Sapphire Nitro Fury Undervolt/Underclock

[b-mac]

I know tomshardware did some tests to show that the Fury could undervolt pretty well while maintaining it performance and I was curious to try this myself. I used a P3 International Kill a Watt to measure power consumption at the wall. I did this using 3DMark Firestrike and Furmark GPU stress (1080, no MSAA).

i7-6700k @ 4.6
16GB DDR4 3000
MSI Z170A SLI
250 GB Intel SSD
250 GB Crucual SSD
1TB WD Blue
DVD Drive
4 Case Fans
EVGA 550 GS
Sapphire Fury Nitro (Custom fancurve, 30% at 60C)

Firestrike / Furmark GPU Stress

1050/500 No Undervolt
Temp ~ 78C

Total Score: 13629
Graphics Score: 15793
Firestrike Wattage: 370W
Furmark Wattage: 440W

(Core could only maintain around 1000mhz)

1050/500 -72mV
Temp ~ 76C

Total Score: 13611
Graphics Score: 15876
Firestrike Wattage: 330W
Furmark Wattage: 390W

(full 1050 mhz acheived)

900/500 No Undervolt
Temp ~ 68C

Total Score: 11952
Graphics: 13773
Firestrike Wattage: 240W
Furmark Wattage: 330W

900/500 -72mV
Temp ~ 65C

Total score: 11958
Graphics score: 13782
Firestrike Wattage:200W
Furmark Wattage: 290W

750/500 No Undervolt
Temp ~ 63C

Total Score: 10226
Graphics Score: 11532
Firestrike Wattage: 210W
Furmark Wattage: 260W

750/500 -72 mV
Temp ~ 62C

Total Score:10251
Graphics Score: 11571
Firestrike Wattage: 190W
Furmark Wattage:230W

Looking at firestrike scores online the 900/500 gets roughly 390X performance and the 750/500 gets around non overclocked 970 performance. While this isn't apples to apples with games it was interesting to see how well the performance scaled with power usage.

 

[Bigbadwu]

Thanks for this. Just picked one up for 249 at jet. Anyone know what settings to use for best eth hashrate and power efficiency? Thanks!

 

[IllogicalGlory]

Those undervolt results are pretty spectacular, 40W less power usage and the same performance. We also see this with the RX 480. Why doesn't AMD do a bit more tuning of their default voltages so that we could see these results out of the box? Can similar results be achieved on NV cards?

 

[b-mac]

Those undervolt results are pretty spectacular, 40W less power usage and the same performance. We also see this with the RX 480. Why doesn't AMD do a bit more tuning of their default voltages so that we could see these results out of the box? Can similar results be achieved on NV cards?

Not sure about the nVidia cards. I was using the sapphire trixx software and couldn't go below -72 mV. I know toms had it at -96 mV for even more savings.

 

[ctk1981]

Just picked up one of these as well. Going to test mine when I get home and see if its stable with a similar undervolt.

 

[IEC]

This was also the case with the 290 series of cards. I am running one of my 290s at -81mV versus stock settings with a slight OC.

My Fury can also go down to -90mV @ 1000/500.

nVidia cards don't have as much room for improvement because they don't suck as bad as AMD at setting appropriate voltages in the first place.

 

[JustMe21]

I did undervolting/underclocking on my RX 470 and indicated steps that I took in analyzing the performance.

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/optimizing-radeon-performance-with-wattman.2482895/

 

[b-mac]

This was also the case with the 290 series of cards. I am running one of my 290s at -81mV versus stock settings with a slight OC.

My Fury can also go down to -90mV @ 1000/500.

nVidia cards don't have as much room for improvement because they don't suck as bad as AMD at setting appropriate voltages in the first place.

Yea I'm sure AMD cranks for the voltages so they can get as many cards to hit the performance mark so they can sell them at that level. I have heard the same thing for the 290/390s but wanted to waste some time on a Sunday afternoon. The impressive part to me is how low the wattage drops when underclocked but performance stays pretty decent. 200ish W for 390x performance is neat.

 

[Accord99]

AMD also had that issue with the Tahitis, using1.175v for 925 MHz 7970s and 1.093v for 800 MHz 7950s. Using a more reasonable -100 mV would have given a much better impression in performance/watt in the initial GTX 680 reviews and made the lousy blowers less lousy.

 

[Shmee]

Nice results! Also, $249 sounds like a great deal for this card, less than I paid for my used 290s.

 

[greatnoob]

AMD shooting themselves in the foot. Had these cards been properly tuned in the factory, most of them would have looked very good in the perf/watt graphs on review sites.

 

[crisium]

AMD shooting themselves in the foot. Had these cards been properly tuned in the factory, most of them would have looked very good in the perf/watt graphs on review sites.

That's why the Fury (air) on TPU looks so good (nearly as much PPW as RX 480) - it's the factory undervolted ASUS Fury Strix.

Though it is odd how people can be disappointed when one cannot OC much on stock volts. That should be a good thing (so long as reasonable OCing with overvolting is still possible). Too much OC on stock volts often means they could have undervolted it a bit.