That PSU is not enough for a GTX470. Here is EVGA recommendation "Minimum of a 550 Watt power supply. (Minimum recommended power supply with +12 Volt current rating of 38 Amps.)"
17A + 18A = 35A. And they're talking total amps, not just what's available for the video card. 18A is right at the edge of what a GTX470 can draw. (See here.)
I'd venture to say it'd probably work considering how GPU manufacturers always slightly overstate PSU recommendations, but damn that's cutting it FAR too close for comfort. The risk definitely isn't worth it.
September 6, 2010 8:53:27 PM
but if 1 GTX 470 needs 38 A.. would 2x in SLI need 2x38=76A?
explode >.< thats not good.. another friend told me that the GPU just wouldnt run 100%.. but if it could explode i better replace it fast <.<
If the PSU isn't good enough then you should not install the GTX 470. That said I'm not so sure it isn't good enough. The power listing on the rails is secondary to the stated maximum power on the rails combined. This is usually listed on the chart below the amperages. The recommended requirements for video cards are always very loosely connected with reality. On its own at stock settings the GTX 470 tends to use approximately 180w(15a) under normal gaming conditions and 230w(19a) during stress testing. You haven't stated what the rest of your system consists of but it is quite likely your PSU would be fine and suggesting explosions are eminent if you try to use it is simply fear mongering and bad advice.
If you want to give the card a good overclock or if you would prefer to just get a new unit to be on the safe side and have enough juice for SLI in the future then this is a good deal and a good choice; http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Jy, how's that irrelevant? I simply stated that a 470 draws roughly 18A or so on it's own. I wasn't implying that the 12V2 would be solely responsible for powering it... (75W (or 6.25A) maximum through the PCI-E slot, 150W (12.5A) through PCI-E cable(s) covers an 18A peak draw, though.)
And ct, I know the actual output would be less than the two rails added together based on the actual peak-wattage output. I was simply stating that his PSU is almost there in terms of the total recommended power required - That despite the usual manufacturer overstatement, it's not far off. But I also said it's not worth the risk...
I just don't quite get why either of you guys cited me...
And ct, I know the actual output would be less than the two rails added together based on the actual peak-wattage output. I was simply stating that his PSU is almost there
I'll jump on you. From how you wrote the your post, you said 17 + 18 = 35. This is just as bad as selling one of those "8GHz" CPUs that has four 2GHz cores. If you did know how to find the output, you should have listed it that way.
Not really trying to start anything, but if your going to write something out take the time to write it out correctly.