11–13 of 13 posts
Absolutely crazy bonkers deal. But yeah, idle is a little under 30W which could for sure be better!
I have a 9070xt in my main desktop, which isn't 24/7. I dont see the 40W idle that is reported in the write-up!! I'm forgetting the numbers but I suspect it's significantly less than half that.
Just got a Minisforum 795S7. 16-core AMD laptop processor (7945HX) barebones (needs ram and disk) for a little over $400. Absolutely crazy bonkers deal. But yeah, idle is a little under 30W which could for sure be better! I have a 9070xt in my main desktop, which isn't 24/7. I dont see the 40W idle that is reported in the write-up!! I'm forgetting the numbers but I suspect it's significantly less than half that.
[1] TechPowerUp and ComputerBase have the most thorough collections of power consumption measurements, but compare them to each other and you'll see how much it depends on the test setup.
[2] Nvidia's latest 5000 series cards buck this trend. The 9070 XT's direct competitor, the 5070 Ti, has especially high idle consumption for no clear reason.
Just got a Minisforum 795S7. 16-core AMD laptop processor (7945HX) barebones (needs ram and disk) for a little over $400. Absolutely crazy bonkers deal. But yeah, idle is a little under 30W which could for sure be better! I have a 9070xt in my main desktop, which isn't 24/7. I dont see the 40W idle that is reported in the write-up!! I'm forgetting the numbers but I suspect it's significantly less than half that.
Idle power almost always goes up with higher resolutions and refresh rates [1], and AMD cards typically raise their idle clockspeeds more drastically than Nvidia cards [2] when resolution or refresh rate increases. The OP uses an 8K 60Hz screen so 45W seems reasonable. [1] TechPowerUp and ComputerBase have the most thorough collections of power consumption measurements, but compare them to each other and you'll see h…
* ASUS, builtin-GPU@4K: ≈39W
* ASUS + nVidia GF4070@4K idle: ≈50W
* ASUS + radeon RX9070 (Linux 6.15): ≈80W