World Exclusive Review: 512SP GeForce GTX 480

Power Consumption Test

We used Seasonic PowerAngle to record the power consumption values of graphics cards. Record the maximum value as stand-by power consumption 5 minutes after the PC entered Windows 7 system interface; Load the GPU with FurMark V1.8.2 Multiple-GPU mode, and then record the maximum value as loaded power consumption.

The frequencies of both cards automatically dropped to 51/101/135MHz (Core/Shader/Memory) in stand-by state. The GPU voltage of 480SP GTX 480 decreased to 0.963V, while that of 512SP GTX 480 was 0.962V.

As we had expected, the stand-by power consumption of 512SP GTX 480 was 17W higher.

Under full load the GPU voltage of reference GTX 480 was 1.0V, while 512SP edition was 1.056V. Surprisingly, the full spec’ed GTX 480 sucked 644W power, which was 204W higher than 480SP GTX 480!

The addition of 32 CUDA cores is not supposed to result in such significant improvement of power consumption. Considering the sample we have has yet to be improved and the increase of GPU voltage brought some negative effects, we’re not sure about the power consumption of final product.

Page 1: Introduction
Page 2: GF100 Architecture Analysis
Page 3: 512SP GTX 480 Previewed
Page 4: 512SP GTX 480 Taken Apart
Page 5: Benchmark Platform & Settings
Page 6: Power Consumption Test
Page 7: Temperature Test
Page 8: Overclocking Potential
Page 9: Performance Test
Page 10: Conclusion

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

36 Responses to “World Exclusive Review: 512SP GeForce GTX 480”

  1. taemun Says:

    204W higher? I’d measure that again. With a different power meter.
    (page 6)

  2. LulWut Says:

    WTF! power consumption scales exponentially with each clock past 700!


    They should ban this kind of electronic xD.

  3. ukasz Says:

    Not Expotentially but quadratically.:P
    2^n != n^2

  4. 94C Says:

    the temp makes no sense, it suddenly hits 94 in a perfect line while the fan keeps speeding up?

  5. tifosi Says:


    It makes sense… why? cos the power consumption goes up (as much as 5-6 times, based on this test), and as a result up goes the TDP. However, air cooling, it will only have a diminishing return… like most things in life :P .

  6. Edmárcio Pinheiro dos Santos Says:

    A typo? 644W = 464W = 24W more.

  7. Mike Baldwin Says:

    I thought that governments were trying to outlaw nuclear weapons :-) .Don’t show this review to Greenpeace.They’ll have a fit.

  8. Yolanda Says:

    Simply 512 SP GF100 sample card have very very overvolted GPU, I think not 1.05V as they measured, it’s about 1.2V+.

  9. Marco89 Says:

    5% performance for 50% power consumption – bad deal.

  10. Gun Says:

    <0,05v give more than 200W power consumption?

    i think you must recheck the core voltage

  11. mortur Says:

    644 Watts? This NVIDIA card is a Joke.

    Forget it.

  12. Trae32566 Says:

    Honestly I think it would only be fair to compare the stock clocks to the 480, as you don’t see Anandtech or Toms Hardware underclocking their 480′s when comparing to 470s, still it’s a horrible amount of heat, but at least give it a chance.
    As well, your core voltage must be off, there’s no way for that little amount of voltage, the TDP is gonna go that high.

  13. QinX Says:

    Voltages don’t impact power consumption. It’s more about the Current being used.
    You see this also happen with CPUs.
    Overclocking is achieved by raising the voltage. Only then will the voltage raise the power consumption.

  14. Yolanda Says:

    Power W = (U*U)/R
    U – voltage
    R – resistance.

    So power gains in square from voltage.

  15. ted Says:


    please put it in quad SLI

    486×4+six core= 2500watt psu

  16. atikkur Says:

    so we must be happy with gtx480 480shaders right?
    i think nvidia must recheck their design from the bottom again,, innovations must continue!

  17. Stewox Says:


    NVFAIL :) (

    AMD AND ATI were always better ;; blame false advertising, lying, unclean hands, evil business …. intel got busted against AMD and now with FTC.

  18. Jon Says:

    Lots of bitter people in this thread…

  19. Albert Says:

    GPU-Z reads 801/1601/950MHz

    But the tests reads 701/1401/924MHz

    no wonder…..;-)

  20. Blacksmith Says:

    This is just awful, even at 900/1100 the 480 doesnt reach that power consumption

  21. Overmind Says:

    Test the card with 600MHz clock and you will see that 512 shaders + 600Mhz clock (as it would of been released) has a lower performance (be very little) then the current GTX480 with 700 MHz clock. Given the choices, nV made the less disastrous one.
    At 800+ MHz this becomes a nuclear-reactor-drainer UFO monster.
    To that adding that the whole GF100 is cost-inefficient, nV should better make a fully enabled GF-104 instead (and put that between 5850 and 5870). That one has the chance of actually working at respectable temperatures and power values. Yields are another matter, though.

  22. bomberboysk Says:

    Yo dude, The new card packs 512 CUDA cores, 64 ROPs, 48 texture units, and core/shader/memory clocks of 801/1601/950MHz, compared to the 701/1401/924MHz on the reference model.

    Uh, you got that backwards, 64 texture units and 48 ROPs.

  23. @ QinX Says:

    That is theoretical BS. I have undervolted my CPU’s and GPU’s and the power consumption does lower in reality. I am undervolting my laptop CPU from 1,1V to 1,0V without changing any clocks so the temp and fan rpm’s go down, it also extends my battery life. And overclocking, just test it with different voltages and you’ll see. Saying that voltage has no impact on power consumption is just stupid.

  24. Bruno Says:

    Wait, that has to be an error with the power consumption being that high under load! Might be great for GPU computing but still, that is nuts and sorry, anyone buying these for Folding@Home or for CUDA, gaming, etc, for anything actually, is an idiot.

  25. joe Says:

    WAIT WAIT WAIT a minute…….. why does this GTX480 with a higher volt with the artic cooling fan have the same temps (slightly hotter) than my GTX 480s in SLI? This article does seem a bit BS to me.

  26. joe Says:

    ESPECIALLY seeing as the artic cooling fan for the 5970 drops the temps from 80c to 40c.

  27. MeanBruce Says:

    I am getting all confuselled. Just get an ATI card, until InVid gets there act together again.

  28. joe Says:

    there’s nothing wrong with the Nvidia cards. They are awsome in my opinion and apparently they run quiter than some ATI counter parts (from what I have read). And these coolers will be awsome once released. I find it kinda funny how some people have 1000w – 1200w PSUs and when something goes to make use of that they PANIC!

  29. MeanBruce Says:

    You can go back and forth about voltages and watts and Moops all day long. The real overview here is this healthy competition between Cool N-Vid and ATI has to go back and forth equally, each one bettering the other just enough to take 1st place for a short time and then the other. We all win and tech moves forward. This time N-Vid didn’t rise high enough did not answer the call, did not meet the challenge. Poor yields-low efficiency-high temps. The worst part is instead of us all enjoying the new ATI 6xxx series this November with 32nm tech or even 28nm tech, we are stuck with 40nm. ATI is only going to spend what it has to to stay ahead. If Fermi had been an efficient success we would be enjoying the new die shrink. One side drops the ball and progress lags behind for a year. It’s not Moops, it’s Moors!

  30. Bruno Says:

    We are stuck with 40nm because of the TSMC (and Nvidia’s problems)… Because of that, AMD/ATi is now relying on Global Foundries for the 28nm (because 32nm is planned to be skipped). So you can thank your “worst part” with TSMC, not ATi or anybody else.

  31. MeanBruce Says:

    andy on here says ATI is only releasing the low and mid cards in November and the 6870 and 6850 in January so they can indeed use the 28nm shrink. Can’t believe they would miss Christmas. Anyone have any information? Will make a huge difference in my next card. Dreaming of temps around 26c with the prolimatech mk-13, oh yeah baby!

  32. Lace Wigs Says:

    I guess, it comes down to 76111 simple choice!

  33. Says:

    Good write-up. I absolutely love this website. Stick with it!

  34. Personalised Wristbands post Says:

    I was reading through some of your posts on this site and I believe this website is really instructive! Continue posting .

  35. tech news Says:

    Wow, awesome blog layout! How lengthy have you ever been running a blog for? you made blogging look easy. The overall look of your web site is great, let alone the content material!

  36. Laurie Videtto Says:

    You have noted very interesting details! ps decent web site.

Leave a Reply