power usage through the roof when overclocking gtx470

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
I just wanted to play around a bit and see what overclocks I could get so I used the MSI afterburner program. the safe maximum core voltage on stock bios gtx470 is 1087 so I went for that and oced to 775/1550 and left memory at stock clock for time being. within 10 seconds of furmark I hit 100 C so I stopped the test. I then took the fan off auto and forced it on 100% and started furmark again. power usage was nearly 500 watts according to my ups. that is almost 150 watts more power usage than the already power hungry stock gtx470. for some perspective my same system with a gtx260 with a 20% oc only hit 245 watts during furmark. :eek:

I am not trying to paint an accurate picture of power usage here but was just simply amazed that overclocking with a little more voltage could increase consumption by that much. I cant even imagine the power usage of an overclocked gtx480 sli setup.

btw the card seems to do 719/1438 no problem on stock voltage. memory seems to crap out at just over 3600 though.
 
Last edited:

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
480
126
I just wanted to play around a bit and see what overclocks I could get so I used the MSI afterburner program. the safe maximum core voltage on stock bios gtx470 is 1087 so I went for that and oced to 775/1550 and left memory at stock clock for time being. within 10 seconds of furmark I hit 100 C so I stopped the test. I then took the fan off auto and forced it on 100% and started furmark again. power usage was nearly 500 watts according to my ups. that is almost 150 watts more power usage than the already power hungry stock gtx470. for some perspective my same system with a gtx260 with a 20% oc only hit 245 watts during furmark. :eek:

I am not trying to paint an accurate picture of power usage here but was just simply amazed that overclocking with a little more voltage could increase consumption by that much. I cant even imagine the power usage of an overclocked gtx480 sli setup.

btw the card seems to do 719/1438 no problem on stock voltage. memory seems to crap out at just over 3600 though.

So you are saying a overclocked gtx 470 uses over 365 watts in furmark?
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
So you are saying a overclocked gtx 470 uses over 365 watts in furmark?
that was almost an extra 150 watts on top of the full system wattage of 360 on stock gtx470 clocks. so yeah I guess actual card consumption was probably well over 300 watts.

just to be clear my system without any gpu load will pull 178 watts during intel burn test. thats with both cores maxed out and using memory. now during furmark only one cpu core is even getting used. so yeah it would have to be pretty close to 350 watts at the wall for the card when overvolted and overclocked like that. so really if I ran cpu burn test and furmark at the same time I would be pretty close to 550 watts total system usage at the wall.
 
Last edited:

zebrax2

Senior member
Nov 18, 2007
974
66
91
~300w then if you consider your psu having a 80% efficiency. Man those things sure chug down a lot of power
 

faxon

Platinum Member
May 23, 2008
2,109
1
81
Run the OCCT PSU test and see what your power draw is. That's basically furmark + linpack at once lmao
 

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
No, I think it would decrease or be able to undervolt to get the same stable clocks.

That makes sense.

I was also thinking the internal resistance of more mature silicon might decrease making higher stock voltages/higher stock clocks possible.

However, I am sure there must be all kinds of chip architecture laws/rules that make across the board comparisons impossible. (even if both chips are on the same process node)
 

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
12,040
2,254
126
^Yes but I've heard he offsets that...somehow...can't remember how exactly now (carbon credits maybe?? not sure).
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
^Yes but I've heard he offsets that...somehow...can't remember how exactly now (carbon credits maybe?? not sure).

which means that he is too rich and busy not to pollute, so he will pay someone else to not pollute "for him"... of course, this falls flat on its head because you are presuming that if you weren't paying the other person to "not pollute" they would pollute that amount...

Plus, all those carbon credit companies are a scam... and they don't actually pay anyone to not pollute, they just take your money, and make you feel better about polluting.
 

Voo

Golden Member
Feb 27, 2009
1,684
0
76
which means that he is too rich and busy not to pollute, so he will pay someone else to not pollute "for him"... of course, this falls flat on its head because you are presuming that if you weren't paying the other person to "not pollute" they would pollute that amount...
No idea how that stuff works in the US, but over here the concept is vastly different. Actually the money is used for various projects in 3rd world and developement countries (where you can reduce pollution by a good chunk for not much money) or planting trees, etc. Which actually makes sense and works fairly well.
 
Last edited:

Tsavo

Platinum Member
Sep 29, 2009
2,645
37
91
Al Gore's house consumes 15,000 kwh a month... nearly 25x what my house consumes, and 10x what an average american household consumes...

Those figures are nothing compared to the hot air the man generates!
 

GaiaHunter

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2008
3,697
397
126
No idea how that stuff works in the US, but over here the concept is vastly different. Actually the money is used for various projects in 3rd world and developement countries (where you can reduce pollution by a good chunk for not much money) or planting trees, etc. Which actually makes sense and works fairly well.

Hmm hmm.

I bet loads of those African "democracies" use money for that...
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
Hmm hmm.

I bet loads of those African "democracies" use money for that...

ooh, burn! (heh, literally)
Yea... in europe buying carbon credit means that "you are paying to plant trees in africa". That is just hilarious.
 

SHAQ

Senior member
Aug 5, 2002
738
0
76
1.087v is not needed for a modest OC. That extra voltage produces more heat and uses more power than necessary. I use 630 watts with 470 SLI. Real world usage not Furmark. I could hit 800 watts if I force enough voltage through it but why?