Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.
We used CPUz logging to measure the card’s power consumption with the Metro:Exodus benchmark running at 2560 x 1440 using the default Ultra settings. We warmed up the graphics cards prior to testing and started when they settle to an idle temperature (about 10 minutes). The benchmark is looped a total of five times which yields around 10 minutes of testing. In the charts you will see a few blips in power use, this is a result of the benchmark starting the next loop.
We also use Furmark to capture worst case power readings. Although both Nvidia and AMD consider the application to be a “power virus” or program that deliberately taxes the components beyond normal limits, the data we can gather from it offers useful information about a card’s capabilities.
Starting off with the gaming power results, our Nitro+ averaged 208W during the Metro: Exodus test. Our other 5700 XT in the lineup averaged 186W. This minor difference makes sense due to the difference in clock speeds.
Furmark’s power consumption doesn’t end up much higher than the gaming result due to the power management, but it still tells a story. Here the Nitro+ averaged 219W, up 11W from the Metro Exodus value while the Gigabyte 5700 XT showed a very small difference of 3W to 189W. AMD’s drivers kept the cards power in check here by lowering clock speeds and voltages as we will see on the next page.
In order to see how each video card behaves, like the power testing, we use GPUz logging in one second intervals to capture the data. Game testing is done looping Metro: Exodus benchmark five times at Ultra settings running at 2560x1440 resolution.
We also used Furmark to capture some of the data below which offers a more consistent load and uses slightly more power, regardless if the clock speeds and voltages are limited. These data sets give an insight into worst case situations along with a load other than gaming.
The Sapphire 5700 XT Nitro+ (in red) peaked at 65C during our testing run which happened to be the lowest of the group. The Gigabyte OC Gaming using Windforce 3 cooling peaked at 68C.
The Nitro+’s three large fans spin up around 800 RPM and rise swiftly to a bit over 1,500 RPM throughout most of the testing. The dips seen are from when the benchmark loops and starts again. We can see for the most part speeds range between 1,500 and 1,600 RPM which maintains the temperature reached. The Tri-X fan setup spun slower than the other Gigabyte 5700 XT Gaming OC card due to the larger fans. That cooling solutions runs running around 2,000 RPM.
The fans are not loud, but you could hear them sitting on an open test bench. The larger fans are able to move more air at a slower RPM than the smaller fans on the other cards and at the speeds we saw here, didn’t emit anything but wind noise for the most part.
As far as clock rate behavior, we see in our testing the clocks bounced around a bit as did all the others. The average clock speed this card achieved was 1911 MHz over the course of the test (the lower clocks between runs was taken out to find the average). This result sits just above AMD’s game clock (1905 MHz) and well below the rated boost clock as is typical. Everything is working as it should during the game testing. The Nitro+ runs faster than the Gigabyte 5700 XT (1,826 Mhz average) and in general has improved frame rates to show for it.
Taking a look at the fan speeds while running Furmark, we see much of the same as compared to gaming except that the loads and ramps are more stable due to the slightly heavier and more consistent loads it provides. Since temperatures really did not increase much due to the throttling of the cards, fan speeds were also similar. The Nitro+ stayed that 1,500 to 1,600 RPM range throughout testing while the other Radeon 5700 XT card continued to run at 2,000 RPM.
We hinted at the temperatures above not being much different and in the chart we now have a visual. Using Furmark, the temperatures ramped up a bit more slowly compared to the game due to all the throttling and management the cards need to run it. Temperatures peaked here at 69C on the Nitro+ while both the Gigabyte and ASRock ran just a couple of degrees Celsius warmer.
One of the biggest differences we see in Gaming and Furmark testing is that, when running the latter, the clock rate is notably lower across all tested cards. As was mentioned previously, both AMD and Nvidia consider Furmark to be a power virus and this have protection built in to protect the hardware under such loads. In this case the Nitro+'s average clock rate was 1,678 MHz, a far cry from the 1,911 MHz when gaming. The Gigabyte 5700 XT card managed to run 1,582 MHz also notably lower than a typical gaming load.
MORE: Best Graphics Cards
MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table
MORE: All Graphics Content
Alarming amount of Texas Instrument chips found in Russian-based weapons in Ukraine — Russian military using third parties to purchase U.S-made chips
Aoostar AG02 eGPU dock with OCuLink support and 500W PSU announced for $219
China levels anti-trust charges against Nvidia – country accuses chipmaker of violating anti-monopoly regulations, examining the $7 billion Mellanox acquisition
