Discussion about power usage for this device.
Discussion about power usage for this device.
Stock, this makes sense (I own one too, linked to a 120Hz 4K display). When you go over any frame rate cap, you’ll still manage more than 400W in a device like Furmark, depending on the configuration and your power supply setup. In the Nvidia app or Afterburner, the limit is typically at 100%.
Hi there, thanks for your update. To start, my frame rate limiter isn't turned on except through the Nvidia control panel, where the preferred refresh rate is set to its maximum available value—likely matching Windows' default of 120Hz. Gsync is active and Vsync is disabled in the panel. I usually stick to 120Hz in-game settings to prevent tearing above that threshold. Regarding Afterburner, it isn't installed on my 4090 yet. Since it performs well out of the box and I haven't experienced thermal concerns, I haven't adjusted limits or tweaked curves. I plan to install AB and raise the power limit to see if it makes a difference.
The setup should provide sufficient power with one PCIe cable handling 150W and the slot supporting 75W, theoretically allowing up to 525W. This shouldn’t be an issue. To achieve peak performance during tests, disable features such as vsync, freesync, and gsync which cap frame rates. It’s best to reactivate them for regular use. Your card might operate at full capacity without hitting its maximum power draw because it maintains adequate cooling for higher frequencies at lower power. As temperatures rise, so does power consumption. This is beneficial since your 4090 stays under 300W even at full load. Regarding the Vrel limit in GPU-z, it indicates the card reached its peak frequency with the current voltage setting without exceeding the maximum power limit. WARNING! I highly recommend against attempting this—overclocking and overvolting can damage the hardware. The RX 4090 is already powerful; pushing it beyond limits won’t please anyone. Hope this clears up your concerns.
I turned off G-Sync and configured Furmark 1 to 4k with 8x MSAA, achieving around 60 frames per second. Performance peaks at about 308 watts when running at 50 GPU cores and 60 cores on the hotspot. Notably, lowering the resolution to 1080p boosts FPS to roughly 250 and raises power consumption to around 375 watts.
Are you reaching the highest possible frequency while using 4K Furmark? If yes, consider increasing the max freq in afterburner and restarting to check for any improvement. This should either confirm the frequency issue or show it’s elsewhere—perhaps a different mV adjustment is required if performance stays the same.
I raised the power cap in AB to 133%, but it had no impact. The Furmark max settings kept usage under 67% of TDP, and the card was boosted to 2805 without changing much. I might experiment with pushing it further to check the limits. Everything should be well-cooled with the S360 + S120 + X240 setup, leaving ample room for performance gains.
It seems you're trying to understand what's happening with your setup. The readings you mentioned—peak draw around 380W, core voltage rising at higher speeds, and reduced core usage—could indicate changes in how the system is operating. At lower speeds (975mV), the core was drawing more power, but now it's using less core power while maintaining a similar output. This might be due to efficiency improvements or load adjustments. Keep monitoring and let me know if you need further clarification.
This aligns well with a Vrel perfcap target. I generally prefer avoiding excessive boosts, even automatic ones. Unless you really need a small performance gain, it’s not worth risking long-term durability. My opinion.