Hola gente ya lleguo mi esperada Gpu pero... No tengo idea de cómo debo probarla con el furmark ya que un conocido me dijo que puede romperse la Gpu como y cuánto tiempo se debe probar sin riesgos ?? Mañana les cuento cómo me fue!!

During a 30 min stress today on my pc for stability since I updated my bios today, my brother walked into my room and said Furmark is bad for my gpu? How true is that really?

So basically, I have a lot of anxiety when it comes to my pc, and for the past month I kept checking it by doing like a 15 min full pc stress test after checking it.

Now, nothing overheated. My cpu was fine, my gpu was like 60 degrees boards, around 80 hotspot and around 76-78 memory. I have an Asus tuf RX7800XT OC so Ikd if these ar good temps or nah.

During a 30 min stress today on my pc for stability since I updated my bios today, my brother walked into my room and said Furmark is bad for my gpu? How true is that really? Is it really that abd for it compared to other stress tests?

How likely is it that these tests will affect my gpu going on from now?

I have used Furmark based tests for years to start my OC process, usually in the form of PrecisionX\Kombuster. I have been noticing that it does not get close to representing a real world load, and pulls around 100w more power through the card then any other stress or benchmark test I have seen. I recently killed a Vega 56 Pulse while running Furmark and that is what caused me to look into what is going on much more deeply, with both an AMD card and a nVidia card.

With Vega 56 I would pull around 280-300w overclocked max in things like Superposition and Timespy. In a Furmark based test I would see the draw increase to 400w+, seemingly bypassing Vega power limits.

With a older GTX 970 I saw similar results, 200w overclocked under Superposition and Timespy. Jumping to 300w under Furmark, which is crazy power numbers to go through a GTX 970.

To me, the tessellation stress test in PrecisionX\Kombuster is still a heavy hitting test, but also far more representative of real world loads that your card is ever likely to incur.

After killing a card with a Furmark based tests, and looking into how much more power those tests can pull over "normal" tests, I think I am done using Furmark from now on.

What about everyone else, where do you land on Furmark, Yea or Nay?

Recientemente realicé algunas pruebas de estrés de CPU/GPU en mi sistema. Usé FurMark para ambas y las ejecuté al mismo tiempo.

La CPU (5600x), mientras estaba OC a 4.6GHz, solo funcionaba a 4.2GHz y consumía 46.7W durante la prueba, a los 30 y 60 minutos. Esto a pesar de que la utilización de la CPU era del 100%.

Supuse que FurMark llevaría la CPU a sus límites (como lo hace con las GPU), pero parece que no.

Se supone que la 5600x consume 65W como máximo, ¿verdad?, así que FurMark no la está forzando realmente, pero el 100% me está confundiendo.

¿Alguien puede explicar qué está pasando?