GPU In terms of power draw/performance/heat, is the 1080 mini really the best way to go?

[SiG]

With the release of the Vega Nano and people having done some testing on it (including the ol' undervolt + power limit increase), it's nice to see it beat the 1080 in certain scenarios. My only concern, however, is the gargantuan power draw and heat dissipation, not to mention if a Corsair SF 600W would be able to handle it. Looking at the PCPartPicker spec, I could definitely see an increase of 35W compared to the regular R9 Nano right off the bat. I've also heard tales of wattage spiking up upon tinkering with undervolting, which is weird. On the upshot, I hear it actually plays cooler than the regular R9 Nano.

Enter the 1080 mini: I've been eyeing the Gigabyte version for sometime now, as I wasn't sure if ZOTAC's model would fit my rig (not with that HDD in the way), and not to mention the power draw seems to only increase by only 5W! It also seems to run considerably cooler from what I've heard, and it helps the price ends up generally the same as the Vega Nano (after rebate).

Here's the kicker: I don't plan on using FreeSync NOR Gsync as my current monitors support neither, but I do plan on having more multiscreen gaming in the long run while not wanting to be worried too much about reaching Ultra settings at 1366x768@60fps (yeah I know). I also already have games patched for and setting profiles for AMD's Crimson Drivers, so a change to Nvidia's graphics drivers would also mean me needing to reinstall my games and install Nvidia specific fixes instead, but I guess that just comes with the territory with any new graphics card.

From the looks of things, a 1080 mini at stock would already boost my performance by leaps and bounds (provided it's not Forza Horizon 4).

 

[Thehack]

With the release of the Vega Nano and people having done some testing on it (including the ol' undervolt + power limit increase), it's nice to see it beat the 1080 in certain scenarios. My only concern, however, is the gargantuan power draw and heat dissipation, not to mention if a Corsair SF 600W would be able to handle it. Looking at the PCPartPicker spec, I could definitely see an increase of 35W compared to the regular R9 Nano right off the bat. I've also heard tales of wattage spiking up upon tinkering with undervolting, which is weird. On the upshot, I hear it actually plays cooler than the regular R9 Nano.

Enter the 1080 mini: I've been eyeing the Gigabyte version for sometime now, as I wasn't sure if ZOTAC's model would fit my rig (not with that HDD in the way), and not to mention the power draw seems to only increase by only 5W! It also seems to run considerably cooler from what I've heard, and it helps the price ends up generally the same as the Vega Nano (after rebate).

Here's the kicker: I don't plan on using FreeSync NOR Gsync as my current monitors support neither, but I do plan on having more multiscreen gaming in the long run while not wanting to be worried too much about reaching Ultra settings at 1366x768@60fps (yeah I know). I also already have games patched for and setting profiles for AMD's Crimson Drivers, so a change to Nvidia's graphics drivers would also mean me needing to reinstall my games and install Nvidia specific fixes instead, but I guess that just comes with the territory with any new graphics card.

From the looks of things, a 1080 mini at stock would already boost my performance by leaps and bounds (provided it's not Forza Horizon 4).

In terms of stock settings, NVidia's GPU are pretty similar in performance/watt. You can see a chart here when compared to a 1080 ti, at 1080P the 1080, 1070, and 1060 are really similar.

In non-stock use, it is always better to run more GPU cores at slower frequency, than run less at high frequency. If you detune a 1080 to 1070 performance, it'll likely be around 10-20% more power efficient.

IMO, unless you have an above 1080/60 monitor, it makes more sense to go for a 1060, or a 470/570 seeing how good the sales are. It'll max most games on your current monitor. 1366x768 requires half the compute power of 1080P

 

[SiG]

In terms of stock settings, NVidia's GPU are pretty similar in performance/watt. You can see a chart here when compared to a 1080 ti, at 1080P the 1080, 1070, and 1060 are really similar.

In non-stock use, it is always better to run more GPU cores at slower frequency, than run less at high frequency. If you detune a 1080 to 1070 performance, it'll likely be around 10-20% more power efficient.

IMO, unless you have an above 1080/60 monitor, it makes more sense to go for a 1060, or a 470/570 seeing how good the sales are. It'll max most games on your current monitor. 1366x768 requires half the compute power of 1080P

The thing is, I already have an AMD R9 Nano, and I see the 1060/570s as a downgrade in terms of performance.

Mind you I intend to run 4098 x 768 in the end (1366x768 x3).

 

[rfarmer]

The 1080 might be your best bet for the 3 monitors. I have run 3 X 1080 in surround with my 1070 and it is really pushing it, to have consistent 60 fps I had to lower settings to medium.

 

[Thehack]

The thing is, I already have an AMD R9 Nano, and I see the 1060/570s as a downgrade in terms of performance.

Mind you I intend to run 4098 x 768 in the end (1366x768 x3).

Realistically you won't notice going to 570 since you're bottle necked by your display at the moment. It'll change when you get your other displays though.

A 1070 already beats the original Nano, and the 1060 performs pretty close.

That said, the 1060 1070 1080 are within 10% of each other for performance/watt. Can't go wrong with any of them. If you have the budget the 1080 seems like a good fit then.

 

[SiG]

Realistically you won't notice going to 570 since you're bottle necked by your display at the moment. It'll change when you get your other displays though.

A 1070 already beats the original Nano, and the 1060 performs pretty close.

That said, the 1060 1070 1080 are within 10% of each other for performance/watt. Can't go wrong with any of them. If you have the budget the 1080 seems like a good fit then.

Thanks. I was debating if I should go for the Vega Nano, but the increased power draw for the increased performance, even at stock speeds, doesn't do it any favors. And I've heard the 1080 mini perform quiet and cool even under full load (at stock, of course).

The thing is, I already have an AMD R9 Nano, and I see the 1060/570s as a downgrade in terms of performance.

Mind you I intend to run 4098 x 768 in the end (1366x768 x3).

When it first came out, I was considering the 1070 mini, but now even the 1080 mini isn't that much more expensive.