PSU and so on.
Suddenly it's a 300W monster with a Tt logo on it.

I know I'm a bit obsessed with low power consumption (more so than with absolute silence) but for me every watt counts. My microwave is hooked up to a power strip just to avoid the 3W standby draw.

[smilingcrow]

Yes, but if I allow the GPU to consume an extra 10-20W, why not allow the CPU to do the same. And the HDDs, and the PSU and so on. Suddenly it's a 300W monster with a Tt logo on it.

I think you’ve completely missed my point as I was simply replying to a post that suggested that a GPU that consumes an extra 10 or 20W at idle would impact on the noise levels of a PC from an SPCR perspective which I felt didn’t make any sense.

When building a decent gaming system that consumes low power at idle the choice of GPU is the hardest compromise to make. You can a use low power consuming at idle PSU, HDD and CPU with little impact on gaming performance but the choice of GPU can have a large impact on performance and idle power draw. That’s the trade off at discussion here.

[Ant6n]

I'd say at 60 W max this thing can be used in a system with a 200 W psu.
The question is whether future drivers will improve some of the power saving features.

[Das_Saunamies]

Das_Saunamies ... thank you very very much for your detailed explanation.

You're welcome. It's mostly stuff I summed up having worked with servers and workstations and having read these forums actively. So thank SPCR too!

[jessekopelman]

If your system can’t handle an extra 10 to 20W GPU power consumption at idle without becoming too noisy it’s not really an SPCR class PC in the first place. From what I’ve seen even the stock coolers won’t be affected by the extra power consumption with regard to fan noise.

That's just silly. SPCR class has to do with how much noise your system makes, not how much heat it can dissipate. You're telling me that if I built a system that was silent using a IGP but couldn't handle a discrete card without adding another fan and becoming slightly less than silent, you wouldn't consider that SPCR class? I guess you'd better give us your blessing on exactly how much heat our systems need to be able to dissipate to make your grade as SPCR class

Now, what I think you are really saying is that 10W just isn't that likely to be more than most of our systems can handle as currently configured and I think you are probably right. But, this is the same forum where people consider replacing a perfectly good HDD because they heard another model consumes 1W less and where people want to go completely passive despite being given multiple examples of multifan systems that are effectively silent. These people are all about potential, and you have to admit that 10W less heat to dissipate is potentially quieter -- especially in some imaginary nearly passive scenario

[smilingcrow]

.. you have to admit that 10W less heat to dissipate is potentially quieter -- especially in some imaginary nearly passive scenario

I know what you mean about wanting to save every last watt but in the context of this thread which is looking at the power draw of the 9600 GT and also in comparison with its competition the HD 3870 etc, an extra 10W or so at idle is ‘typically’ an irrelevance.

Maybe I should rename my ‘SPCR Class System’ moniker to a ‘Mainstream SPCR Class’ system. i.e. Passive obsessives and systems in a matchbox powered by a mouse on a wheel can have a separate label; Extreme SPCR Class system.

[Ant6n]

if you have a system run by a mouse on a wheel (pwm200, picopsu), then you still care more about the max wattage - i do.