AMD Radeon R9 290X 4 GB

btarunr said:

Ta-Ta Titan. GTX 780 Ti stillborn?

Click to expand...

Yes about Titan. Titan never made any sense as a general consumer card.

As for 780ti, it's a very interesting question.

Let's say the average game uses 2816sp (counting special function) with 48 ROPs, and AMD hit the nail squarely on the head to compete with that limitation from nvidia. It's pretty damn close, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt.

13 smx is similar to 2912sp (2496sp + 416sfu)...so perhaps slightly less efficient, but pretty darn close. But then you also have 3GB (4 less chips) of memory and 16 less ROPs being fed, which are hardly a detriment in most single-card and/or single monitor scenarios, hence it will help power consumption relatively.

It could run up to around ~1020-some mhz before it is restrained by bandwidth, as it is consumed in conjunction with the shader processors.

(2912*1020-something) > (2816 =< 1000) any way you cut it, and I will be beyond surprised if that is not what nvidia will do. The clocks will of course be listed as 9xx/9xx., but it will turbo and play games at precisely that level so all memory bandwidth is used for at least 384/6008.

You then have a card that is faster, realistically, than 290x at 1080p/2560.

While it may only scale as well as memory bandwidth allows (say they overclock to 6.6, then it will be bottlenecked at ~1130mhz) the radeon has it's heat issues that will also come into play around a similar performance level.

They, like all their other ~300w watt cards, will be close. You're essentially switching clockspeed for units (for compute) on nvidia's side with a slight increase in efficiency (780 is similar to 2688sp), as 780 can clock pretty high and get close to saturating it's overclocked bandwidth. That said, if they use a slightly higher tdp and/or 7ghz ram, that could conceivably change things slightly. Should be interesting, if only academically.

290x is a hell of a deal, relatively speaking, and I look forward to see how they run with better coolers and the powertune level jacked up (to 50%/375w?! Good call AMD! Power back to the people!). Even with the power consumption being high, if they can maintain stable clocks it's a pretty great design. Would love to see one running maxing out the process/memory controller at somewhere close to 1300/6400...sucker would be a sight, and likely a sound, to be reckoned with. Wonder if anywhere around that level will be realistic with a good aftermarket (AC) air/(whatever) water cooler.

Sihastru said:

With the exception of noise, power consumption and heat, this is one killer card.

But I do have one little reservation. Looking at the GPU clock/temperature graphs. It seems to me that even if the card is sold as a 1000MHz GPU card, after a few minutes, it throttles heavily. I mean, it even gets to go even under 650MHz. A HUGE drop.

So, with that in mind, I have to wonder. If the card is used to test/benchmark a game with a time-limited sequence (a few minutes) of gameplay or a built-in benchmark sequence (also, a few minutes)... wouldn't the card run that few minutes sequence at a higher clockspeed than it would tipically run during a gaming session?

So wouldn't the results that the card gets in the reviews be a lot higher (1000MHz and slightly down) then the actual results you get while you're actually gaming for a few hours (650MHz and up) and not just a few minutes?

Because it seems to me that this is actually a 650MHz core card that turbos to 850MHz when you're actually gaming...

Click to expand...

It's a good question. I wish W1zzard would have posted a scale on the X-axis so we could get an perspective on the time scale.

This makes testing just as confusing for AMD cards as it has been for NVidia cards with GPU boost because a case with better airflow will result in a card with better performance.

This is no different than what smartphone manufacturers do. They advertise SoC clock speeds fully knowing that those clock speeds are only attainable for a few minutes until the SoC overheats and throttles to a much lower clock speed.

Sihastru said:

With the exception of noise, power consumption and heat, this is one killer card.

Click to expand...

It's not. Just 1-3 fps increase.
-------
Looks like someone is upset.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...ands-details&p=5212736&viewfull=1#post5212736

Nirutbs said:

good luck to u all but the price is very high here. nice review almost perfect card.

Click to expand...

Price here is insane as well, but AMD cards seem to attract a price premium here in relation to other markets- although 2.5 times the price of an Asus 280X DC2T is taking the piss even for our price gougers.

Sihastru said:

With the exception of noise, power consumption and heat, this is one killer card.

Click to expand...

Sounds as though you're channelling the GTX 480 review thread

The Von Matrices said:

This makes testing just as confusing for AMD cards as it has been for NVidia cards with GPU boost because a case with better airflow will result in a card with better performance.

Click to expand...

Actually, nVidia cards have a base clock that they don't go under. They advertise the cards as having the GPU running at that base clock. The boost clocks (turbo) are an added bonus.

Recus said:

It's not. Just 1-3 fps increase.

Click to expand...

Yes, but I'm also taking price into consideration when stating that.

The Von Matrices said:

...This makes testing just as confusing for AMD cards as it has been for NVidia cards with GPU boost because a case with better airflow will result in a card with better performance.

Click to expand...

You need to ignore quiet mode and just look at the uber mode results. Who'd a thought that wasn't a boost BIOS.

Basically, without aftermarket cooling the card as a complete entity is 'poor'. Unless you like that level of noise. Something so loud his neighbours complained? Come on guys, that's indefensible.

BUT..... Give it proper cooling it looks to be an absolute beast. It's going to break records, that's for sure.

Amused though that nobody has noticed it is now role reversal. Nvidia have the architecture and design that is 'civilised' and AMD have created a furnace, the likes of which would shame Fermi.

But really, that's academic to me - I like to water cool my gfx cards so I'll need to think about how good this will be at 1440p and higher clocks...

Time to check a bunch of other reviews for a whole world approach...

W1zzard said:

no, amd does not have any turbo. they reduce the clock

Click to expand...

I understand that. It's just "seems" like that.

Sihastru said:

Actually, nVidia cards have a base clock that they don't go under. They advertise the cards as having the GPU running at that base clock. The boost clocks (turbo) are an added bonus.

Click to expand...

the54thvoid said:

Time to check a bunch of other reviews for a whole world approach...

Click to expand...

The advertising might be false but the conclusion is the same - a cooler test platform will result in a card with better performance. This makes it much harder to compare review sites with different platforms. Earlier in this thread people were criticizing Anandtech for having lower performance scores than TPU for the same card; maybe W1zzard just had a colder environment in which to run his card, in which case both sites' scores would be valid.

It's a good card, but I'm still not quite convinced that it will be a "smash hit". Price/performance is great compared to Titan and GTX 780. If I were to get this card, I'd probably keep it on quiet; the 5% increase in performance is not worth blowing your ears out.

The problem is, Nvidia can (and probably will) drop the price of the GTX 780, and release the GTX 780 Ti at a price point between the GTX 780 and Titan. If Nvidia drops the price of the GTX 780, I would see little to no point in buying the R9 290X (other than Mantle), because overclocking the GTX 780 can give you similar/better performance to the R9 290X on "Uber", but at the same time being quieter and cooler. Based on that, Nvidia wouldn't even need to drop the full 75$, they could just drop it for 25-50$.

Now I'm interested in seeing if vendors can put some serious 3rd party coolers on this card and make it run quieter, cooler, and give it better OC-potential.

The Von Matrices said:

The advertising might be false but the conclusion is the same - a cooler test platform will result in a card with better performance. This makes it much harder to compare review sites with different platforms. Earlier in this thread people were criticizing Anandtech for having lower performance scores than TPU for the same card; maybe W1zzard just had a colder environment in which to run his card, in which case both sites' scores would be valid.

Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with Anandtech. People criticise when they don't like what they hear. Anand pretty much recommends it anyway and he doesn't find the noise as bad as W1zz though he still recommends active noise cancelling headphones.

I doubt there is a single site that will recommend 780 over this. Titan is irrelevant as a gaming item. I couldn't use this card without a waterblock though- the fan noise would be a deal breaker.

The Von Matrices said:

The advertising might be false but the conclusion is the same - a cooler test platform will result in a card with better performance. This makes it much harder to compare review sites with different platforms. Earlier in this thread people were criticizing Anandtech for having lower performance scores than TPU for the same card; maybe W1zzard just had a colder environment in which to run his card, in which case both sites' scores would be valid.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

That could actually be on purpose: they could show benches with much better performance just because they were taken in outdoors Finland or Sweden or something and those would be valid too.


It seems it hasn't sink into AMD's heads that the cooler is almost as important as the card and non water cooling oriented folks may very well decide against opting for this card because of noise which, to me, seems like a shot in the foot using a cannon ball as a weapon ...


Im my case, i would never opt for this kind of card because:

A - i don't game often
B - noise (lack of it) is important for me
C - consumption is as important as noise, if not more important

The only good thing IMO about this card is the price: though expensive, compared to other cards with similar performance, it's way cheaper and, for those not caring for noise and consumption, it's a clear winner.

Come on just 9.3 , that will be are a blasfemy :shadedshu

HTC said:

It seems it hasn't sink into AMD's heads that the cooler is almost as important as the card and non water cooling oriented folks may very well decide against opting for this card because of noise which, to me, seems like a shot in the foot using a cannon ball as a weapon ...

Click to expand...

I agree, although in the past the coolers were good enough to sustain the reference clock speed. This is the first graphics card that cannot sustain its advertised clock speed under any scenario with the reference cooler. If AMD had just called this a "boost" or even published a base clock this would be different.

Just for comparison, load noise for the GTX 480 and the R9 290X in "uber" mode both rank in at 50dB in TPU's reviews.

For all the complaints that NVidia got about GTX 480's heat and power consumption I hope AMD gets just as many for the R9 290X.

Seems to be plenty available already in UK........

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-092-HS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1752

that price however converts to $760

The power/temps situation doesn't bother me, I haven't bought a reference card for a couple of generations for that reason. Those blower coolers are always noisy to me, even on less powerful cards.

Its a bit of a worry that AMD said there wont be non -reference for a while but I have a feeling it wont be too long. AMD want to sell a bunch of reference cards first, giving people the impression non-reference is a loooong time away..they would be well aware that reviews will criticize temps/noise and many reviewers will recommend waiting for non-reference coolers.

This card would be great on watercooling though or for people who don't care about fan noise so much.

Overall awesome card though, for that price. THe non-reference should be awesome too, like a MSI lightning of Asus DCUII with awesome overclocking clocking potential

Edit: My local store in Australia is selling them for $649 for powercolor to $699 for Sapphire/Gigabyte but they are already SOLD OUT. They should get some Asus and other brands soon though.

the54thvoid said:

I doubt there is a single site that will recommend 780 over this. Titan is irrelevant as a gaming item. I couldn't use this card without a waterblock though- the fan noise would be a deal breaker.

Click to expand...

I'd recommend a 780 over a 290X to anyone that isn't watercooling. These temperatures on their stock cooler are terrible, and that's an understatement. It throttles, it's loud as hell, and AMD essentially just released a card that only works at its defined baseclock of 1000mhz if it's watercooled(Because there are no aftermarket solutions being sold).

I think there's a reason this card is only 549... Maybe people are so hyped up over the last few months that they are ignoring the temperatures and noise, and I don't understand why. It's an awesome chip, but a very very bad card for non W/C gamers.

RCoon said:

I'd recommend a 780 over a 290X to anyone that isn't watercooling. These temperatures on their stock cooler are terrible, and that's an understatement. It throttles, it's loud as hell, and AMD essentially just released a card that only works at its defined baseclock of 1000mhz if it's watercooled(Because there are no aftermarket solutions being sold).

I think there's a reason this card is only 549... Maybe people are so hyped up over the last few months that they are ignoring the temperatures and noise, and I don't understand why. It's an awesome chip, but a very very bad card for non W/C gamers.

Click to expand...

It's an enthusiasts card, many who buy will watercool, many will wait until non reference cooler designs are available, some of the others won't care, some will and will take up other options.

I will wait for the polished or next version, please AMD, no heat and noise and driver issues.

RCoon said:

I think there's a reason this card is only 549... Maybe people are so hyped up over the last few months that they are ignoring the temperatures and noise, and I don't understand why. It's an awesome chip, but a very very bad card for non W/C gamers.

Click to expand...

Blower coolers always suck (...or blow). Just like previous generations those us wanting good temps, noise performance and overclocking will go for a non- reference design or water. No big deal. I wouldn't write off the card based on the reference cooler.

Anyway AMD have priced the card cheap enough to buy the reference and get an after market cooler. Anybody who is serious about overclocking on a highend card doesn't run a stock blower cooler imo. Get an aftermarket cooler or water cooling.

buggalugs said:

Anybody who is serious about overclocking on a highend card doesn't run a stock blower cooler imo.

Click to expand...

Um, both my old 780's with reference coolers ran at 1200mhz core and stopped dead at 69 degrees... NVidia's reference cooler was viable for high end cards and for overclocking, with decent noise output. Feel free to check out my 780 overclocking guide in the forums.

People are making excuses that we should expect the reference cooler to be bad and to throttle the card to kingdom come and not be a viable choice. But we shouldn't. Reference coolers should be(and a lot ARE) viable options for both noise and cooling potential. Especially in SLI/Crossfire circumstances.

EDIT: Not to mention this card DOES NOT maintain its advertised baseclock over extended periods of time. WHY ARENT PEOPLE ANGRY ABOUT THIS???

IMO, this card is an engineering failure, it runs almost 50W more than gtx780/titan and what do I get? only 1~3avg fps faster? this is a major roadblock for me to even consider purchasing this card. I would much rather buy a much quieter/cooler card that performs almost at the same performance, and willing to accept the premium. this day and age is all about efficiency efficiency! the age of brute force was long past.

When people say "oh who cares im just gonna watercool this bitch", ummm no, 300+w of heat is still 300+w of heat, doesn't mater if you water cool it or not, that same amount of heat is still output to the surroundings and its still consuming the same amount of energy, and doesn't water block cost money too? did you add that to the total cost during comparison??? from a technical point of view, this card is very inefficient and inelegant. to put it into perspective, its same as OCing 780gtx by 15% and selling it as R290x, there is no innovation here, its just pure brute force, people. nothing to see here, move along.

Tatty_One said:

It's an enthusiasts card, many who buy will watercool, many will wait until non reference cooler designs are available, some of the others won't care, some will and will take up other options.

Click to expand...

+1 - I think you hit the nail on the head

RCoon said:

People are making excuses that we should expect the reference cooler to be bad

Click to expand...

AMD haven't really pushed much for a quieter blower solution in the past few years. The 5850 was excellent but the 6xxx series was not so good and the 7970 blower was loud, this is the expected progression I guess. However, the 7990 cooler was excellent by all accounts but on the 290X that would blow the 90+ degree heat into the case.

RCoon said:

EDIT: Not to mention this card DOES NOT maintain its advertised baseclock over extended periods of time. WHY ARENT PEOPLE ANGRY ABOUT THIS???

Click to expand...

It will on Uber mode but that is the sound penalty you will pay for. In Guru's review he quotes AMD as saying 95 degrees is the units operating normal - it can run at that for it's lifetime. If users want a cooler experience they can make it cooler by lowering performance or having higher fan speeds.

Anand also stated the lack of a comprehensive new cooler (like Titan's) helps to keep the end cost down. In all fairness we'll get a slew of reviews and there will be varying acceptance of the noise. Guru 3D says it's fine - he tested on quiet mode as he stated there was no performance difference and that was the default setting.

the54thvoid said:

it can run at that for it's lifetime.

Click to expand...

A lifetime of 50+ dB, 95 degrees, 315w power draw, and repetative throttling?
It's essentially selling a delicious bacon and cheese bagel, in a stale bagel. The baker is saying it's still edible, and the customers are saying "oh its fine just put it in a new bagel".

I don't get this. I really don't.

EDIT:I'll also note that the 290X is £479. For £479 you can also buy a Gigabyte 780 OC Windforce 3X.