Originally Posted by
tajoh111
I think we have to take things like furmark into consideration because we never know how stressful future programs and games will be. Also if it is not stable in something brief like OCCT or furmark, who is to say we are not causing longterm damage to the card over a longer period of time.
People saying we will never see loads like furmark simply want progress to be held back for the sake of their argument. Something like this program can easily be fixed if another phase of power was added to the card. When the cards are 600 a piece and such a add on would be insignificant to the overall cost, they should do it for the benefit of the customer, especially if these cards are being marketed to overclock.
Honestly, I think most people would love if a game was programed so well, that it was using 100% of the videocards power. This might be a tad unrealistic because its difficult to programs in such a manner when there are so many hardware configurations there are, unlike consoles.
However, I can see a program(not game), especially if open Cl does take off, which could be as stressful as furmark. If these cards ever want to be taken seriously in the supercomputer world, they better be beefed up because there will be programs that use 100%.
It was not until the 4870 series, which had crashing with furmark, that we started calling it a power virus on AMD accord.
However what is the point of a stress program if it does not show long term stability. A stress program has to prove stable in the short term at above average loads to show a piece of hardware can stay stable in the long term at lower loads. If elevator manufacturers only tested to the maximum rating, most of us would feel alot less safe in a crowded elevators. Or if tires were only tested up there speed rating, we would see alot more tires burning out.
Programs like Prime95 or Intelburn in, test beyond realistic loads, but do we call them power viruses? No we don't.