I was also very excited to see the arrival of the GTX 980, and very excited by reading tests.
But I quickly became disillusioned when I read this one:
geforce gtx-http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-980-970--maxwell,3941.html
look on page 12 Their conclusions regarding consumption when used GPGPU is very worrying.
I read that too, but their power usage ratings seem very suspicious to me. They're way above what they should be; in fact, probably too high for the cabling to allow.
Much more sensible is this review:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/2014/09/18/geforce-gtx-980-review-performance-lower-power/
There's a lot of power information in there, which tallies much more with what I would expect from the specs of the card. I have also read elsewhere that the GTX 980 pulls somewhere around 30W less than the standard GTX 680 under load. That's reassuring to me, as I have a GTX 680 SuperClocked in my MacPro5,1 with no additional power supply (all internal) which has been running perfectly for over a year now - with some very stressful work. Two standard 6-pin connectors on that too, and no problems.
I can't see that Nvidia would ship a card that from stock pulled more than its cabling was rated for. That'd just be wild. Having said all that, I have a GTX 980 ACX 2.0 SuperClock (04G-P4-2983-KR) inbound for my MacPro5,1 and will be happy to report back on my burning traces.
EVGA state a power draw of 165W and 500W PSU required for the 04G-P4-2983-KR, which would be rather less than the 550W PSU requirements of the GTX 680.
Here's the GTX 680 Spec (PDF) and GTX 980 Spec (PDF). The GTX 680 is as I have used it, and as I say, been super happy with no additional PSU requirements.
NB. I don't have any spinning drives in my Mac Pro now, though I did have two 2TB WD Black drives when I first installed the GTX 680. No problems then either.
Last edited: