General Discussions

[elstaci]

For those interested on the next generation of AMD GPU cards: AMD Radeon RX 6000 Navi 21 XT & Navi 21 XL "Big Navi" GPU Clocks Speeds Reportedly Up To 2.4 & 2.2 G... 

Note the new GPU cards have a very high Wattage ratings which means many Users will probably need to upgrade the PSU in their computers to run the new GPU cards.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

In a series of tweets, veteran tech leaker, Rogame, has uncovered the clock speeds of AMD's Navi 21 "Big Navi" GPUs which go on to power the top of the line Radeon RX 6000 series graphics cards. As per Rog Game, the Navi 21 XT and Navi 21 XL will have clock speeds up to 2.4 GHz which is also something that was reported yesterday.

AMD Radeon RX 6000 Graphics Cards With Navi 21 "Big Navi" GPUs To Feature Up To 2.2-2.4 GHz Clock Speeds

The AMD Navi 21 GPU which is going to be the "Big Navi" chip will have several variants. We know from previous leaks that the Navi 21 SKU lineup includes the Navi 21 XTX, Navi 21 XT, Navi 21 XL & Navi 21 XLE. The graphics card that AMD teased at its Zen 3 announcement was most likely based on the Navi 21 XT die and will be referred to as the Radeon RX 6900 XT. Yesterday, it was reported that the Navi 21 XT GPU will feature insane clocks of 2.4 GHz and a TGP of 255W. Rogame gives us an even better insight on what to expect from Navi 21 SKUs in regards to their clock frequencies.

[Update Navi21]

Navi21 XL
> Base clock 1350MHz to 1400MHz
> Game clock 1800MHz to 1900MHz
> Boost clock 2100MHz (maybe 2200MHz)

Navi21 XT
> Base clock 1450MHz to 1500MHz
> Game clock 2000MHz to 2100MHz
> Boost clock 2200MHz to 2400MHz

1/2 https://t.co/ig6WIJmbgT

— _rogame (@_rogame) October 18, 2020

The leaker reports that both Navi 21 XT and Navi 21 XL "Big Navi" GPUs for Radeon RX 6000 series graphics cards will feature a huge variation between the base and boost clocks. We're looking at up to a +700 MHz difference between the base and boost frequencies. Following are the clock speeds as listed by Rogame:

AMD Radeon RX 6000 Series Navi 21 XT "Big Navi" GPU Clocks (via Rogame)

• Base clock 1450MHz to 1500MHz
• Game clock 2000MHz to 2100MHz
• Boost clock 2200MHz to 2400MHz

AMD Radeon RX 6000 Series Navi 21 XL "Big Navi" GPU Clocks (via Rogame)

• Base clock 1350MHz to 1400MHz
• Game clock 1800MHz to 1900MHz
• Boost clock 2100MHz (maybe 2200MHz)

According to the leaker, the Navi 21 XT/XL GPUs will feature even higher clock speeds in AIB made custom models. The first batch of GPUs will be sold as reference only variants but AMD's partners are definitely cooking their own custom designs that will feature even higher clock speeds.

Similar statements were provided by Videocardz whose sources at AIBs reveal that the Navi 21 XL will have peak clock speeds around 2.2 GHz, similar to what's stated by Rogame. It is likely that the red team will artificially lock the clock speeds but reference samples are said to feature around 2.3 GHz peak clocks with AIB models hitting the 2.4 GHz clocks out of the box.

As per Rogame, the Navi 21 GPU currently has the following SKUs:

• Navi 21 XTX (0x731F:D0)
• Navi 21 XT (0x731F:D1)
• Navi 21 XL (0x731F:D3)
• Navi 21 XLE (0x731F:DF)

The AMD Navi 21 XTX and XLE variants are currently unknown and the former is said to be an AMD exclusive variant. There are rumors that the Navi 21 XTX can feature a higher number of cores than the Navi 21 XT GPU which peaks out at 5120 stream processors or 80 CUs (Compute Units) but that remains to be seen. The XTX variant could be a special binned variant that AMD can market as the highest performing Big Navi Radeon RX 6000 series graphics card. Previously, the highest-end SKUs have received more premium designs such as AIO coolings and we can see a return of that on the XTX variant.

- Max. TGP of Navi 21 XT is 290 W.
- AIB partners are testing different TGP for their cards.
- The ~2.4 GHz was achieved with an AIB partner card. So assume that the card was slightly overclocked.

— Patrick Schur (@patrickschur_) October 18, 2020

Patrick Schur has also reported that while the 255W TGP is mostly close to the reference spec, the max TGP is suggested around 290W. AIB models will feature different TGP's based on their cooling and board designs. Patrick also reaffirms that the 2.4 GHz Game clock was achieved by an AIB card so it could've been slightly overclocked outside its factory overclocked specs.

As for the Navi 21 XT and XL graphics card, these cards are said to feature 16 GB and 12 GB GDDR6 memory capacities. The bus interface for the 16 GB variant is 256-bit as per the leaked PCB but can change in the final variant. There are also reports of Infinity Cache being one of the big features on Navi 21 GPUs, offering higher bandwidth figures to boost high-res gaming performance. These are the specifications that we know so far but expect more leaks to occur in the coming days prior to the unveiling itself.

AMD's RTG Flagship GPUs Comparison:

Graphics Card	AMD Radeon R9 Fury X	AMD Radeon RX Vega 64	AMD Radeon VII	AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT	AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT
GPU Codename	Fiji XT	Vega 10 XT	Vega 20 XT	Navi 10 XT	Navi 21 XT?
GPU Process	28nm	14nm	7nm	7nm	7nm+?
Transistors	8.9 Billion	12.5 Billion	13.3 Billion	10.3 Billion	TBA
Die Size	596mm2	495mm2	331mm2	251mm2	~500-540mm2
Compute Units	64	64	60	40	80?
Stream Processors	4096	4096	3840	2560	5120?
TMUs/ROPs	256/64	256/64	240/64	160/64	TBA
Base Clock	1050 MHz	1247 MHz	1400 MHz	1605 MHz	TBA
Boost Clock	1050 MHz	1546 MHz	1750 MHz	1905 MHz	2.3-2.4 GHz?
Memory Size	4 GB HBM1	8 GB HBM2	16 GB HBM2	8 GB GDDR6	16 GB GDDR6?
Memory Bus	4096-bit	2048-bit	4096-bit	256-bit	256-bit?
Bandwidth	512 GB/s	484 GB/s	1024 GB/s	448 GB/s	512 GB/s?
TDP	275W	295W	295W	225W	255W?
Price	$649	$499	$699	$399 US	TBA
Launch	2015	2017	2019	2019	2020

AMD Radeon RX 6900 Series With Triple-Slot Cooling Solution:

As for the designs themselves, the Radeon RX 6000 flagship cooling design looks amazing with the red and black design. The card features a triple axial-tech fan setup on the shroud and has a large aluminum heatsink that runs beneath it. The card has a LED-lit Radeon logo on the side and there is a large cut out on the side for the fans to vent out hot air. This design is very reminiscent of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 20 series Founders Edition cooler. The card will feature dual 8-pin power and display ports would include a USB Type-C (VirtualLink), 1 HDMI, and 2 DisplayPort connectors.

The card also features a fancy backplate along with a retention bracket to hold the cooler in place. The Radeon RX "Big Navi" GPU looks like it will come in the standard 2-slot reference design which is the same as NVIDIA's flagship RTX 3080 but not as huge as the triple-slot GeForce RTX 3090.

AMD will officially be unveiling its Radeon RX 6000 series graphics card family on October 28th. The second half of 2020 would definitely be interesting times for all the hardware enthusiasts and mainstream PC gamers who are looking forward to upgrading their PCs with the best hardware.

How fast do you think AMD's Big Navi (RDNA 2) GPU Powered Radeon RX graphics cards will be?

• On par with RTX 2080 Ti
• 10% Faster Than RTX 2080 Ti
• 20% Faster Than RTX 2080 Ti
• >20% Faster Than RTX 2080 Ti

[elstaci]

I think it might be a good idea to put on the RX 6xxx Series GPU Retail box in bold letters indicating the minimum PSU required to run these cards. 

So Users will be aware if they have a powerful enough PSU for the new NAVI 21 GPU cards before purchasing and later on going to AMD Forums complaining the computer is all screwed up since install the new GPU cards. 

Good chance it will be Power or Driver related.

[pokester]

I will second that. And none of the crap they did last time of having minimum and recommended specs. Just put the full recommended spec. When you put the so called minimum there are so many variables that make a power supply fall under its advertised spec and failing to deliver power needed by a GPU. 

[hardcoregames_]

I have an HX1000i so I am not super worried about some power pig video card

[elstaci]

Trouble is most Users are not aware whether their PSU is powerful enough or not.  All they see is that the new GPU cards will fit in the same PCIe slot as their old GPU card and will fit inside their computer case.

Some Users will find out their PSU doesn't supply 2 - 8 PIN PCIe Power Connectors and then go out and purchase adapters to connect one or both 8 Pin GPU Connectors from the PSU. Something the PSU might not be able to handle.

From what I have read, the NAVI21 will all have 2 - 8 Pin PCIe GPU Power connectors due to their high TGP of over 200 Watts. So if a User has a power hungry Ryzen CPU and and a Navi21 GPU card it is possible a 600 Watt PSU may not be powerful enough to run the computer under heavy stress, in my opinion.

Not every User has a 1000 Watt PSU or higher installed.

[pokester]

I know I don't have a 1000 watt power supply. If AMD says minimum 650 watt that will be a travesty again. I can pretty much promise you with that verbiage the recommended is more like a 750. A lot of people will buy the card thinking their 650 is fine and be here in these forums wanting to know why their computer is hanging with their new graphics card. 

[elstaci]

I don't know what AMD has as a minimum PSU Wattage. I picked 600 Watts because a Ryzen can easily use more the 200 -300 watts or more under stress and with a Navi21 GPU card could possible go over 400 watts under stress.

This website shows the various Ryzen 39xx processors and Intel processor Wattage under stock speeds:

and Overclocked:

Here

Here is 3D Guru showing the Wattage during gaming. The Radeon VII is closest to the new Navi 21 GPU cards:

The new Navi 21 GPU card MIGHT be much higher than the Radeon VII. 

Once they go to Retail stores and Tech sites have a chance to Review them they will find out how much Wattage or Power these new GPU cards will consume.

[pokester]

I don't know what they are picking. I am only pointing out that for a couple generations now they have been listing minimum and recommended. In a lot of cases those minimums they list will get you into a lot of trouble stability wise. 

[hardcoregames_]

elstaci wrote:

Trouble is most Users are not aware whether their PSU is powerful enough or not.  All they see is that the new GPU cards will fit in the same PCIe slot as their old GPU card and will fit inside their computer case.

Some Users will find out their PSU doesn't supply 2 - 8 PIN PCIe Power Connectors and then go out and purchase adapters to connect one or both 8 Pin GPU Connectors from the PSU. Something the PSU might not be able to handle.

From what I have read, the NAVI21 will all have 2 - 8 Pin PCIe GPU Power connectors due to their high TGP of over 200 Watts. So if a User has a power hungry Ryzen CPU and and a Navi21 GPU card it is possible a 600 Watt PSU may not be powerful enough to run the computer under heavy stress, in my opinion.

Not every User has a 1000 Watt PSU or higher installed.

I have ranted for years over inadequate power supplies.

Recent cards in my studio with three 8-pin cables should wake everyone up that power demands can be brutal.

• R9 Fury needs 3 cables
• HD 7990 also wants 3 cables
• RTX 3080 wants 3 as well

This what I rant over PSU capacity, RGB simply adds more demands on 5V which is not in infinite supply.

[leyvin]

hardcoregames™ wrote:

elstaci wrote:

Trouble is most Users are not aware whether their PSU is powerful enough or not.  All they see is that the new GPU cards will fit in the same PCIe slot as their old GPU card and will fit inside their computer case.

Some Users will find out their PSU doesn't supply 2 - 8 PIN PCIe Power Connectors and then go out and purchase adapters to connect one or both 8 Pin GPU Connectors from the PSU. Something the PSU might not be able to handle.

From what I have read, the NAVI21 will all have 2 - 8 Pin PCIe GPU Power connectors due to their high TGP of over 200 Watts. So if a User has a power hungry Ryzen CPU and and a Navi21 GPU card it is possible a 600 Watt PSU may not be powerful enough to run the computer under heavy stress, in my opinion.

Not every User has a 1000 Watt PSU or higher installed.

I have ranted for years over inadequate power supplies.

Recent cards in my studio with three 8-pin cables should wake everyone up that power demands can be brutal.

• R9 Fury needs 3 cables
• HD 7990 also wants 3 cables
• RTX 3080 wants 3 as well

This what I rant over PSU capacity, RGB simply adds more demands on 5V which is not in infinite supply.

R9 FURY & FURY X only use a 2x 8pin

RTX 3080 Reference uses a 1x 12pin which has a splitter into 2x 8pin

HD 7990 to my recollection also only has 2x 8pin on the Reference Model

(with FURY they are ALL identical, as they're ALL Reference Models)

Even still... I've never actually heard of ANY Graphics Card that exceeds the 2x 8pin Specification that was only recognised and adopted by PCI-SIG in Late 2018 to be within "Specification"

Now as a keynote., the PCIe x16 Slot while in Specification only supports up to 75w (66w) and this is what Motherboard Manufacturers are required to support to pass Specification Validation... it is capable of delivering up to 150w., which AMD do have a habit of going beyond PCIe Specification to utilise; esp. in their High-End Cards.

Beyond this., very little today actually uses the 5v Rail... PCIe uses the 3.3v and 12v Rails., the same is true for the Motherboard / CPU / Memory.

Yes, there are 5v Rail Connectors still part of the ATX Power Connection Interface but these are legacy from the Early 2000s and the ATX Specification hasn't been changed / replaced since it's introduction in 1997. 

•

Will a 600w PSU be Recommended for "Big" Navi and "Bigger" Navi?

I'd wager that AMD will list higher for both on the Box., they always do... Remember that a 600w PSU is Recommended for the RX 5700 XT., which has a Stock Peak of 225w; Peak Delivery is 300w (1x 6pin + 1x 8pin) while remaining in PCI-SIG Specification.

Of course this said the Reference Card never actually uses > 200w without Overclocking outside of what the Automatic Default does.

As a further note., the 16GB used on the "Bigger" Navi are the Samsung 16Gb Modules... meaning there are only 8 Modules Vs. the 16 Modules that would be needed for "Traditional" GDDR5/6.

Ignoring the Memory Interface (Bandwidth) for now... in essence it uses the same Power Draw as 8GB currently does on the RX 5700-Series. 

Not sure how "Igor' Lab" came up with 20w., as it uses 23w at Operational Frequency (1750MHz); given that the 16Gb Modules have a Higher Frequency, then it can be guaranteed it will be using 26w. 

Also as a further note., the Fans used on Graphics Cooling Solutions are capable of drawing up to 24w at 100%... typically however they are by Default Limited to 40% (~10w) Peak. This is as noted is JUST what they're Software Limited to as part of their Fan Curve., they can still draw their Maximum should they be set to such. (Of course "Big" Navi will use 2., while "Bigger" Navi will use 3) 

The AMD Media Engine (which includes the Display, Video and Hardware Codec) runs at a set Frequency., in the RX 5700 XT this uses ~37w in Operation but it is important to keep in mind that it was also part of the 14nm Elements (remember ONLY the GPU Cores, i.e. Graphics Engines were 7nm on Navi 10).

It should also be noted that Clock-for-Clock N7 to N7P is a 16% Reduction in Power Draw (based upon Sony and Microsoft Figures) 

As such we should be looking at:

Navi 20 XT (RX 6700 XT) using 160w [Typical] / 190w [Peak]

Navi 21 XT (RX 6800 XT) using 225w [Typical] / 240w [Peak]

Navi 23 XT (RX 6900 XT) using 270w [Typical] / 315w [Peak]

How these then provide "Recommended PSU"... well AMD is always overly cautious. 

I should point out that I presently run an R5 1600 + RX 5700 XT on a CX430 (430w PSU)., and it's still within the "Ideal" Deliverable Range; despite the RX 5700 XT "Recommending" a 600w PSU.

The ONLY reason that is the case is because you can pair much more Power Demanding CPU with it. 

I could technically go up to a 95w CPU without issues., but beyond that I'd want a 450 - 500w PSU... the ONLY Scenario where I'd need a 600w PSU would be pairing it with Threadripper or Epyc. 

But then those are 180 - 225w CPUs., it's just common sense you'd need a stronger PSU.

And even then... this should be keeping in mind that I also run Multiple Displays (3), one of which is a Display Tablet, Midi Keyboard, VR Headset, Controller, Multiple Mechanical Hard Disks, Dedicated Audio Card, Optical Drive, Kinect Azure, Bluetooth Hub, etc.

These are NOT things that avg. Consumers typically have.

General Setups today are CPU + RAM + Motherboard + SSD + (Maybe HDD) then Standard Peripherals (Keyboard and Mouse) and WiFi Adapter., that's about it.

Modern PSUs are in most cases overkill for what most Consumers actually require., and as a note even the Budget PSUs have Efficiency Ratings of 80 - 87%... typically speaking the Efficiency Rating is 87 - 94%., with the 80+ Branding simply guaranteeing a minimum; it's far from what can actually be delivered.

Why do some PSUs omit 6pin and/or 8pin Connectors? Is it because they can't deliver the necessary Power? No.

It all comes down to Licensing and Production Costs.

This is the exact same reason why Motherboard Manufacturers will not include HDMI / DisplayPorts., or limit how many USB Ports you have; even having many pull double duty as USB 3.0 / 3.1 / 3.2 to get up to their claims of how many of a given port are on-board; as each one require additional licensing fees and comes with a nominal cost increase.

Same with PCIe Slot., noticed how a lot of boards (esp. more "Budget" Options) come with barely any PCIe Expansion Slots today? 

Or again they pull double duty... I mean there are plenty of Ax20 Boards that use x16 Slots for x1/x4 Expansions; why? Because the x16 Slot isn't that expensive and purchasing in bulk drops that cost, where-as the License that's a different matter. 

[hardcoregames_]

My Sapphire Nitro+ R9 Fury has 3 on it, want to see 2 cards for CFX???

I have used lots of of power pig cards, HD 6970 was a beast back in the day too

[leyvin]

Most of this information is speculative and wrong.

Now as it stands we don't actually which is "Big" Navi (54/60 CU) and which is "Bigger" Navi (72/80CU) BUT what I can say with absolute certainty is that what AMD previewed in regards to benchmark scores at the end of their Ryzen 5000 presentation as an appetiser for the Radeon Event next week., that was "Big" Navi... and specifically I'd wager it was their XT Version.

architectural improvements to performance from RDNA 2, which Microsoft says is 25 per cent to the better, teraflop to teraflop.

Navi 10 XT achieves ~39.9 FPS Avg. 4K Ultra in Gears of War 5 (DirectX 12) [Review Aggregate., but re-downloading now to run some benchmarks to validate]

[edit] After Validation (5 Run Avg. 2160p Ultra)., I'm getting 36.5 FPS Avg... if as in other games, I'm getting ~10% Less Performance than I should (be it from PCIe 3.0 x16 / Ryzen 1st Gen / 3.5GHz CPU Frequency / 6C-12T CPU) then this would actually mean that accounting for that., then this would put it ~39-41 FPS and inline with the Review Aggregate. 

This is assuming to be at the Boost Frequency [1905MHz] but we can use this to base what to expect from the Navi 20 XT (RX 6700 XT) Graphics Card.

i.e. we should expect to see 49.88 FPS [1905MHz]., and I actually think we'll see the Boost Frequency (slightly) but only to 2000 - 2050MHz... it will be such a small increase in performance. 

Still let's assume they're not, and this does make sense as we'll be talking about a Lower Power Draw, Lower Thermal Profile thus we'll be seeing these actually hold the Boost Frequency better.

From this though we can quite easily figure out where the 60CU and 80CU Cards should sit in terms of performance... first I'll use 1905MHz as a "Baseline" while also providing what the proposed (above) Frequencies should yield.

Navi 21 XT (60CU?) • [1905MHz] 73.32 FPS [2100MHz] 80.83 FPS

Navi 23 XT (80CU?) • [1905MHz] 95.77 FPS [2200MHz] 110.60 FPS

Notice something... yeah., the 60CU Variant at the same Boost Frequency as the RX 5700 XT is theoretically achieving EXACTLY what AMD is showcasing as the performance of the "Unnamed" Radeon 6000-Series GPU.

What's more is if we actually compare this performance to the RTX 3080., it's ONLY Borderlands 3 where it is achieving a "Win" with Gears 5 is ~10% Slower while CoD MW is ~15% Slower.

Why is this interesting? Well because Borderlands 3 at 4K HDR10 Badass on the RX 5700 XT will yield a 29.35 FPS Avg. (at least on my System)., this might be slightly below what it could potentially hit assuming what Colesdav was reporting was correct in comparison to Forza Horizon 4.

In any case we can still use this... again we want to add +25% IPC, +50% CORE, -2% Core Scaling

This yields 53.93 FPS., let's see what it would be with Higher Frequencies .. well now at 2100MHz we'd yield 59.45 FPS.

Of course I would note that when Benchmarking in Bad*** Graphics., unlike Ultra / High (typically I have it set to High Graphics 1440p for a smooth 60Hz as it never drops below at that) ... there are some BIG dips in 2 Sections of the Benchmark near the end.

First during the initial swing towards the Docks then just as it gets to the Docks before going under the Canopy to the Left... both of which drop the FPS down to 23-24 before slowly climbing back up to 28-31. 

This likely is having a big impact on the Avg. for me, and not sure if this is SRAM, VRAM or CPU related... on top of this the biggest impact to performance appears to be Screen-Space Reflections, as there is a clear drop in Framerate when there is a lot of Water on-screen; this could be something that RDNA2 offloads to the TPU, which does now have somewhat dedicated Hardware to accelerate such.

Still in either case., if we calculate where the 80CU should be., that's +25% IPC, +100% Core, -4% Core Scaling; then what we end up with is 70.44 FPS [1905MHz] and 81.35 FPS [2200MHz].

This is quite clearly well above when is being reported (61FPS). 

I still stand by my speculation that AMD was (and has) decided to keep Stock Frequencies the same as Navi 10., and the differences will literally be tweaks so that their pricing model means the Performance Per Currency remains relatively flat (and predictable).

I also think what they've showcased was sandbagging (to a degree)., by showcasing the RX 6800 (Navi 21?) as opposed to the bigger and faster RX 6900 (Navi 23?). 

Now I have made a post elsewhere, with my speculation about the potential SKU along with pricing. 

And if the Clocks do remain roughly the same (which I think they will, so AMD doesn't have to really create a High-Performance Cooling Solution) then we can expect to see:

RX 6700 XT use 180w (peak) 165w (avg.) 500w PSU Recommended 

RX 6800 XT use 270w (peak) 250w (avg.) 600w PSU Recommended

RX 6900 XT use 360w (peak) 320w (avg.) 750w PSU Recommended

We will of course find out next Wednesday., but as it stands... yeah that's where I think they'll be.

What's more is Ro Game also doesn't believe that there will be any Mainstream RDNA2 GPUs., instead he is standing by the idea of an RDNA1 Refresh.

I think that's just what the AIB Partners have been told so-far, but that isn't inline with what AMD stated in regards to conditions for including DXR Support in Radeon GPUs.

They said and I quote David W, Senior VP of Radeon Technologies Group

Utilization of ray tracing games will not proceed unless we can offer ray tracing in all product ranges from low end to high end.

They have actually reiterated this several times since this initial quote in 2018.

I'm not saying that we WILL be seeing the RX 6500 / 6600 as part of the Radeon RX 6000-Series Launch., but I don't believe for a second that AMD will rebrand and rerelease the RX 5000-Series under the RX 6000-Series branding.

As it will not only omit Hardware Ray Tracing Support (against their statement of brining Ray Tracing to both Low and High End Hardware) but they'll also be creating a greater performance and efficiency deficit between their Mainstream and Enthusiast Product Sectors.

Then you add in to the mix that the RX 5000-Series "Low End" currently all use the same Embedded Semi-Custom GPU that was designed for the Mobile Market and was never intended for the Desktop Market; as opposed to more cost efficient dedicated GPU Designs.

Why would AMD deliberately keep their profit margins low and their prices anti-consumer high for said market sector?

That makes ZERO business sense.

Instead what I think will happen is that we will get a Staggered Release.

How they will stagger them exactly I'm not sure., but I think High End > Mainstream > Budget over the next 6 months.

[edit] It's a little amusing to me the Senior VP of Technology at RTG' name is considered "Offensive Language", so don't mind the edits to get around that.

[elstaci]

Lol, I had a similar experience when I posted the name of a Malware in a article, a while back, that AMD's JIVE found to be "Offensive".  I needed to go through the entire article and replace the name with, as an example, S---------E. to be accepted.

[black_zion]

According to Igor's Lab, "Big Navi" will consume 320-355w of power, with the reference edition being on the lower end and aftermarket cards being on the higher end. Personally I wouldn't be surprised to see aftermarket cards nudge the "official" 375w limit (300w from 2x PCIe-8 and 75w from PCIe slot).

https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-6000-big-navi-gpu-power-numbers-detailed-navi-21-xt-320w-navi-21-xl-290w/

[hardcoregames_]

I have a power monitor on my wall so I can see how much energy is being used at any one time. Using a platinum rated PSU does minimize energy wastage. Using more recent hardware has also done wonders for power consumption.