How to: Firmware Update the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT
MSI Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming Z review
Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 5600 XT OC review
ASUS STRIX Radeon RX 5600 XT TOP review
Gigabyte Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming OC review
Arctic Liquid Freezer II 280 liquid cooler review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro licenses for under 10 USD
Team Group MP33 NVMe 512 GB SSD Review
ADATA SE800 1TB Portable SSD review
Promo: Microsoft Office 2016 for $29.82
ASRock Radeon RX 5700 XT Taichi OC+ review
Posted by: on: 10/01/2019 09:13 AM [
16 comment(s) ]
ASRock is going a bit more premium with their all-new Radeon RX 5700 XT Taichi, in specific we test the OC+ edition. It has the best clocks, new looks, and silent acoustic levels. Fabricated at a 7nm node and capable of battling with NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 2060 and 2070 we'll check out how well it holds against the reference card as well.
Read article
Advertisement
The_Amazing_X
Senior Member
Posts: 385
Senior Member
Posts: 385
Posted on: 10/01/2019 10:25 AM
Its a very nice design, good work Hillbert. Do you think you can add the game The Surge 2 and No man Sky, they are Vulkan, justo to add dx12 dx11 and also Vulkan to your testing.
Its a very nice design, good work Hillbert. Do you think you can add the game The Surge 2 and No man Sky, they are Vulkan, justo to add dx12 dx11 and also Vulkan to your testing.
Andy Watson
Senior Member
Posts: 127
Senior Member
Posts: 127
Posted on: 10/01/2019 11:18 AM
Are the temperatures under load the wrong way around for silent and performance in the chart?
Are the temperatures under load the wrong way around for silent and performance in the chart?
insp1re2600
Senior Member
Posts: 1070
Senior Member
Posts: 1070
Posted on: 10/01/2019 11:42 AM
Looks great, but the central fan & RGB makes it a little tacky.
Looks great, but the central fan & RGB makes it a little tacky.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36824
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36824
Posted on: 10/01/2019 11:52 AM
No
Are the temperatures under load the wrong way around for silent and performance in the chart?
No
NCC1701D
Senior Member
Posts: 131
Senior Member
Posts: 131
Posted on: 10/01/2019 04:14 PM
Would have been cool if they had RGB gears on the back plate. They could have programmed an RGB sequence that would make them look like they were moving and working together.
Would have been cool if they had RGB gears on the back plate. They could have programmed an RGB sequence that would make them look like they were moving and working together.
FrostNixon
Senior Member
Posts: 199
Senior Member
Posts: 199
Posted on: 10/02/2019 04:47 PM
Truly performs better than my Asrock Challenger, which doesn't even spin fans and shutsdown randomly...
Truly performs better than my Asrock Challenger, which doesn't even spin fans and shutsdown randomly...
Reddoguk
Senior Member
Posts: 1790
Senior Member
Posts: 1790
Posted on: 10/02/2019 06:08 PM
My next GFX card will have to be a low power unit because my electric bills are getting higher and higher.
This card is not for me. 225w, my gtx 980 G1 from like 6 years ago now doesn't even use that much power.
I thought 7nm gpus would be low 1xx wattage but 225w is too high.
My next GFX card will have to be a low power unit because my electric bills are getting higher and higher.
This card is not for me. 225w, my gtx 980 G1 from like 6 years ago now doesn't even use that much power.
I thought 7nm gpus would be low 1xx wattage but 225w is too high.
HybOj
Member
Posts: 84
Member
Posts: 84
Posted on: 10/02/2019 08:00 PM
Reddoguk - that is understandable, but this has Id say 2x the performance of your 980... I think this is more like 1080ti perf?
I wonder how this compares in a real world scenarios in terms of power draw...
Reddoguk - that is understandable, but this has Id say 2x the performance of your 980... I think this is more like 1080ti perf?
I wonder how this compares in a real world scenarios in terms of power draw...
Reddoguk
Senior Member
Posts: 1790
Senior Member
Posts: 1790
Posted on: 10/03/2019 06:42 PM
HH said it used 265w while gaming. So with a small OC this card would reach 300w.
Yea it's 2070 super level performance but that 250+ watts is crazy.
My mate is gonna sell me his EVGA 1070 FTW Gaming ACX 3.0 which only uses about 150w, i just have to wait til he gets his 2080 super.
HH said it used 265w while gaming. So with a small OC this card would reach 300w.
Yea it's 2070 super level performance but that 250+ watts is crazy.
My mate is gonna sell me his
RooiKreef
Senior Member
Posts: 387
Senior Member
Posts: 387
Posted on: 10/04/2019 05:59 AM
I love the outrageous look of their gpus. It's something different from the rest.
I love the outrageous look of their gpus. It's something different from the rest.
GlennB
Senior Member
Posts: 216
Senior Member
Posts: 216
Posted on: 10/04/2019 04:57 PM
My next GFX card will have to be a low power unit because my electric bills are getting higher and higher.
This card is not for me. 225w, my gtx 980 G1 from like 6 years ago now doesn't even use that much power.
I thought 7nm gpus would be low 1xx wattage but 225w is too high.
At the same frequencies the 7nm will be a lot more efficient. Don't forget all the newer cards have really high clocks speeds. Once you lock both cards at your monitors refreshrate you have better minimums while still maintaining efficiency.
My next GFX card will have to be a low power unit because my electric bills are getting higher and higher.
This card is not for me. 225w, my gtx 980 G1 from like 6 years ago now doesn't even use that much power.
I thought 7nm gpus would be low 1xx wattage but 225w is too high.
At the same frequencies the 7nm will be a lot more efficient. Don't forget all the newer cards have really high clocks speeds. Once you lock both cards at your monitors refreshrate you have better minimums while still maintaining efficiency.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 1043
Senior Member
Posts: 1043
Posted on: 10/04/2019 08:11 PM
HH said it used 265w while gaming. So with a small OC this card would reach 300w.
Yea it's 2070 super level performance but that 250+ watts is crazy.
My mate is gonna sell me his EVGA 1070 FTW Gaming ACX 3.0 which only uses about 150w, i just have to wait til he gets his 2080 super.
Your electric bill does not rise up from your computer not as muchsay you have 150 watt card now and this one will slurp 250 so 100 watts lets say you game and have the card maxed out to 250 watts (does not work like that but for the shake of simplicity) for average 3 hours per day, that would be 3 watthours per 10 days 9 per month the whatt hour depends where you live costs from 11 to 20 cents so 1.8 euros or usd or 99 cent annually from 11.95 to 21.6 this is assuming you run the card 3 hours maxed out every day no game menus no vsynch nothing of that short just full on action for every single fps you can get
HH said it used 265w while gaming. So with a small OC this card would reach 300w.
Yea it's 2070 super level performance but that 250+ watts is crazy.
My mate is gonna sell me his EVGA 1070 FTW Gaming ACX 3.0 which only uses about 150w, i just have to wait til he gets his 2080 super.
Your electric bill does not rise up from your computer not as muchsay you have 150 watt card now and this one will slurp 250 so 100 watts lets say you game and have the card maxed out to 250 watts (does not work like that but for the shake of simplicity) for average 3 hours per day, that would be 3 watthours per 10 days 9 per month the whatt hour depends where you live costs from 11 to 20 cents so 1.8 euros or usd or 99 cent annually from 11.95 to 21.6 this is assuming you run the card 3 hours maxed out every day no game menus no vsynch nothing of that short just full on action for every single fps you can get
GamerNerves
Senior Member
Posts: 126
Senior Member
Posts: 126
Posted on: 10/06/2019 02:32 AM
It is true that the difference on the eletric bill will be lesser than people calculate due to GPU not being maxed out nearly all the time when you use your computer - some game more than others though. Still, when considering buying many of these Navi cards, we need to think if the risen power consumption is justifiable or is the product just plain badly designed? The comparison between RTX 2070 Super and RX 5700 XT is pointless though, since that kind of difference is negligible even in the long run; your power bill will be much the same.
In any case, buying the product that consumes less power is wise if we consider the fact gaming GPUs are wide spread products that many people will use. If the masses buy the more consuming option, then energy is potentially wasted. The decision between GTX 1060 and RX 580 was easy for this part, the difference was just too great, which you could immediately notice through fan noise and heat too. The goal should be to make less and less consuming products what the consumers certainly want, which is why I don't bode RX 5800- and 5900-series to sell well, since Navi doesn't scale that well beyond RX 5700 XT level of performance, although added compute units and such design differences will alleviate the problem slightly.
Your electric bill does not rise up from your computer not as muchsay you have 150 watt card now and this one will slurp 250 so 100 watts lets say you game and have the card maxed out to 250 watts (does not work like that but for the shake of simplicity) for average 3 hours per day, that would be 3 watthours per 10 days 9 per month the whatt hour depends where you live costs from 11 to 20 cents so 1.8 euros or usd or 99 cent annually from 11.95 to 21.6 this is assuming you run the card 3 hours maxed out every day no game menus no vsynch nothing of that short just full on action for every single fps you can get
It is true that the difference on the eletric bill will be lesser than people calculate due to GPU not being maxed out nearly all the time when you use your computer - some game more than others though. Still, when considering buying many of these Navi cards, we need to think if the risen power consumption is justifiable or is the product just plain badly designed? The comparison between RTX 2070 Super and RX 5700 XT is pointless though, since that kind of difference is negligible even in the long run; your power bill will be much the same.
In any case, buying the product that consumes less power is wise if we consider the fact gaming GPUs are wide spread products that many people will use. If the masses buy the more consuming option, then energy is potentially wasted. The decision between GTX 1060 and RX 580 was easy for this part, the difference was just too great, which you could immediately notice through fan noise and heat too. The goal should be to make less and less consuming products what the consumers certainly want, which is why I don't bode RX 5800- and 5900-series to sell well, since Navi doesn't scale that well beyond RX 5700 XT level of performance, although added compute units and such design differences will alleviate the problem slightly.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 1043
Senior Member
Posts: 1043
Posted on: 10/06/2019 02:18 PM
@GamerNerves when you buy general electric devices that also applies i am pretty sure there are enough people around that would complaint about the consumption of a video card and still sport at least one traditional lamp 100 watt one instead of led lamps there 1 light bulb is the difference! People that have a washer machine with A- energy rating instead of A++ etc etc, my point is people way overblow their impact on the electrical bill and my second point was that if indeed his electrical bill keeps going up indeed then something else causing it and not the computer.
And yeah consumption indeed is a valid criteria when you choose the right card for your needs/budget. If they are about the same price and about the same perfomance then yeah picking the more efficient one is the logical ibvious choise , if say the card a consumes 30%more power and is 15% faster than the card b , my self i would always choose the card a, if both cards are equal but the card a consumes 30% more while costs 20 % less than the card b i will still go with the card a.
@GamerNerves when you buy general electric devices that also applies i am pretty sure there are enough people around that would complaint about the consumption of a video card and still sport at least one traditional lamp 100 watt one instead of led lamps there 1 light bulb is the difference! People that have a washer machine with A- energy rating instead of A++ etc etc, my point is people way overblow their impact on the electrical bill and my second point was that if indeed his electrical bill keeps going up indeed then something else causing it and not the computer.
And yeah consumption indeed is a valid criteria when you choose the right card for your needs/budget. If they are about the same price and about the same perfomance then yeah picking the more efficient one is the logical ibvious choise , if say the card a consumes 30%more power and is 15% faster than the card b , my self i would always choose the card a, if both cards are equal but the card a consumes 30% more while costs 20 % less than the card b i will still go with the card a.
Reddoguk
Senior Member
Posts: 1790
Senior Member
Posts: 1790
Posted on: 10/14/2019 06:02 PM
I played Batman Arkham Knight last night for a few hours and left GPU-Z running.
My 980G1 boosts to 1400mhz and has a high Asic score of nearly 80%. The power usage is reported @ 130W - 150W but mostly around 138W which is no where near the 225W the card receives.
So i think i use about 250W total while gaming which is fine really. Would i be happy if it was 350W probably not.
I played Batman Arkham Knight last night for a few hours and left GPU-Z running.
My 980G1 boosts to 1400mhz and has a high Asic score of nearly 80%. The power usage is reported @ 130W - 150W but mostly around 138W which is no where near the 225W the card receives.
So i think i use about 250W total while gaming which is fine really. Would i be happy if it was 350W probably not.
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 12282
Come on guys if you count out the dx11 games card is the the same performance as 2070S.
Interesting design though, reminds me of gears inside the watch.