ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II - Watercooling EK FC-R9-280X vs. Aircooling

Published by Hiwa Pouri on 14.03.14
Page:
« 1 ... 10 11 12 (13) 14 15 16 »

Power Consumption

Stock Clocks - Idle Watt Index
Aircooling ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II (GPU 1070 / Mem 1600 MHz) 48 100.00 %
Watercooling ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II (GPU 1070 / Mem 1600 MHz) 49 102.08 %
  More is better


Overclocking - Idle Watt Index
Aircooling ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II (GPU 1150 / Mem 1700 MHz) 72 150.00 %
Watercooling ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II (GPU 1200 / Mem 1700 MHz) 76 158.33 %
  More is better


Stock Clocks - Load Watt Index
Aircooling ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II (GPU 1070 / Mem 1600 MHz) 331 100.00 %
Watercooling ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II (GPU 1070 / Mem 1600 MHz) 334 100.91 %
  More is better


Overclocking - Load Watt Index
Aircooling ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II (GPU 1150 / Mem 1700 MHz) 372 112.39 %
Watercooling ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II (GPU 1200 / Mem 1700 MHz) 375 113.29 %
  More is better



Page 1 - Introduction Page 9 - Call of Duty Black Ops 2
Page 2 - Test Setup Page 10 - Sleeping Dogs
Page 3 - 3DMark Fire Strike Page 11 - The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Page 4 - Unigine Heaven 4.0 Page 12 - Metro: Last Light
Page 5 - BattleField 4 Page 13 - Power Consumption
Page 6 - BattleField 3 Page 14 - Temperatures
Page 7 - Bioshock Infinite Page 15 - Index
Page 8 - Crysis 3 Page 16 - Conclusion



  Items by the same author View this article in PDF format Print article

Navigate through the articles
Previous article ASUS R9 290X DirectCU II - Watercooling EK FC-R9-290X vs. Aircooling ASUS GeForce GTX 780 Ti DirectCU II OC - Watercooling EK-FC GTX780 DCII vs. Aircooling Next article
comments powered by Disqus

ASUS R9 280X DirectCU II - Watercooling EK FC-R9-280X vs. Aircooling - Graphics cards > Aircooling vs. Watercooling - Reviews - ocaholic