News AMD Launches Radeon RX 6900 XT Liquid Cooled

escksu

Respectable
Aug 8, 2019
433
148
1,860
0
120mm rad and fan can dissipate 330 watts? Lol good luck with that
Lol.... Why not? Remember furyX? Its TDP is 275W and the fan is extremely quiet. Yet, it provides best cooling of all cards during that era. I used to have 2 of them in crossfire.

330W? Its not that much more than 275w. Engineers in AMD knows way more than you.
 
Lol.... Why not? Remember furyX? Its TDP is 275W and the fan is extremely quiet. Yet, it provides best cooling of all cards during that era. I used to have 2 of them in crossfire.

330W? Its not that much more than 275w. Engineers in AMD knows way more than you.
I'm work with thermodynamics everyday. There's more than wattage to consider. Thermal density is one.

The radiator is thin
The tubes are thin meaning high back pressure
This is a hard no. 55 wats more and a higher power density...sorry no not buying it at 330w
 
Reactions: Phaaze88

greatmaharg

Commendable
Jan 1, 2019
29
7
1,565
5
I'm work with thermodynamics everyday. There's more than wattage to consider. Thermal density is one.

The radiator is thin
The tubes are thin meaning high back pressure
This is a hard no. 55 wats more and a higher power density...sorry no not buying it at 330w
The Fury X is only about 15% larger than the 6900 XT

The way the pictures are shot, you can't see the thickness of the radiator

AMD has cooled much more with a single 120mm rad - look at the R9 295x2
 
Reactions: usiname

spongiemaster

Respectable
Dec 12, 2019
1,350
629
2,060
0
Weird. This post isn't getting overrun by people accusing AMD of a money grab release despite this being another highend release, where one isn't needed. Not one person complaining about unavailability of GPU's either. Internet must be down where the chronic complainers are...
 
Weird. This post isn't getting overrun by people accusing AMD of a money grab release despite this being another highend release, where one isn't needed. Not one person complaining about unavailability of GPU's either. Internet must be down where the chronic complainers are...
OEM only. Doesn't really affect us, even if it does come with a crap cooling solution. It doesn't have enough thermal overhead to allow overclocking any more than a standard air cooled heat pipe arrangement.
 
I just ran my coil simulation code using .01" AL flat fins at 12 fpi on a 120mm radiator using square pipe copper tubing and 5 circuits of 1 tube per circuit and electro plating using 15% Ethelyn glycol @ Sealevel and an entering air temp of 74F. I'm running at a reasonable head pressure/flow rate for 1/4" tubes. I'm running at a face velocity of 400fpm which is heck high for a small fan. It also doesn't take into account flow loss around the fan hub or corner edges. I'm assuming 25mm radiator thickness with 20mm x 5 mm pipes with a wall thickness of .032". I came up with a TMBH of ~1 which is about .294 kW

[edit]I had to rerate with 30% glycol because 15% is too low for standards at preventing growth.[/edit]

It will thermal throttle. This assumes full efficiency of the cold plate which means thermal density doesn't exceed thermal conductivity's ability to carry the heat away.
 
Last edited:

spongiemaster

Respectable
Dec 12, 2019
1,350
629
2,060
0
OEM only. Doesn't really affect us, even if it does come with a crap cooling solution. It doesn't have enough thermal overhead to allow overclocking any more than a standard air cooled heat pipe arrangement.
No, it doesn't affect me. I'm not in the market for a GPU, but it absolutely does affect people still trying to find one. This is going to be the most expensive gaming GPU AMD is selling to anyone at a time when more expensive options isn't exactly what people are clamoring for and every one that they sell is one less that could potentially end up on a retail shelf as a regular 6900 XT or lower GPU.
 

Phaaze88

Titan
Ambassador
Some of ya'll are definitely forgetting thermal density.
Fury X was 28nm. 6900XT is 7nm. Both TSMC.
That's a bigger gap than Intel's 14nm V Ryzen's 7nm, though the process isn't the same between them.

GDDR6 is built on 10nm. HBM could be done on what, 65nm?


I still think this model could've done with a fan on the gpu itself for QoL reasons.
So instead of putting an awesome cooler on this, the manufacturer went with a 'just enough' approach. Lame.
 

husker

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2009
1,000
42
19,310
0
Clearly the controversial cooling solution is the reason why it is OEM only. The average Joe consumer throwing this into a case with god knows what else would be a support issue nightmare. With OEMs a professional will design the overall system and (supposedly) deal with the thermal situation appropriately.
 
Attack the argument not the person.

My software has been in place and in development since 1967. It is professionally vetted and certified by ahri/ashrae. Although the size of the radiator is outside standard certifications programs. But any single line change in the code requires recertification which is costly as they often compare results against actual coil exchangers. Also if it's wrong you have expensive warranty claims in the field for non performance.

I have degrees in computer science and aerospace engineering.

Maybe one of my parameters is wrong. If it is please supply me the corrected parameter.

The 295x2 may be 500 watts. It sure in hell isn't a sustained 500 watts or it will throttle. It was a crossfire and it's hard as hell to keep both cores running at full tilt on that. End of story. Let me see you run furmark on a 295 running on both cores. I dare you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TJ Hooker

Champion
Ambassador
Regarding the 295x2, the two reviews I found that had GPU-only power draw both pegged it at ~430W while gaming, with a temperature high of 60-65C (no ambient temps provided to find temp deltas). Unfortunately neither of them explicitly said that they measured temperature and power consumption under the exact same load, but the TH review does state temps are under a gaming load.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-295x2-review-benchmark-performance,3799-17.html
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY