EVGA 560 Ti 448 @$220 or Asus 7850 @$250?

[blastingcap]

Whew indeed, like those 7970s... Chug a lug.


I don't pay any bills, but I did check the rates. 100w extra really adds up, assuming I play 2 hours every other day for an entire year the cost difference in my area is a staggering $2.52 a year.

I dunno what anyone makes these days, but back in my day you could buy a farm with that kind of cash.

I figured I'd find out what kind of power we were talking for things like web browsing and youtube/netflix/Hulu Plus videos which I probably spend most of my time doing.

7850 draws 40w during blu-ray playback, while the 470 draws 45w.

I figued in 6 hours a day, everyday, for one year, the cost difference between the 7850 vs the 470 was a staggering $0.72 a year.

I'm just glad I don't pay any bills, the same site I got my info from shows some pretty power hungry appliences which makes my entire setup look trivial.

1. He was talking about gtx 480 not gtx 470.

2. Power costs differ wildly depending on how many hours a day the PC is operational and whether it's idling or gaming. For those that leave their PC's idling for most of the day, surf the web/watch a youtube video/etc. for an hour, and game for 2 hours, that's 21 hours of idling, 1 hour of 2D speeds, and 2 hours of 3D speeds. That's hugely weighted towards idle and 2D speeds. The 7850 has excellent idle wattage of 10W, whereas the GTX 480 has an idle wattage of 55W: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7850_HD_7870/24.html

3. A weighted average, at a cost of 10 cents per kilowatt-hour (or 0.1 cents per watt), over the course of the year assuming the usage profile in (2) above:

$0.10*365*((21*10+1*26+2*87)/1000) = $14.96/year to operate HD7850

$0.10*365*((21*55+1*127+2*257)/1000) = $65.56/year to operate GTX480

The difference only gets worse the more hours you spend NOT idling. This is assuming no secondary effects like triggering additional a/c costs or kicking you up to the next electric rate tier, and does not account for noisiness, either. Not even going to go into the ballsweat thing you guys were talking about, 'cause that'd be sexist.

4. You bash the 7970 for consuming a lot of power, but even the 7970 doesn't eat power like a GTX480:

The 7970's 12/45/163 watts for idle, multi-monitor and movies/youtube, and gaming loads, is a lot lower than the GTX480's 55/127/257 watts.

5. Not idling your computer takes care of a lot of the power costs, so if you are conscientious about turning off your PC when not using it, it's not as expensive to use a power hog like a GTX480.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I wasn't talking to Don, but perhaps you should turn your PC off when you're not using it?

You can buy a decent SSD for $60 these days with an eight second or less boot time, there is really no logical reason to leave your PC on 24/7 with 21 hours of idle and 3 hours of actual use. All the while trying to act as if power consumption matters in a scenario where you failed to use power properly in the first place.

 

[blastingcap]

I wasn't talking to Don, but perhaps you should turn your PC off when you're not using it?

You can buy a decent SSD for $60 these days with an eight second or less boot time, there is really no logical reason to leave your PC on 24/7 with 21 hours of idle and 3 hours of actual use. All the while trying to act as if power consumption matters in a scenario where you failed to use power properly in the first place.

See point no. 5 in my post above. (Which I had to edit due to a simple math error, but the numbers are right now. The 2 hours is still debatable as whether that should count as idling in 2D or multi-monitor and youtube, but it wouldn't change things by more than $0.73 for the 7850 and $5.26 for the GTX480. I'm going by http://www.anandtech.com/show/5625/...-7850-review-rounding-out-southern-islands/17 which implies that the difference between zerocore and nonzerocore 7850 is about 12 watts, but it's more like 10 watts accounting for PSU inefficiencies.)

You proposed an average daily load of something like 6 hours of 2D time (surfing the web, watching youtube, etc.), which I will break down as 4 hours at nonzerocore idle and 2 hours of watching a Blu-Ray movie. Then add an hour of gaming each day like you proposed.

$0.10*365*(4*20+2*40+87)/1000 = $9.02/year for HD7850
$0.10*365*(4*55+2*76+257)/1000 = $22.96/year for GTX480

Once again this doesn't take into account secondary effects like driving more a/c or anything.

The power/heat/noise issue is part of why people gladly left behind the 4xx series in favor of the 5xx series such as the GTX560 Ti.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Honestly a difference of $10-20 a year due to electricity is irrelevant. I wouldn't even consider that a point worth a mention. Most of us use it for 1-3 years at most and $50 in 3 years is probably less than what you spend on shaving cream which too is irrelevant

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I was simply going off my typical usage seniario, my web browser uses the GPU so it's not typically in low power states or "idle".

100w came from 470, not 480, and TPU seems to have changed their power numbers at least once.

Even with the higher power numbers, you're looking at two years to make up the inital cost difference (480 vs 7850). While at the consumption numbers stated the 480 is faster.

The realitiy of the situation is that for most of us, and even those who actually pay the bills in most areas (at least in the US) PC power consumtion is probably the least concerning item in your house.

 

[blastingcap]

Honestly a difference of $10-20 a year due to electricity is irrelevant. I wouldn't even consider that a point worth a mention. Most of us use it for 1-3 years at most and $50 in 3 years is probably less than what you spend on shaving cream which too is irrelevant

I like to be accurate. Also note that $20 is about 9% of the cost of the GTX560Ti448. People obsess over 9% performance differences between cards (witness the GTX680 vs 7970 thing), so why not 9% difference in price? The percentage is even bigger if you are planning to buy-and-hold for 3 years; $50 is significant even for a $220 card. It's like comparing a $270 GTX560Ti448 vs. a $280 HD7850. The 7850 is cooler and quieter with greater overclockability and more VRAM (and also signs of falling in price).

Food for thought.

Going back to the original point of this thread: an issue that is gaining more attention is that the 7850 has 2GB of VRAM, which is up to 1GB VRAM more than other cards that it is getting compared to. While I personally believe that you don't *really* need more than 1GB VRAM at 1080p and reasonable AA settings, many people disagree. There is a significant gap between the GTX560Ti448's 1280MB VRAM and the 7850's 2GB VRAM.

Of course all bets are off if you need CUDA, PHYSX, or any other NVIDIA-specific technology. Also SLI > CF if that is a consideration.

I was simply going off my typical usage seniario, my web browser uses the GPU so it's not typically in low power states or "idle".

That's fine, I just wanted to set the record straight about the GTX480 which is a pig. The GTX470 isn't as bad. And I don't know what else to call it other than idle if it's not playing a Flash video or Blu-Ray. (The TPU charts are testing long idle, so desktop idle wattage for the 7850 is more like 20 watts, not 10 watts, per the Anandtech review link I posted earlier in this thread and accounting for PSU inefficiencies.) You are using an outdated TPU chart by the way; they started using Crysis 2 as their game for power numbers.

Due to power/noise/heat and VRAM I don't know if I'd pick the GTX480 over the 7850 unless the price difference got pretty big. But all bets are off if you need CUDA/PhysX as there is only one company that can deliver that. Also I wouldn't go multi-GPU if at all possible, but if I had to, I would avoid CF like the plague and go SLI instead.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

7850 oc > 480/570 oc

 

[ocre]

idk, At 200$ the 480,570,560ti 448 are very good deals.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

idk, At 200$ the 480,570,560ti 448 are very good deals.

True. But they are > $200 and if you can get a 7850 for $230-240 then that makes more sense due to power noise temps VRAM etc

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Honestly a difference of $10-20 a year due to electricity is irrelevant. I wouldn't even consider that a point worth a mention. Most of us use it for 1-3 years at most and $50 in 3 years is probably less than what you spend on shaving cream which too is irrelevant

It's much more than what you're saying...

 

[aaksheytalwar]

The other guy just proved this to be true.

 

[blastingcap]

The other guy just proved this to be true.

I have a name you know.

And the numbers were based off assumptions that may not hold true. Obviously usage patterns will impact cost a lot.

And people living in high-cost-of-power countries will pay a higher difference, but people with free electricity simply won't care unless the heat/noise aspect of it hurts them enough.

 

[3DVagabond]

If anyone doesn't see the value of more efficient appliances, well then, what can you say? They are either really ignorant or lead a really sheltered existence. That is the type of life knowledge it was our parent's responsibility to have taught us. It's all about people feeling entitled to have anything they want. Anyway, you can't convince many of them. I just shake my head and ignore it, mostly. I sure don't try to get into a debate with someone who, basically, doesn't care.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Yeah we should start stoning people who overclock too. Those people are the worst.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Yeah we should start stoning people who overclock too. Those people are the worst.

Overclocking can raise power efficiency, so that's probably not a very good argument. I have higher performance/watt than stock with both my CPU and GPU.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

4.2GHz doesn't really count as overclocking.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

4.2GHz doesn't really count as overclocking.

It still applies as long as I run anywhere from 3.6GHz-4.6GHz.

Also, nice job with the stupid insults. I ran at 4.2GHz because folding@home is much more stressful than other MT programs when it comes to detecting system instability, and I needed 1.3V--a jump of 0.05V--just to go 100MHz higher. I decided it wasn't worth it. Electricity here is too expensive, though, so I'm not folding for now. I can run IBT stable at 4.4GHz/1.28V.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

It's not a stupid insult, it's a point of fact. Clearly I wasn't addressing someone with a 400MHz OC which could be undervolted. I was addressing those who ran their processors at close to 5GHz, or those who buy a 7850 and run them at 1300MHz, others who bought BD and overclocked that.

Also unless you're using your PC to figure out more efficient means of creating and using power or solving the issues preventing world peace you're already using too much power.

You're wasting power posting on this forum, are you not? Nothing important ever came of posting at Anandtech, it's a waste of power. Who wastes slightly more or less really is a petty talking point when in the end it's all wasteful.

The discussion was over if spending $25 extra a year made up the $50 initial cost difference.

If you want to save the world, you should start be not posting on Anandtech.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

It's not a stupid insult, it's a point of fact. Clearly I wasn't addressing someone with a 400MHz OC which could be undervolted. I was addressing those who ran their processors at close to 5GHz, or those who buy a 7850 and run them at 1300MHz, others who bought BD and overclocked that.

Also unless you're using your PC to figure out more efficient means of creating and using power or solving the issues preventing world peace you're already using too much power.

You're wasting power posting on this forum, are you not? Nothing important ever came of posting at Anandtech, it's a waste of power. Who wastes slightly more or less really is a petty talking point when in the end it's all wasteful.

The discussion was over if spending $25 extra a year made up the $50 initial cost difference.

If you want to save the world, you should start be not posting on Anandtech.

I don't care who you addressed. You're no one here to be insulting members over nothing.

Also ignorant that you'd call someone only running Sandy Bridge at 5GHz to "have an overclock". That, and you insult people even though you can't even do math correctly. 3400-4200MHz is 800MHz, not 400.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Bulldozer will have higher IPC, 3400 is the base clock, and trubo is a overclock right? I guess since max turbo is 3800 on the i7 then you really are only overclocking 400MHz. An "overclock" you can get by pressing a button on most boards.

I never insulted anyone, I only addressed the person who felt the need to insinuate that improper upbringing was to blame for them not having a concern over a few kWh a year while all of it is wasted to play video games.. What kind of logic is that?

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Bulldozer will have higher IPC, 3400 is the base clock, and trubo is a overclock right? I guess since max turbo is 3800 on the i7 then you really are only overclocking 400MHz. An "overclock" you can get by pressing a button on most boards.

I never insulted anyone, I only addressed the person who felt the need to insinuate that improper upbringing was to blame for them not having a concern over a few kWh a year while all of it is wasted to play video games.. What kind of logic is that?

Except 3.8GHz is for a single core, so you don't even have your facts right. And yes, a 700MHz overclock.

And overclocking even to 4.2GHz on a motherboard automatically means it'll apply much more voltage than necessary. But hey, who cares, right?

Keep insulting members, you're doing a great job at it. :thumbsup:

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Except 3.8GHz is for a single core, so you don't even have your facts right. And yes, a 700MHz overclock.

And overclocking even to 4.2GHz on a motherboard automatically means it'll apply much more voltage than necessary. But hey, who cares, right?

Keep insulting members, you're doing a great job at it. :thumbsup:

Oh you never stated that, how was I ever to know that you meant all four cores gee golly. Maybe you should spell things out in clear detail leaving no wiggle wrong at all next time, someone might assume you meant something you didn't then jump all over you about it. Is it 800, or is it 700?

Not going to matter much in reality.

Saying you have a low overclock is insulting! :thumbsup:

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

4.2GHz doesn't really count as overclocking.

It's not a stupid insult, it's a point of fact. Clearly I wasn't addressing someone with a 400MHz OC which could be undervolted. I was addressing those who ran their processors at close to 5GHz, or those who buy a 7850 and run them at 1300MHz, others who bought BD and overclocked that.

Also unless you're using your PC to figure out more efficient means of creating and using power or solving the issues preventing world peace you're already using too much power.

You're wasting power posting on this forum, are you not? Nothing important ever came of posting at Anandtech, it's a waste of power. Who wastes slightly more or less really is a petty talking point when in the end it's all wasteful.

The discussion was over if spending $25 extra a year made up the $50 initial cost difference.

If you want to save the world, you should start be not posting on Anandtech.

Bulldozer will have higher IPC, 3400 is the base clock, and trubo is a overclock right? I guess since max turbo is 3800 on the i7 then you really are only overclocking 400MHz. An "overclock" you can get by pressing a button on most boards.

I never insulted anyone, I only addressed the person who felt the need to insinuate that improper upbringing was to blame for them not having a concern over a few kWh a year while all of it is wasted to play video games.. What kind of logic is that?

From the person who just made this comment today:

T6500 Laptop, stock vs OC without cooling assistance

Yeah I overclocked it, take that SB laptops!

Here you are boasting about a 350MHz overclock on a 5-year-old CPU.

Nice try at insulting members who don't overclock to the point where it heavily degrades their hardware.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

:thumbsup:

Are you done yet? I can't bare the stress of your constant insults.

You never addressed the twisting where you state 4.2GHz but never on all four cores, and actually still haven't. A i7-2600k will turbo to 3.8GHz, your overclock is of 400Mhz unless you want to clarify.

Let's compare my laptop c2d overclock against your desktop unlocked processor overclock, it makes sense.

Btw the cheaper i7-2600 (non k) will overclock to 4.2GHz without a baseclock adjustment, higher with it. While you were busy saving the world from minor wattage differences you overpaid for your processor. :thumbsup:

How much power have you wasted now on this conversation? You should probably power down and go hand turn a windmill for a few hours as pennence.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

You guys are dissing over a few bucks difference...

When one OC card uses 200W more. Do you not pay bills, ever?

Yes I pay bills and have paid many of them being a 31 year old man that's been living on his own for over 11 years now.