ano, je lepsi. protoze hd5800 nemela power management ale thermal management ;)

tak to je snad jasny ze nestacili :D v amd rozhodne nejsou hlupaci. to byl jen takovy jab na no-x ohledne druhe vetve prispevku nize :)

oprava ad 1

primo z toho clanku, ktery jsi zminil:
"In this case the job of the monitor is to continually monitor the VRMs for dangerous conditions. Should the VRMs end up in a critical state, the monitor will immediately throttle back the card by one PowerPlay level. The card will continue operating at this level until the VRMs are back to safe levels, at which point the monitor will allow the card to go back to the requested performance level. In the case of a stressful program, this can continue to go back and forth as the VRMs permit."

nikde se tam nepise o monitoringu proudu. pak je dulezita tahle veta:
"Ultimately AS THIS WAS TEMPERATURE BASED AMD’s cards were allowed to run to the best of their capabilities, so long as they weren’t going to damage themselves."

"Ad profily - kdo tvrdí, že s HD5xxx nelze profily používat?" prave, ze to netvrdi nikdo. ja tedy rozhodne ne. tobe se ale jaksi nelibi, ze je pouziva nvidia, u amd je ale obhajujes. a odpoved na otazku, proc je jedno, ze to bez profilu ochrana nebezi, najdes primo u svych milacku amd primo v tom clanku a odstavci, na ktery jsi me odkazal:

"Why is this? AMD believes that the instruction streams generated by OCCT and FurMark are entirely unrealistic. They try to hit everything at once, and this is something that they don’t believe a game or even a GPGPU application would ever do. For this reason these programs are held in low regard by AMD, and in our discussions with them they referred to them as “power viruses”, a term that’s normally associated with malware. We don’t agree with the terminology, but in our testing we can’t disagree with AMD about the realism of their load – we can’t find anything that generates the same kind of loads as OCCT and FurMark."

takze si to priste sam lip precti, diky. sama amd si nemysli, ze by se takovy load mohl nekdy vyskytnout v realne aplikaci. tak proc by proboha mela mit nvidia profily ochrany na normalni hry? ehm. premyslej

"Konkrétně spotřeba se dostala 50W nad TDP a teprve potom ochrana zareagovala." tohle je ale stejna feature, jako bude u Intel Sandy Bridge, kdy CPU pojede nejakou dobu NAD TDP, protoze je to po nejakou dobu bezpecne. ocividne jsi ten design nepochopil. ja si naopak myslim, ze to je chytre. velky load muze prijit i jen na zlomkovy cas a kdyby throttling reagoval ihned, jak tomu bude u caymana, mohlo by to pusobit neprijemne zaskuby. false detection techhle spiku u hd5800 zase nerika nic tobe, ne? zde je videt to, jaky je rozdil mezi definici TDP nvidia a intelu oproti definici amd

try harder and until next time ..