RX 480 is apparently killing pcie slots

Ieldra said:
Yeah, at least AMD didn't name it something that would sound ironic in the context of its performance, you know, like name it after the god of fire, or a star.
Click to expand...
Anyone using Asrock mobos back then should not be taken seriously.
 
Ieldra said:
The 12v rail will have overcurrent protection of course, but the limit at which it is set must also allow for fluctuation within spec. Moreover, the damage we are talking about, that could potentially happen, is due to localized power draw; as pcper mentioned it is about power dissipation in pins and connectors.

The 12v rail on the mobo does more than just power the gtx 480
Click to expand...

(heh 'gtx 480', joking aside though...)

I know about OVP, OCP (OPP), UVP, Short-Circuit, Thermal, etc in regards to PSUs. Granted, in my personal experience, a number of those protection systems either may not have quite trickled down into the consumer grade PSUs like the Antec I had, so I can't specifically say which features are present on the lower end models even by the respectable brands. Problem is, from what I'm seeing (though, perhaps my Google Fu is weak), is that there doesn't appear to be any kind of protection against ripple. Sure, there are ripple specs that need to e adhered to for when the product is new but nothing to self-monitoring to protect (or prevent) the unit from drifting outside of said specifications.

I can just see the RX480 exacerbating already present problems in some computer, but not specifically the cause behind the deaths, merely expediting their demise.

Changing gears though...

Could it perhaps be possible that during creation of the BIOS, one of the engineers accidentally mixed up the values for how much to draw from which source? As it almost seems like in most cases the power draw is more from the Slot than it is the PCIe Power socket. I just get the impression that something accidentally was input 'backwards' from what was intended.
 
Formula.350 said:
(heh 'gtx 480', joking aside though...)

I know about OVP, OCP (OPP), UVP, Short-Circuit, Thermal, etc in regards to PSUs. Granted, in my personal experience, a number of those protection systems either may not have quite trickled down into the consumer grade PSUs like the Antec I had, so I can't specifically say which features are present on the lower end models even by the respectable brands. Problem is, from what I'm seeing (though, perhaps my Google Fu is weak), is that there doesn't appear to be any kind of protection against ripple. Sure, there are ripple specs that need to e adhered to for when the product is new but nothing to self-monitoring to protect (or prevent) the unit from drifting outside of said specifications.

I can just see the RX480 exacerbating already present problems in some computer, but not specifically the cause behind the deaths, merely expediting their demise.

Changing gears though...

Could it perhaps be possible that during creation of the BIOS, one of the engineers accidentally mixed up the values for how much to draw from which source? As it almost seems like in most cases the power draw is more from the Slot than it is the PCIe Power socket. I just get the impression that something accidentally was input 'backwards' from what was intended.
Click to expand...

Look honestly, they would test this shit before sending out review samples. No matter how trivial the solution to this problem may end up being, AMD look like buffoons.

A month or so ago they were claiming dual RX480s were both more powerful and more efficient than a GTX 1080.

Now we are talking about the card that breaks it's 150W limit out the box, and draws too much from the PCIE. potentially damaging the board.

In arabic there is a saying

"A man does not fast every day for a month, only to break his fast on an onion"
 
Last edited:
iNViSiGOD said:
My line of thought exactly. When I saw the board and processor he was working with I kind of cringed. Not that I'm excusing the issues AMD is having because they should have taken into consideration that people with older rigs or those built on the cheap could be subjected to problems.
Click to expand...

A cheap card will go in to a cheap system. This is what a $200 card is going to see a lot of, people upgrading old systems.
 
I thought it was determined to be a MB bios issue?

"Maybe i can helb you out a bit Raja. I have just read the PCI-E 3 specifications and they are telling me something different. In my understanding the 75 watt isnt the maximum limit, its just the default value on startup of the motherboard. The motherboard it self sets the maximum allowed watt per slot in the "Slot Capabilities Register" which you can configure up to over 300 watt per slot. In the bits 7 to 14 "Slot Power Limit Value" you can set 250, 275, 300 and above 300 watt. This will be multiplied with bits 15 to 16 "Slot Power Limit Scale" in steps x1 ,x0.1, x0.01 and x0.001. So its up to the motherboard manufacturer and the power management on it how many watt the slot is capable of. The Specifications do define the protocol and not the hardware specs of the PCI-E slot. If a manufacturer uses better parts which can handle higher amps on the contacts and the lines, they can allow the devie in the slot a higher power consumption than 75 watt via these registers. Sadly most people doesnt even read the specifications and judge things they dont understand."

"Power limits on the platform are typically controlled by the software (for example, platform firmware) that comprehends the specifics of the platform such as: 15 Partitioning of the platform, including slots for I/O expansion using adapters Power delivery capabilities Thermal capabilities This software is responsible for correctly programming the Slot Power Limit Value and Scale fields of the Slot Capabilities registers of the Downstream Ports connected to slots. After the value has 20 been written into the register within the Downstream Port, it is conveyed to the adapter using the Set_Slot_Power_Limit Message (see Section 2.2.8.5). The recipient of the Message must use the value in the Message data payload to limit usage of the power for the entire adapter, unless the adapter will never exceed the lowest value specified in the corresponding form factor specification. It is required that device driver software associated with the adapter be able (by reading the values of 25 the Captured Slot Power Limit Value and Scale fields of the Device Capabilities register) to configure hardware of the adapter to guarantee that the adapter will not exceed the imposed limit. In the case where the platform imposes a limit that is below the minimum needed for adequate operation, the device driver will be able to communicate this discrepancy to higher level configuration software. Configuration software is required to set the Slot Power Limit to one of the 30 maximum values specified for the corresponding form factor based on the capability of the platform. The following rules cover the Slot Power Limit control mechanism: For Adapters: Until and unless a Set_Slot_Power_Limit Message is received indicating a Slot Power Limit 35 value greater than the lowest value specified in the form factor specification for the adapter's form factor, the adapter must not consume more than the lowest value specified. PCI EXPRESS BASE SPECIFICATION, REV. 3.0 528 An adapter must never consume more power than what was specified in the most recently received Set_Slot_Power_Limit Message or the minimum value specified in the corresponding form factor specification, whichever is higher."

"Page 527 to be specific, this concerns slot power limit control. The above sounds to me either, vBIOS or BIOS level. Would be quite interesting if the motherboard was responsible for assigning the slot power limit wouldn't it? Folks, we have a solution, bios update is probably all that's needed and the rx 480 is good to go. powergate goes back into the ground just as it was getting started."


RX 480 powergate problem has a solution • /r/Amd
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
BTW guys the guy that stated his card fried his motherboard, posted up pics for everyone complaining about why there aren't posting pictures.

PCI-E slot died with RX 480 | Community

20160701_144201.jpg


Its clearly visible the area of where the motherboard melted/burned.
Click to expand...
I actually can't see the burned area. The motherboard is black colored, so it makes it hard. Also, why there so much yellow yuck? Also, that does look like my old AsRock 770iCafe, which I just washed with soap and water. Runs good now, but it's so crap that it couldn't handle my 8350. Used now with an old Phenom 9850 with Linux Mint for kids to play games with. But if that board is anything like my old 770iCafe, then it has some terrible VRM's. Maybe that's what blew out?
 
Yup... blame now the motherboard... those guys have no limits seriously.. so we are since 2 days from the launch of the card and we are starting to see reports of users at this bare early stage of launch.. which its kinda sad, normally things take time to present anomalies and issues, oh well, we have now issues reporting directly straight motherboard damages, and then the users who defend this card blame the motherboard. hahaha it's actually kinda funny..
 
DukenukemX said:
I actually can't see the burned area. The motherboard is black colored, so it makes it hard. Also, why there so much yellow yuck? Also, that does look like my old AsRock 770iCafe, which I just washed with soap and water. Runs good now, but it's so crap that it couldn't handle my 8350. Used now with an old Phenom 9850 with Linux Mint for kids to play games with. But if that board is anything like my old 770iCafe, then it has some terrible VRM's. Maybe that's what blew out?
Click to expand...

just around the brown stuff, you can see the color of the board has changed.


Yeah VRM's could be an issue, they regulate the voltage, so if the card is pulling more wattage, it will be supplied by more volts or amps.
 
Ieldra said:
AdoredTV used the strix 960 argument to justify the gtx 480 here, i was spammed with it the moment he posted it lol. He convieniently ignores the distribution of the load, and the differences between the two, and the averages, and the fact that Tom's measures at very high frequency . Oh well. Just another thing to add to his sizeable list of mistakes and mispredictions.
Click to expand...

Brent posted the video to "deaden the issue"
 
razor1 said:
BTW guys the guy that stated his card fried his motherboard, posted up pics for everyone complaining about why there aren't posting pictures.

PCI-E slot died with RX 480 | Community

20160701_144201.jpg


Its clearly visible the area of where the motherboard melted/burned.
Click to expand...


No support cooling, healthy amount of dust, and 7 straight hours of gaming... that mb, gpu huffing on its own hot air for 7 hours, that's a great idea!
 
thesmokingman said:
No support cooling, healthy amount of dust, and 7 straight hours of gaming... that mb, gpu huffing on its own hot air for 7 hours, that's a great idea!
Click to expand...


Actually its not that bad, he probably didn't clean out his system in a couple of months, it doesn't take long to get that amount of dust in there, depends on where his comp is. And yeah I have seem much worse systems that have like a layer of caked on dust which run fine with a gtx 275 lol. I mean it was so bad when my friend opened up the case, I turned to him and asked him what was he doing, vacuuming with the damn thing lol.
 
thesmokingman said:
No support cooling, healthy amount of dust, and 7 straight hours of gaming... that mb, gpu huffing on its own hot air for 7 hours, that's a great idea!
Click to expand...
You cannot determine that hot air is being recycled from that image.
It would help your case if you didnt bs from the outset.

You appear to be saying that its essential to have a rigid cleaning regime to safely own one of these cards.
That excludes most of the planet.
 
Araxie said:
Yup... blame now the motherboard... those guys have no limits seriously.. so we are since 2 days from the launch of the card and we are starting to see reports of users at this bare early stage of launch.. which its kinda sad, normally things take time to present anomalies and issues, oh well, we have now issues reporting directly straight motherboard damages, and then the users who defend this card blame the motherboard. hahaha it's actually kinda funny..
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what AMD does now. Polaris is tarnished even worse than the 290x. The 290x was a great card but the reference design killed it. It was known as hot and inefficient/loud. That carried over to the AIB designs even if it wasn't true. Now the 480 is known as hot, inefficient, loud and takes out Mobos.

Like holy shit. I really wanted AMD to do well but they do it to themselves. At this point I am back to hoping for a quick bankruptcy and a competent company replaces them.
 
I think that getting laid even if it has to be with a sex pin will totally put the issue to rest...lol :D
 
Tyns said:
Thread's gone; what did you guys do? :bored:
Click to expand...
Pointed out to the fanboys that it isnt a problem you can push under the rug.
Brent was trying to be fair but I'm not sure he understood the severity.
 
razor1 said:
Actually its not that bad, he probably didn't clean out his system in a couple of months, it doesn't take long to get that amount of dust in there, depends on where his comp is. And yeah I have seem much worse systems that have like a layer of caked on dust which run fine with a gtx 275 lol. I mean it was so bad when my friend opened up the case, I turned to him and asked him what was he doing, vacuuming with the damn thing lol.
Click to expand...


It's like pc mentalism stuff, technically it's not technical but you can read/see what sort of environment that rig is put under and you can call me crazy but that's not a rig I would be running for 7 hours straight gaming. The failure could be as a result of the powergate, or it could be coincidental, who knows, do you? Lmao, one poster is already uptight implying that I implied you must have a clean comp lol.
 
Nenu said:
Pointed out to the fanboys that it isnt a problem you can push under the rug.
Brent was trying to be fair but I'm not sure he understood the severity.
Click to expand...

The post contained a video that was not compliant with specification; there was a very large spike in misinformation lasting approximately 7 minutes. That's a sustained misinformation average well above the maximum
 
Ieldra said:
The post contained a video that was not compliant with specification; there was a very large spike in misinformation lasting approximately 7 minutes. That's a sustained misinformation average well above the maximum
Click to expand...
It was just a terrible video overall.
 
Araxie said:
Admittedly I overreacted to that thread....
Click to expand...

Theres a lot of over reaction, and not just the stuff with the power issues either. Its the internet, so someone overreacting should shock no one (or offend anyone either).

DukenukemX said:
I actually can't see the burned area. The motherboard is black colored, so it makes it hard. Also, why there so much yellow yuck? Also, that does look like my old AsRock 770iCafe, which I just washed with soap and water. Runs good now, but it's so crap that it couldn't handle my 8350. Used now with an old Phenom 9850 with Linux Mint for kids to play games with. But if that board is anything like my old 770iCafe, then it has some terrible VRM's. Maybe that's what blew out?
Click to expand...

Look at the IC that's to the left of the PCIe x1 slot, pay attention to the chip as well as the surrounding traces. This thing must of been sharing a power source with the PCIe lanes.
 
or he was trying to mount the sex pin and drooped on the circuitry.as ledra suggested.
Its deleted because this video is making way too much sense and clearly common sense is a super power these days.
 
Last edited:
Imhotep said:
or he was trying to mount the sex pin and drooped on the circuitry.as ledra suggested.
Its deleted because this video is making way too much sense and clearly common sense is a super power these days.
Click to expand...


Haha.

Complains about the lack of common sense.

Posts AdoredTV videos
 
Computer is still cranking furmark, I think it's safe to say 9 hours straight of furmark in crossfire and my PC is fine. Not saying this isn't a issue but might be more situational then everyone makes it out to be
 
Ieldra said:
Haha.

Complains about the lack of common sense.

Posts AdoredTV videos
Click to expand...

He provided all the charts that you like to go by. All of them from toms hardware or other reputable tech sites. What is the problem then. >?
 
Imhotep said:
or he was trying to mount the sex pin and drooped on the circuitry.as ledra suggested.
Its deleted because this video is making way too much sense and clearly common sense is a super power these days.
Click to expand...

It does not help that he has the figures slightly wrong; the mainboard PCIe spec for the slot is actually 66W from the 12V with the other 9W allowed from the 3.3V.
So when Tom's Hardware is showing 82W average that is just for the 12V contact, the situation is made a little worst when you also combine the 3.3V average.
Also no point in mentioning the peaks because with the window duration so wide you cannot notice well that the spurs are instantaneous bursts followed by the current quickly dropping to more sensible levels.
To make better sense of the graph with the every sample spike, you need to change the window duration to something like 2-10 seconds and adjust and focus on segments that look to be clustured peaks - still not an issue tbh but looks worst than it is because of so many data points scrunched together in the chart window of 60s.

PCPer took an alternative path and filtered these to give a representation that makes sense to more people not using the tools.
Cheers
 
Last edited:
Imhotep said:
He provided all the charts that you like to go by. All of them from toms hardware or other reputable tech sites. What is the problem then. >?
Click to expand...
Anyone can link to charts and comment on them, but building a coherent argument from data is a little more than that. Like we have said two million times, power spikes that are short in duration are not a problem, sustained power draw above the maximum is.
 
Ieldra said:
Well I disagree with Brent!

For the record I disagree with Brent about AdoredTV providing useful insight to the issue.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with AdoredTV. The card does average very high, but rarely spikes high super high like other cards do. The GTX 960 spikes so high that it hits the 250W mark often. That's not good for a motherboard. Even the 750 Ti does this pretty badly as well. But because Nvidia cards also spike very low, it averages lower compared to the RX 480. Doesn't change the spikes, which are very likely to damage the motherboard, not the steady increased power draw from the RX 480, which spikes barely to 150w.

This is just more anti AMD PR spin.
 
DukenukemX said:
I have to agree with AdoredTV. The card does average very high, but rarely spikes high super high like other cards do. The GTX 960 spikes so high that it hits the 250W mark often. That's not good for a motherboard. Even the 750 Ti does this pretty badly as well. But because Nvidia cards also spike very low, it averages lower compared to the RX 480. Doesn't change the spikes, which are very likely to damage the motherboard, not the steady increased power draw from the RX 480, which spikes barely to 150w.

This is just more anti AMD PR spin.
Click to expand...

oh.. well.. as you seem to be ignoring most things of this thread, then let me post this again, straight from PCPer. this time the image without spoiler because everyone seems to be ignoring it in spoilers.. so, sorry ieldra because you hate long pics =D

ASUS GTX 960 power debunked by PCPer





image.png
 
Ieldra said:
Anyone can link to charts and comment on them, but building a coherent argument from data is a little more than that. Like we have said two million times, power spikes that are short in duration are not a problem, sustained power draw above the maximum is.
Click to expand...
None of this is any issue at all. The cards come equipped with the power phase for a reason. The capacitors are there to handle any desired loads. At the end it does not look like any power draw is out of spec even if they spike above sustained capability of PCI-E or what the sex pin is capable of providing.
All of this is simply horseshit.
 
Imhotep said:
None of this is any issue at all. The cards come equipped with the power phase for a reason. The capacitors are there to handle any desired loads. At the end it does not look like any power draw is out of spec even if they spike above sustained capability of PCI-E or what the sex pin is capable of providing.
All of this is simply horseshit.
Click to expand...
The power phases are for the GPU, not the motherboard.
 
Imhotep said:
None of this is any issue at all. The cards come equipped with the power phase for a reason. The capacitors are there to handle any desired loads. At the end it does not look like any power draw is out of spec even if they spike above sustained capability of PCI-E or what the sex pin is capable of providing.
All of this is simply horseshit.
Click to expand...
What effect does that have upon the points of contact on the motherboard where power passes?
 
Dan said:
Computer is still cranking furmark, I think it's safe to say 9 hours straight of furmark in crossfire and my PC is fine. Not saying this isn't a issue but might be more situational then everyone makes it out to be
Click to expand...
Dan maybe you could create a separate detailed thread with pictures and what ever data you think relevant. There must be half a dozen AMD witch Hunt threads already.....It be nice to see a thread with positive working results. Not to mention maybe we can figure out better why your setups are having zero issues. Just a thought;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top