# ASUS R9 290X DirectCU II OC 4 GB



## W1zzard (Dec 23, 2013)

The ASUS R9 290X DirectCU II OC is R9 290X done right. It is overclocked out of the box, but doesn't suffer from the throttling issues of AMD's reference design. The card is also quieter, even in performance mode, and you can activate the second, quiet BIOS for a very low noise experience.

*Show full review*


----------



## Eroticus (Jan 21, 2014)

Nice review =)

Please review the Tri-x 290x and non x to =)

thanks.


----------



## radrok (Jan 21, 2014)

I know that in the page where you show the cards PCB close ups you say that the rebranded CHiL gives voltage control but have you checked firsthand if you can manually set the voltage to a desired value?

Thank you.


----------



## happita (Jan 21, 2014)

Seems like this card is for the hardcore performance/quiet setups. It's interesting that in most instances that this card is lower in power consumption versus the reference designs, which is nice. I wish that there were VRM temps recorded in the temperatures section, especially with these cards. 

Nice review overall.


----------



## N3M3515 (Jan 21, 2014)

Excellent card and review like always.
Too bad this one doesn't overclock.


----------



## Slomo4shO (Jan 21, 2014)

I always thought the prices listed in the comparison charts on the first page of the review were MSRP, seems I was wrong...


----------



## Casecutter (Jan 21, 2014)

Slomo4shO said:


> I always thought the prices listed in the comparison charts on the first page of the review were MSRP, seems I was wrong...


Yea, when did AMD raise the MSRP for a R9 290X... by $30 hadn't read that?

When you directly compare this Asus to the Asus GTX 780Ti W1zzard did a while back this isn't bad.  First they appear to have the same cooler and fans, so other than the difference in what heat load they displace and the fan profiles Asus chooses for either, would be what differentiates thermal performance and noise... correct?

Power consumption at peak (actual gaming loads) the Asus 290X show it’s draws 4-5% less power, _didn’t expect that_!  Noise the Asus GTX 780Ti at load was 39dbA, and the 290X had either 32dbA (quiet mode) or 42dbA (performance).  Temperature the Asus GTX 780Ti was 80°C, the 290X (quiet mode) was 94°C while 78°C (performance).  Now what I need to know is what (program/game) is used to stress and achieve those results, hopefully both the noise/temperature number are from the same stress test.

So, from that we see less power, while higher heat produced from the AMD Hawaii, while even faster fan (or at least by the noise that would be the case).  Transistor density of Hawaii might point to one issue, while the abundance of that heat (some say inefficiency) uses a die area 30% smaller to dissipate it with.  Just look at the two pictures W1zzarrd has of die outline of both the Asus heat-pipe coolers to realize the disparity.  So is there problems with Hawaii perhaps, or did the push to much on the envelope of the 28Nm process packing it a little to much? By what little OC headroom I think a little of both is apparent.

Then look at performance, by the 2650x summary there’s something like 12% between the two Asus models, that’s noteworthy.  However can one contend the Asus GTX 780Ti could logically be priced somewhere like $70 more (12%) than a Asus 290X @$600. They're basically similar BOM’s other than the chips, so what gives with $730?  While then look at the perf/watts at 2650x this Asus 290X bests a reference 780Ti, although the Asus version by all account accounts would pull ahead perhaps by 4-7% using the gaming titles used currently.  Surprising given what was unearth above, I thought it would’ve been much more lopsided.

So from all this we grasp while AMD went with a more densely packed part that provides a better cost, Nvidia has a large die that is less densely packed but at a higher cost per chip. Although it seems there's another 9% tack-on above the logical perf/$.

AMD obviously hit some issue’s with such a design, chiefly being able to dissipate the amount of heat from the chip surface, but after that most of the parameters aren’t all that different as perf/watt noise or temperatures.  I’d like to see the 290X temperature if Asus had set the fans to provide the same 80°C or 39dbA as they did with their 780Ti.


----------



## rawad (Jan 21, 2014)

The Asus r290x really isn't that good , I have the sapphire tri-x 290 and I don't pass the 65c while gaming , I had the chance to stress the card with furmark and it reached 75c with no audible noise at all for me , my friend has the tri-x 290x his card reached 78c with furmark .
Note : you also get an HDMI cable .


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 21, 2014)

Eric_Cartman said:


> Oh those poor AMD fanboys!
> ...
> AMD just can't compete, what a shame for all you AMD fanboys out there.



It is infantile, unintelligent and sadly short sighted comments like this that feed forums with poor discussion.  If you can't be constructive with your criticism, why not just keep your fingers off the keyboard?



NeoXF said:


> 1. Why not use beta9.5
> 
> 2. TR 2013 bench: "in the interest of fairness", of what now? Can nVidia run TressFX, yes they can; do they run it horribly slow or something? No, they don't.
> I'm pretty sure if PhysX got open, everyone would test AMD cards and take it "as is", no questions asked. If you guys were really after fairness you wouldn't include games like SC: Blacklist either, which doesn't even have the excuse of AC IV, that it's a very popular game (another game that had it's development doors slammed closed for AMD by nVidia).



It's not really relevant what you are saying.  It's a broad spectrum of games tested and I've said it before - more than almost any other review site.  There are plenty of gaming evolved titles in that list, not just TWIMTBP.  As for Tress FX being off, well, so is PhysX in Metro 2033.  Physics can be done by non Nvidia GPU in Metro 2033 it's just that it's coded for NV.  Tress FX is written off the back of GCN.

Also, BF4 is a massively AMD sponsored game.  It favours AMD far more and you can see it in comparison differences between BF3 and BF4.  In summary, the review list and conditions are fine.  What matters are resolutions tested and a good mix of games.  There are sites that massively cherry pick titles to suit their sponsors but that doesn't happen here.



All this being said, it does seem as if Nvidia just held back long enough to see what AMD had and the release of the 780Ti just stole the thunder.  The MSI Gaming 780Ti is head and shoulders above this card and in the UK is 'only' £50 more (give or take).  Now, what happens with Mantle on board will be nice to see but again, that depends on adoption, not raw hardware. 
I still dearly want to see the 290X Lightning and hope to hell that MSI get it right.


----------



## Rowsol (Jan 21, 2014)

I really don't understand why a video card fan doesn't just turn off in idle.  I mean if 32db can keep it stable then I'm thinking it could run passive in idle.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 21, 2014)

quote="Slomo4shO, post: 3052817, member: 135417"]I always thought the prices listed in the comparison charts on the first page of the review were MSRP, seems I was wrong...[/quote]
they are the same street prices we use for the perf/$ charts, and yes they are retarded. to complain: ceo@newegg.com



Rowsol said:


> I really don't understand why a video card fan doesn't just turn off in idle.  I mean if 32db can keep it stable then I'm thinking it could run passive in idle.


completely off might be bad for some secondary components because they heat up more. running it extremely quiet is always possible. some fan motor designers require a minimum rpm for the fan to spin reliably though (design fail imo)


----------



## rawad (Jan 21, 2014)

Great review as always w1zzard , can we expect tri-x reviews in the near future ?


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 21, 2014)

rawad said:


> Great review as always w1zzard , can we expect tri-x reviews in the near future ?


yes, talked to sapphire today, they are getting the card back from the previous reviewer early next week.


----------



## human_error (Jan 21, 2014)

W1zzard said:


> yes, talked to sapphire today, they are getting the card back from the previous reviewer early next week.



Awesome  - any chance we can have all 290x custom cards in the other custom cooler review comparison charts? (or, at least, the noise chart). Would make it much easier to see whose custom cooler is best.

Also any news on an MSI 290x gaming edition review?


----------



## Slomo4shO (Jan 21, 2014)

W1zzard said:


> they are the same street prices we use for the perf/$ charts, and yes they are retarded. to complain: ceo@newegg.com



I voted with my wallet . ShopBLT until prices drop and then I will go with TigerDirect over Newegg. Prices at Newegg haven't been competitive for months and TigerDirect price matches Amazon and I can circumvent the local sales taxes since Amazon now collects in Arizona 

On a side note, can you also include MSRP in that initial table in addition to the Newegg pricing? The current table makes it look as if AMD raised the MSRP on the R9 290 by $100 and the R9 290X by $30 if one were to compare this review to your previous reference reviews.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jan 21, 2014)

First of all, thank you for your thorough review W1zz, it's greatly appreciated.

I have a question I hope you may kindly answer for me, I noticed the RAM doesn't have any sort of cooling other than the air blown by the fans, do you think there's enough room under the heatsink for some low profile copper RAMsinks (6mm)?

I also noticed you posted some new BIOS images, are these required for all cards, or only for press samples?

I noticed that two of the heat pipes don't make any contact with the GPU, greatly reducing the efficiency of the cooler, but even taking that into consideration the temps were great all around, and zero throttling to boot.

I ordered this card last night, a few hours before your review went online, I was lucky enough to find it for a little less than the MSRP ($593.00 with free shipping and no tax) by avoiding the scalpers out there (I'm looking at you Newegg...)

Once again, thank you for your review, I hope you can help me with the RAMsink question


----------



## Delta6326 (Jan 21, 2014)

Great review W1zz I enjoy reading these.

Is Grid 2 and Metro Last Night supposed to be on the same page?


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 21, 2014)

15th Warlock said:


> I also noticed you posted some new BIOS images, are these required for all cards, or only for press samples?


from what I understand, all production cards will have the same BIOS or neweg. I still posted mine for full disclosure.



Delta6326 said:


> Is Grid 2 and Metro Last Night supposed to be on the same page?


fixed


----------



## nemesis.ie (Jan 21, 2014)

It would also be good to see the TPU treatment on the *MSI Gaming edition*, I got mine (290x) on Monday, they all seem to have Hynix so far - although my reference card (Asus) with Elpida OCs it's RAM better (5952MHz), probably needs the BIOS changed, OCUK staff apparently had the RAM on one up to 6800MHz using an Asus reference BIOS so maybe doing a bit of OC by mixing/matching BIOSes would be a fun test to add. 

Regarding the other factors, it's pretty quiet and keeps the chip around 78c in games and is very quiet at idle. Very nice.


----------



## Bender (Jan 21, 2014)

From overclockers.co.uk
LtMatt:  There's 5 heatpipes and only 3 make any contact with the core. To be honest it looks like only two of them make decent contact. That's pretty poor tbh. I think they just used the Nvidia DC cooler version for the AMD card and its clearly not an ideal fit.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 21, 2014)

I agree, it's not ideal. Heat will migrate sideways though and into the pipes on the sides.


----------



## Assimilator (Jan 21, 2014)

Rowsol said:


> I really don't understand why a video card fan doesn't just turn off in idle.  I mean if 32db can keep it stable then I'm thinking it could run passive in idle.



There's a massive difference between even a small amount of airflow over the components, and none at all.


----------



## yueh (Jan 22, 2014)

Just registered to try to discuss several points (sorry for any misspelled words as English is not my mother tongue) for which, W1zzard, your knowledge would be very helpfull (thanks in advance):

- firstly, there is one fact that has been surprising me for a long time since R9 290/290X was reviewed for the first time: 95ºC for a GPU / any part based on Si (Silicon)-technology. I am a student specialized in electronics finishing his dissertation of a five year career in Spain which is called 'telecommunications' which is a BSc+MSc in computer science + electronics + other stuff. I have studied the basics of Si-technology, properties and how more or less, make a transistor from a silicon wafer. As the temperature arises certain temperature, to form or to cut the channel (1 or 0 between the Drain and the Source of a MOSFET -remember that the tech. used in general in microchips is CMOS) in the transistor you will have to arise the voltage in more noticeable steps. There are also another studies (papers, PhD Thesis, etc) for aging related to frequency, operating temperatures and switching rate (% of times that a transistor switch between 1 to 0 or vice versa), without considering electromigration effects at the PCB nearer the chip (to prevent electromigration the general rule of thumb is to stay below 65ºC) and the quality of soldering of the BGA socket due to cold-hot cycles. So, in general, the less temperature the better for the circuit properties and features, but also in terms of aging of the circuit. Hence, has AMD traded-off lifespan of a top-tier product for pure performance? Wish I could have a not prone to failure 290 or 290X to test it around the two year guarantee to give you an answer, but I tend to think that the answer is yes. What do you think?

- secondly, most of the chips that we actually use have its components not powered at the same time. This fact is related to how to power a lot of different transistors and power density. Looking through the power consumption charts and the temperatures in über (German word by the way which means greater or higher than) and quiet, the power consumption is the same for more or less the same performance in FPS. Power consumption in general is proportional with frequency and square with voltage, and more temperature more voltage to create the channel. I really do wonder what materials and properties are used at 28nm TSMC and how AMD manage to have the same power consumption footprint; because the only answer to this is that AMD is powering certain zones and pipelines of the chip depending on the power footprint and temperature (like an automatic watchdog over power and performance)... althougth it was stated that the 290 / 290X was throttling back due to temp. issues (hence to control the power used by the chip to not enter into a positive feedback: +temp => + power => +power dissipated => +temp). What are your thoughts about it?

Regards,

Javier

PS: dissipated power is related to the switching rate due to the linear portions of the MOSFETs, then to the activity of the chip commuting 0s and 1s. If you need some more links about this or something that I've told over the post, please, don't hesitate to ask for more info as I understand that maybe a too detailed technical stuff in one post could be difficult to comprehend.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Jan 22, 2014)

Id hate to have 94'c of heat dumped inside my case... I dont think no amount of airflow will be able to keep the inside of your case fairly cool let alone the nightmare of it when it comes to crossfire unless you live in the north pole or have the AC chill your room to 8-10'c (if thats even possible) - watercooling them is a must.

for single cards though, id rather have a reference cooler so the heat gets dumped outside of the case.


----------



## fullinfusion (Jan 22, 2014)

Nice looking card but dam! Why cheap out on the Elpida memory chips..

Note to self: strike this one off the maybe to buy list


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 22, 2014)

yueh said:


> Hence, has AMD traded-off lifespan of a top-tier product for pure performance?



Science agrees that for silicon higher temperature = shorter lifespan, but I haven't seen any significant cases of GPUs randomly dying after a certain time due to high heat. You'd see a gaussian distribution of such cases, which would quickly draw everyone's attention. Usually the product becomes obsolete first (which happens in just a few years). Also thermal expansion of solder joints leads to damage on the PCB itself first. Have you seen any scientific research on the topic of silicon lifespan vs temperature (on real shipping products)?



yueh said:


> AMD is powering certain zones and pipelines of the chip depending on the power footprint and temperature



I think you mean power gating, which has been used extensively over the last few years. Moderns GPUs reduce clock and voltage whenever they can, but as far as I know they do not randomly shut off shaders when full performance is needed. When idling, they shut off almost everything, even their 2D rendering acceleration units, by detecting whether the displayed image is static or not.



FreedomEclipse said:


> Id hate to have 94'c of heat dumped inside my case



You don't dump x°C of heat into the case. All power the card consumes is turned into heat which is dissipated into the case. So for a constant power draw, no matter the temperature, the same energy is deposited into the case.


----------



## buggalugs (Jan 22, 2014)

It seems the tri-X cooler is a little better than the Asus but either would be good.


----------



## ShurikN (Jan 22, 2014)

buggalugs said:


> It seems the tri-X cooler is a little better than the Asus...


And in my opinion a bit better looking.


----------



## Xzibit (Jan 22, 2014)

buggalugs said:


> It seems the tri-X cooler is a little better than the Asus but either would be good.



Only in an open air bench test.

*Tom's Hardware - Does Radeon R9 290X Behave Any Differently In A Closed Case?*

In a closed case scenario. Hands down the Sapphire wins







The Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X runs about the same in both scenerios.



			
				Does Radeon R9 290X Behave Any Differently In A Closed Case? said:
			
		

> Sapphire's Tri-X OC Radeon R9 290X maintains open-air performance levels even in a closed chassis. More specifically, the board sheds .4% of its average framerate, which is within a margin of error.
> Asus' R9 290X DirectCU II OC fares worse, losing 8% of its performance in the closed case.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 22, 2014)

Xzibit said:


> The Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X runs about the same in both scenerios.


what about noise? how does the gpu temperature affect your user experience anyway? what's the perceived difference between 70°C and 85°C ?

Did they mix quiet mode and performance modes in that test?


----------



## Xzibit (Jan 22, 2014)

W1zzard said:


> what about noise? how does the gpu temperature affect your user experience anyway? what's the perceived difference between 70°C and 85°C ?
> 
> Did they mix quiet mode and performance modes in that test?



It's on page 2 of the link

Closed Chassis

Asus R9 290X DirectCU II OC
84-85 °C
47.3 dB(A)

Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC
70-72 °C
43.8 dB(A)

Gigabyte R9 290X Windforce OC
83 °C
45.8 dB(A)


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 22, 2014)

Then I'm looking forward to seeing how the Tri-X will perform in my review


----------



## nemesis.ie (Jan 22, 2014)

The other thing folks need to consider is that I believe the tri-x is effectively a triple-slot versus the Asus and MSI dual-slot, this can be a large factor if you need to put more than one card in your case or you have a small case or slots closer together etc.


----------



## Steevo (Jan 22, 2014)

nemesis.ie said:


> The other thing folks need to consider is that I believe the tri-x is effectively a triple-slot versus the Asus and MSI dual-slot, this can be a large factor if you need to put more than one card in your case or you have a small case or slots closer together etc.




The issue I take with this idea, is if anyone can afford two 290X's, and the monitor pixel count to necessitate them, they can afford some liquid cooling, which then renders this argument invalid. 

I see it as, I can't buy a Tesla S, I have this $25 gas card I need to use......or I can't but a Ferrari, my coffee cup doesn't fit.


----------



## charkoth (Jan 22, 2014)

I received my Asus R9 290X Directcu ii OC last night. (got it from BLT for $599, I too am fed up with newegg)

I replaced two Sapphire 6970 2GB reference cards in crossfire with this card any have noticed dramatic improvements in framerate despite cutting my total GPUs in half.

I seriously don't understand people complaining about the noise or even basing their decision on it. I set this card to 70% Fan speed while playing Far Cry 3 on Ultra/max every setting on my 2560X1600 monitor last night. I could barely hear the fan from the card inside my case and it is sitting 2-3 feet away from my head. Compared to two reference 6970s this card is whisper quiet. I can barely make out the sound of the fans over the rest of my case fans (Antec 1200 case). Even at 100% it is far from what I'd consider annoying. 

It is worth noting that the card during several hours of play held steady at 70-71C (which is on par with that my 6970s ran at). The clock rate never once throttled below 1050.  People who are talking about all of the heat/noise etc. of these cards are just nitpicking. Over the past 2 years overall power consumption per pixel of relative performance has dropped not increased. Average noise has dropped significantly over the past couple of years as well. It is also worth noting that this card carries a 3 year warranty compared to a 2-year warranty of the Sapphire Tri-X. I don't deny that the Tri-X may have a more powerful cooler, but this cooler is pretty damn quiet and does the job.

Anyways this is my first post on this site, I just wanted to post from the perspective of a typically gamer who has the card and isn't a professional reviewer or over-clocker.


----------



## charkoth (Jan 22, 2014)

Steevo said:


> The issue I take with this idea, is if anyone can afford two 290X's, and the monitor pixel count to necessitate them, they can afford some liquid cooling, which then renders this argument invalid.
> 
> I see it as, I can't buy a Tesla S, I have this $25 gas card I need to use......or I can't but a Ferrari, my coffee cup doesn't fit.



I don't think your assessment is accurate. I'm planning on purchasing a second Asus R9 290X directcu ii as soon as the new Asus 4K 60hz monitor becomes available (provided it has good reviews) at the end of this quarter. I've never water cooled any of my gear and there are plenty of people like me who like to purchase hardware that just works out of the box who don't particularly enjoy tweaking every last drop of performance out of it.  I DO like to have bleeding edge hardware which is why I'm willing to make the jump to 4K gaming so soon (much as I made the jump to 2560X1600 gaming).

As we've already established these cards are not the best for overclocking and they are designed to run hot, I don't think the benefits of watercooling them are worth the cost/effort.


----------



## Casecutter (Jan 22, 2014)

buggalugs said:


> It seems the tri-X cooler is a little better than the Asus but either would be good.


That is fairly obvious in several ways.  While both uses 5 heat pipes the Tri-X has shorter more effective runs as they are attached to the fins much sooner, while being a longer overall cooler at least giving the impression of more finned areas of the H-P’s.  The largest H-P of the Tri-X would appear smack over the middle of the die and has very little un-fined area vs. the Asus.  While we can’t tell, it appears Sapphire has almost every bit of 3 H-P running right over the width of die, while Asus has the one (smaller), then hardly the other 2 pipes on the die and they run them long ways.  Sapphire has the die-cast structure cooling the memory and VRM’s, from what I see Asus has a regular heat-sink on the VRM’s, while nothing on the memory chips.  Finally you have 3 fans over what appears to be a greater area of fins.

I see Asus making that cooler design in all appearances as far back as the GTX780 (6/2013), now turning around and having work with Hawaii, I don’t see as an optimized solution for Hawaii.  Personally I see Asus unit as mediocre, not any great solution on either brand.


----------



## yueh (Jan 22, 2014)

(I know that I'm linking a lot of stuff from Wikipedia, but it comes handy as a starting point to people who wants to know more about the stuff talked about)



W1zzard said:


> Science agrees that for silicon higher temperature = shorter lifespan, but I haven't seen any significant cases of GPUs randomly dying after a certain time due to high heat. You'd see a gaussian distribution of such cases, which would quickly draw everyone's attention.



The distribution I think you are referring to is this one. When microchips are made, one of the lasts steps before testing them at the wafer I think (I cannot remember the exact step right now, sorry), they are introduced in a furnace at a high (high for humans but low to the processes of making a microchip -impurities annealing, etc) temperature (I think it was around 150ºC) in order to age the chips. By this step, most of the chips that are prone to early failure, they fail. Then the exponential fall down you see at the beginning, is displaced to the left; so the chips that they sell us are a little bit 'old' but the manufacturer will assure you that the chips will have a low failure rate (maybe 5% or 2% of a batch? -sorry I cannot provide more data).



W1zzard said:


> Usually the product becomes obsolete first (which happens in just a few years).



This is called programmed obsolescence, which began in electronics maybe around 1990-1995? (more info on this video with Annie Leonard -the others I know are in Spanish, sorry for not to linking them). This is related to economies of scale, value engineering, etc. Hence, I somehow comprehend that this is engineered towards sub 100-150$ GPUs (~less than 100-120€) but if you pay, lets say, like two-three steps of 20-30% of the best performance/price product, then you are paying a premium for obtaining the high tech (you are on the right point of an exponential curve of price on the horizontal axis and performance on the vertical axis). So, for this niche which is spending +350-400$ (+350-400€), you could expect two things: they are rich and prone to update with your high tier products (maybe 20% of the total) and the rest (80%) they are buying this relying on "price / durability". Then, this last sector is eager to expend a 'little fortune' on a premium product desiring that this product will last longer (in FPS -performance wise- and reliability), and will hold to it for 4-5 years (of a 2 year standard in Europe at least guarantee for any electronics). As for my personal experience I had a faulty Asus 4850 (due to the chip and a compact block of pre-applied thermal paste), then a replacement with some whining at the coils of the VRMs, then another replacement which was also an Asus 5770 (with some whining too) and after failing it, I'm settling on a XFX 5770 with an aftermarket cooler (and yes, I know what I am doing and I am careful doing it). The 4850 was back then ~200€ (1GB version) so it was a top-notch product and I was then thinking over the reviews and "price /durability /performance" curve, but I definitely had bad luck. Now with more info and knowledge, I am eager to pull the trigger for a 350-400€ GPU but also based on the temperatures of it to at least avoid a 2 year but less than 1 year (24/7) used product. This is why I love so much the reviews that look "under the hood": GPU, VRMs (quality and number), etc.



W1zzard said:


> Also thermal expansion of solder joints leads to damage on the PCB itself first. Have you seen any scientific research on the topic of silicon lifespan vs temperature (on real shipping products)?



This is why there are some techniques that apply heat to the chip again in an attempt to resolder the balls again (due to thermal expansion-contraction) to make that contact again, or just apply cold with an air can (P·V = n·R·T, if you pull out too much air out the can, the air remaining will drastically go down its temperature)... or apply heat to desolder the chip, clean the soldering material from the PCB and chip and then, put a new mask of balls to resolder it. This is why I should recommend to GPU team to include in the reviews some data about other temperatures among the PCB, the back of it, VRMs etc (yes, I know it will cost money to find out and buy a reasonable IR thermo-probe maybe, but I think that definitely you will pay it off); and why I am so careful with reviews and temperatures of the whole GPU (not only the chip itself).

On the second point, I'm making my dissertation with the Electronics Department of the Technical University of Madrid. They have several papers + publications with a broad knowledge about aging (in fact, a colleague is making a sensor to detect aging on-chip and provide counter measures) + bast knowledge in other areas (i.e, quantification in which I am working on with CUDA). Right know, I cannot provide those papers as it is not my main area of knowledge, but if you have an IEEE account or maybe a Research Gate account, you could easily access to them. Anyhow, I will ask about them. Do you want to learn about general lifespan vs temperature or more focused on aging and use of the device?



W1zzard said:


> I think you mean power gating, which has been used extensively over the last few years. Moderns GPUs reduce clock and voltage whenever they can, but as far as I know they do not randomly shut off shaders when full performance is needed. When idling, they shut off almost everything, even their 2D rendering acceleration units, by detecting whether the displayed image is static or not.



Yes and no  Yes because it is true that power gating is used widely among microchips (not only GPUs, think about the states of a CPU -RISC, CISC, whatever), but no because I am not stating the randomness of waking / sleeping them (just based on a plan and power states in order to reduce the power drawn by the microchip -which maybe it would be not efficient if not designed carefully) but the fact that you cannot power all the transistors / blocks / whatever at the same time due to the power phases and the power density. The more you shrink a process, the more stuff you could put into that 'box'. At the same time, the faster you would like to work for a transistor, the more voltage you have to apply on it (as long as this voltage is between some limits), and the more you shrink, another challenges appear as you scale down the processes of making a chip and making it work properly. Think on how to power, i.e, 1000 transistors of 50nm of gate length (using basic maths, at least (50x10)^2 nm^2 area, which is far more due to other several facts as they form a block or a logic cell in the chip). Then scale this with parallelization techniques in pipelines and stages of the data process, and you will have billions of transistors. Have you ever wondered how to power up this whole thing? There arguments were given by a professor that explained the basics of the power draw by a chip and by other professor which subject was about growing a transistor from a Si wafer. Sorry I cannot provide more evidence on this or the name in English; I'll try to ask about it too.

Because of all this points (yeah, the word you are thinking is stuff  ), I wonder how AMD and specially Asus manages to cope with the same performance (FPS) at different temperatures, with more or less the same (~5W difference) power drawn. To be honest, I was thinking more of a ~20W difference + the fact of GPU throttling on AMD design.

PS: thanks for reading W1zzard! (and anyone interested in the topic  ). Everyday we learn something new


----------



## Steevo (Jan 22, 2014)

charkoth said:


> I don't think your assessment is accurate. I'm planning on purchasing a second Asus R9 290X directcu ii as soon as the new Asus 4K 60hz monitor becomes available (provided it has good reviews) at the end of this quarter. I've never water cooled any of my gear and there are plenty of people like me who like to purchase hardware that just works out of the box who don't particularly enjoy tweaking every last drop of performance out of it.  I DO like to have bleeding edge hardware which is why I'm willing to make the jump to 4K gaming so soon (much as I made the jump to 2560X1600 gaming).
> 
> As we've already established these cards are not the best for overclocking and they are designed to run hot, I don't think the benefits of watercooling them are worth the cost/effort.




After watercooling I will never go back to air. Numerous tests have shown the effect of watercooling a stock card is well worth the efforts, 1.2Ghz or close to with reasonable temps.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/12/10/water-cooling-amd-s-radeon-r9-290x/2

For the cost of the cooling solution on two non OEM cards you are close to the cost of a loop that will outperform the air option on every metric presented.


----------



## yueh (Jan 22, 2014)

W1zzard said:


> You don't dump x°C of heat into the case. All power the card consumes is turned into heat which is dissipated into the case. So for a constant power draw, no matter the temperature, the same energy is deposited into the case.



On separate with the other discussion, this is not correct at all (sorry if I say any arguments you already know or if I missunderstood the argument given). Switching activity of the transistors is related to the heat generated at any chip using CMOS or MOSFET technology (wish I had V-I models at hand explaining the "resistance" effect caused on the switching activity going 0 to 1 or 1 to 0). This heat is transferred to the package (image1) and then the package transfers this heat to the ambient or to a heatsink. Hence, Intel suggest to orientate the heatpipes in the direction of the die of the chip to achieve an efficient transfer in heat (+1 to the discussion about 5 heatpipes only touching 3 to the metal package). Then the fans push and/or pull air throw the fins /whatever surface the heat is transferred to, to exchange the heat with the air by a physic law I cannot remember the name right now in English (the one that states that if there are two corpses with temperature A and B close to each other, they will tend to have a final temperature of (A+B)/2). 

So, the power drawn by card is not the same as the power transformed into heat due to the resistance effect, losses on the transistor (current leackeage or I_leackage), etc: it depends on the design, use, etc of the chip. Then for a power transferred to the heatsink, yes, a constant heat is transferred to the air of the case; provided that the heatsink will not 'saturate'. If you have a heatsink + fan capable of transferring to air 40W of heat per second and the chip produces "35W of heat" per second (equation power = energy/time), the temperature of the chip will remain somehow constant and the heatsink will somehow not 'saturate' (there are some other facts involved such as the coefficient of transferring heat throw the chip to the package and the package to the chip -which could be viewed as a "resistance" to transfer the heat. If you want to know more about this, I can scan the equations, theory, etc  ). On the other hand, if your chip produces more heat than the heatsink is able to transfer to the air, then your heatsink will only transfer its maximum => the temperature on the chip will arise.

Hope to have been helpful on the matter  (and sorry for any misspelled words as English is not my mother tongue)

Greetings,

Javier


----------



## yueh (Jan 22, 2014)

Steevo said:


> The issue I take with this idea, is if anyone can afford two 290X's, and the monitor pixel count to necessitate them, they can afford some liquid cooling, which then renders this argument invalid.
> 
> I see it as, I can't buy a Tesla S, I have this $25 gas card I need to use......or I can't but a Ferrari, my coffee cup doesn't fit.



Maybe there is a niche of people who had bad experiences with water cooling kits or are aware of issues related to leaking:

- pros of watercooling: more ability to cool (think of the radiator of a car as an example or the one your fridge have)
- cons of watercooling: more parts involved, more maintenance to do and risk of leackage which will maybe, cause an overall failure on the system

On the other hand, the traditional air-cooling:

- cons: it is not as capable of cooling as watercooling
- pros: less parts involved, less maintenance then, if the fan stops, the overheat protections of the chip will -or is expected to- shut down the computer /cause the system to freeze / whatever to protect the component involved from high temperatures (+heat => + voltage needed to apply to the chip => +heat generated at the same activity level of the chip => + heat)

So, what is suitable? I tend to think that for each work there is a tool to do it. I agree with you that if you have the money, probably you will think on water/liquid cooling because you will have to move that excessive amount of heat from the GPUs to elsewhere. On the other hand, they could put an Artic Extreme air cooled solution with its pros/cons or they could put a closed loop.

Summing up, is not directly related to the money you have but the technology you are confident with or the person that you hire to maintain your computer (in this last example, yes, money talks).

Greetings,

Javier


----------



## yueh (Jan 22, 2014)

Casecutter said:


> stuff



It's all about transferring heat. On the design you posted, probably that Cu-plate attached to the heatpipes maximizes the heat transferred by: chip -> package -> plate -> heatpipes -> fins -> air through fins. We cannot tell a priori which will be better if we don't have data about the heat transfer coefficients of each stage of the process described before for transferring heat. While I agree that if you wish to put more heatpipes you have to arise the surface touching them to transfer to the heatpipes the heat over the surface (like Noctua designs), maybe only 3 'big' heatpipes will have a better overall transfer coefficient (and maybe direct contact heatpipes of high quality are better than a high quality plate transferring heat to heatpipes).... so then the Asus design will be good enough to cool down the heat produced. Wish I could have more info about it. If you could provide any links / books / reading about the subject, it will be much appreciated  Thanks in advance!!

Greetings,

Javier

PS: about fins, fans and number of fans, it is all related to the number of fins, the thickness of each fin, the separation between fins and the pressure/airflow of each fan. Think about why some fans work better on some radiators (watercooling) while the same fans, don't work so great on other radiatiors.


----------



## nemesis.ie (Jan 22, 2014)

Steevo said:


> The issue I take with this idea, is if anyone can afford two 290X's, and the monitor pixel count to necessitate them, they can afford some liquid cooling, which then renders this argument invalid.
> 
> I see it as, I can't buy a Tesla S, I have this $25 gas card I need to use......or I can't but a Ferrari, my coffee cup doesn't fit.



True, but there is also the hassle factor of maybe ripping your machine apart or buying a case that will take the extra radiator(s). In my case I am putting an accelero hybrid on the reference card and then leaving the MSI with the air cooling which keeps things tidy and I have room to put the radiator on the exhaust of the case (the top is filled with a Swiftech H320 to keep the FX-8350 under control). 

I really do agree with you when it comes to LCS versus a triple slot cooler though as the LCS will leave more space.


----------



## buildzoid (Jan 22, 2014)

This card is underwhelming compared to my pair of Windforce cards. For one thing that VRM is seriously lacking in the area of output ripple suppressing capacitance so I wasn't that surprised when it only hit 1090mhz. Also I think the Elpida ICs on some of the R9 290(X)s are actually speced at 1500mhz because my do 1650mhz(that's where my HD7970's Elpidas got to) without voltage tweaking which is way beyond what you would expect from 1250mhz Elpida ICs.
BTW about temperature and OCing. 5C° temperature difference can easily make the difference between a stable and unstable OC I know this because my HD7970 and now my R9 290X both display the same phenomenon. If the temperature stays under 80C° I can get 1210mhz on the R9 290X but once it goes over I start getting artefacts and above 85C° the screen is more artefacts than actual image. Also a 10C° difference can lower power consumption by around 4%. That comes from my own testing which I plan to extend into sub zero territory later this year.


----------



## Steevo (Jan 22, 2014)

yueh said:


> Maybe there is a niche of people who had bad experiences with water cooling kits or are aware of issues related to leaking:
> 
> - pros of watercooling: more ability to cool (think of the radiator of a car as an example or the one your fridge have)
> - cons of watercooling: more parts involved, more maintenance to do and risk of leackage which will maybe, cause an overall failure on the system
> ...


The only extra moving parts in the liquid cooling system is the pump and impeller. The new coolants aren't conductive so no chance of shorting if you spring a leak, which if its done right is almost impossible. If your pump dies there is enough thermal mass in water to protect the components as well as a heatsink, and if the fans die there is enough thermal mass to protect the components as well as a significantly larger heatsink than you could install.

Right now a stock version of the 290X can be had for $569 that also comes with a free hard drive, the cheapest of these with aftermarket cooling is $699. The $130 per card will buy a complete coverage block for $108 each, a good pump and tubing. Your expense is now the cost of a few hours of time, coolant, and whichever radiator you want. Lets say $80 more for two liquid cooled cards than aftermarket cooled.
Noise should be around 35Db with decent fans, temps around 40-45C, and core clocks at 1.2Ghz plus or minus a 100Mhz

I was unaware anyone on these forums paid someone else to maintain their computer. For the most part we are all enthusiasts with little to no fear of the DIY approach to many things.


----------



## yueh (Jan 22, 2014)

Steevo said:


> The only extra moving parts in the liquid cooling system is the pump and impeller. The new coolants aren't conductive so no chance of shorting if you spring a leak, which if its done right is almost impossible.



Could you send me some links with this new non-conductive fluids, please? Thanks  ! Also, as far as I've read, there are some inks that people put on the liquid that could cause (I cannot remember the word in English at the moment) "bad" effects on copper or silver. Apart from the eye-candy, I think they are useful to physically see that your pump is doing its work right, as you can see clearly the liquid going through the fins of the block of the CPU / GPU / whatever. What do you think about it? Could you provide more info? Thanks 



Steevo said:


> If your pump dies there is enough thermal mass in water to protect the components as well as a heatsink, and if the fans die there is enough thermal mass to protect the components as well as a significantly larger heatsink than you could install.



Hm...  water transfers heat better than air, so if you heat one spot of the total water, the heat will tend to spread to the rest of the volume. I think that this is applicable as well to the rest of liquids, but I'm not so sure about it (viscosity maybe plays an important role on this? other properties of the liquid?). If you could provide more info about this, it will be much appreciated 



Steevo said:


> Right now a stock version of the 290X can be had for $569 that also comes with a free hard drive, the cheapest of these with aftermarket cooling is $699.



In Spain the reference 290X, i.e, 475€ (today 1$ = 0,74€ => 569$ = 421€ + an hdd you say? wow  -supposing the taxes for importing won't be high). Windforce is at 509€ (688$) and Sapphire Tri-X 519€ (701$). I don't know what will be the prices in other countries and with other money  .



Steevo said:


> The $140 per card will buy a complete coverage block for $108 each, a good pump and tubing. Your expense is now the cost of a few hours of time, coolant, and whichever radiator you want. Lets say $80 more for two liquid cooled cards than aftermarket cooled.
> Noise should be around 35Db with decent fans, temps around 40-45C, and core clocks at 1.2Ghz plus or minus a 100Mhz
> 
> I was unaware anyone on these forums paid someone else to maintain their computer. For the most part we are all enthusiasts with little to no fear of the DIY approach to many things.



Some months ago I looked over a 240 rad + tubing, etc and it was pretty much expensive (> 200€) (link of overclockers UK), in which you have to add the waterblock (at least +100-120€, that is more or less the premium price EVGA charges you for a non water and a waterblocked high-end GPU -I cannot find any waterblocks around Europe for the R9 290X). If you add the fans like the Schyte, Silverstone Penetrators, Noctuas or the new ones from Corsair (around 15-22€ each), we are talking about a ~400€ price tag to custom watercool your CPU + GPU with a 240 rad (like ~25-50€ more expensive than the price tag of a GTX770 4GB or R9 290 4GB).

I am a lover of the concept DYI, mainly because of the process of tinkering and learning; but maybe people that read the forum hasn't got so much money, or have the time to, etc, and they ask a friend to do it or just buy a boutique Pc (hence pay someone to build it and if you live near to the shop, to maintain it as I think it is the case of some boutique Pc business in USA). Take into account that you'll have to refill the loop (how many people put a service port at its loop?) or just change the entire coolant (maybe every 2 years for a 50hr per week usage?), and there are sometimes that you just don't feel confident to do it (because you don't feel secure playing what you see as a risk on expensive hardware, with the support of a video, tools and a manual). Anyhow, we tend to grow old and have less time to take care about this stuff and tend to follow the KISS principle. If I would have a kid or two kids and I would have to choose between tinkering or playing with them, probably I'll pay an extra for peace of mind. Hence, water or air cooling is more an act of balance between the performance you need and the actual performance you want: I want to play all maxed out with 60 FPS, but maybe I have little time (10hr/week) to play with the Pc, so probably I will be fine with 30-35 FPS or less eye-candy. I want to overclock (just for fun and/or FPS) and have my GPUs cool, so maybe you will be fine (need) with a non K quad-core Intel CPU and a GTX770 /R9 280X (with the trade-offs between nvidia and AMD of price/heat/noise/power consumption at this actual generation). By the way, when studying at the career different methods of cooling the chips, the liquid cooling was used when you are trying to manage high thermal loads (with its pros and cons); and before being told this and after being told, i.e by maintaining my car I could check this.

About noise, it depends on the ratio between the static pressure needed from the radiator to work properly + airflow (then, albeit a silent motor from the fan can cause noise from the turbulence of air passing through the radiator), supposing you pick a quiet pump.


----------



## charkoth (Jan 22, 2014)

I disagree Steevo. I picked up my card for $599 shipped, $30 above reference which is MSRP.  

I consider myself an enthusiast but I think Yueh hit on all the right points. I for one don't want to have to deal with all the downsides of water cooling, primary of which is a greater investment in time.

You're also talking about a financial investment that puts these cards well above GTX 780 Ti price range. The Asus Card itself can be further overclocked with which makes the gap between the water cooled R9 290X and the Directcu ii version even smaller. 

When I step into 4K gaming it doesn't have to be utilizing a water cooled solution. Two of these cards will be more than adequate to do so and back to the point mentioned: A Tri-X card will limit your options due to the 3-slot design of the card.


----------



## Steevo (Jan 23, 2014)

yueh said:


> Could you send me some links with this new non-conductive fluids, please? Thanks  ! Also, as far as I've read, there are some inks that people put on the liquid that could cause (I cannot remember the word in English at the moment) "bad" effects on copper or silver. Apart from the eye-candy, I think they are useful to physically see that your pump is doing its work right, as you can see clearly the liquid going through the fins of the block of the CPU / GPU / whatever. What do you think about it? Could you provide more info? Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> ...




http://www.xoxide.com/primoice-nonconductive-fluid-clear.html

http://www.xoxide.com/xspc-raystorm750rs360watercoolingkit.html kit for $158


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jan 23, 2014)

Another problem the Tri-X card has is its length, it's over an inch longer than the DirectCU version, I measured my case (HAF XB) and the card wouldn't fit unless I removed the 240mm rad located in the front grill, I can't afford that.

Can anyone confirm the 290x DirectCU II cooler has a plate that cools the ram modules like the 780 version? 

I would really appreciate if anyone can clear that doubt


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jan 24, 2014)

buildzoid said:


> This card is underwhelming compared to my pair of Windforce cards. For one thing that VRM is seriously lacking in the area of output ripple suppressing capacitance so I wasn't that surprised when it only hit 1090mhz. Also I think the Elpida ICs on some of the R9 290(X)s are actually speced at 1500mhz because my do 1650mhz(that's where my HD7970's Elpidas got to) without voltage tweaking which is way beyond what you would expect from 1250mhz Elpida ICs.
> BTW about temperature and OCing. 5C° temperature difference can easily make the difference between a stable and unstable OC I know this because my HD7970 and now my R9 290X both display the same phenomenon. If the temperature stays under 80C° I can get 1210mhz on the R9 290X but once it goes over I start getting artefacts and above 85C° the screen is more artefacts than actual image. Also a 10C° difference can lower power consumption by around 4%. That comes from my own testing which I plan to extend into sub zero territory later this year.



Other websites found higher overclocks:



> We found a small tweak that will bring your boost frequency towards almost 1175 MHz stable. We applied:
> 
> 
> Power Target 150%
> ...



http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_radeon_r9_290x_directcuii_oc_review,28.html



> For the ASUS R9 290X DirectCU II OC we managed to overclock the video card to 1115MHz with a 1.35v setting and 5.67GHz memory. Remember, the video card is already overclocked at 1050MHz versus 1000MHz on a reference card.
> 
> The reference cooler and reference cards are notorious for throttling performance. We experience no throttling what-so-ever on the ASUS R9 290X DC2 OC video card while overclocking. This means we saw a consistent 1115MHz clock speed in every game.



http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...ctcu_ii_oc_overclocking_review/7#.UuH44hDTmUk



> As you can see above, even with a few minor modifications to the core voltage and Power Limit, *the core easily hit nearly 1.2GHz while the memory evened out at 6016MHz.* Both of these represent vast improvements over what was achievable with the reference card. The best part about this is there’s even more room there since fan speeds were at 60% (which was still surprisingly quiet). And yes, there's still more in the tank.



http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...94-asus-r9-290x-directcu-ii-oc-review-11.html

Every card is different, it seems other people had better luck extracting more juice from this card, this time W1zzard didn't win the silicon lottery apparently...


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 24, 2014)

15th Warlock said:


> Other websites found higher overclocks:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What Warlock said.  Every card is different, some will clock well, others wont. 



charkoth said:


> When I step into 4K gaming .....Two of these cards will be more than adequate to do so .......



Speak up!  I can't hear you above the noise of (your future) two non blower fans dumping lots of heat into a case and making the inevitable disproportionate rise in acoustical noise to accommodate the extra heat.


----------



## charkoth (Jan 24, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> What Warlock said.  Every card is different, some will clock well, others wont.
> 
> 
> 
> Speak up!  I can't hear you above the noise of (your future) two non blower fans dumping lots of heat into a case and making the inevitable disproportionate rise in acoustical noise to accommodate the extra heat.



As I said I replaced two 6970 cards in crossfire that produced both more heat and more noise than this card individually. The addition of a second card (and it's added heat) will still be far quieter than those two 6970 reference cards. My case is an Antec 1200 and it is pretty efficient at dumping air from inside the case to the outside.

To be honest I've never really understood complaints from people of case noise, perhaps it is a matter of accoustics? I don't get it. My computer sits on the carpet by my feet under my desk so I know the carpet dampens the sound somewhat. Maybe the people complaining of loud cards have hardwood flooring or something?


----------



## west7 (Jan 24, 2014)

great review


----------



## HTC (Jan 25, 2014)

charkoth said:


> As I said I replaced two 6970 cards in crossfire that produced both more heat and more noise than this card individually. The addition of a second card (and it's added heat) will still be far quieter than those two 6970 reference cards. My case is an Antec 1200 and it is pretty efficient at dumping air from inside the case to the outside.
> 
> To be honest I've never really understood complaints from people of case noise, perhaps it is a matter of accoustics? I don't get it. *My computer sits on the carpet by my feet under my desk so I know the carpet dampens the sound somewhat. Maybe the people complaining of loud cards have hardwood flooring or something?*



That's a possibility!

Acoustics is really in the ear of the listener so every person experiences sound differently.


----------



## nemesis.ie (Jan 25, 2014)

I built an APU machine with my "old" 7970 for someone recently in a CM Silencio case and it had never seemed so quiet under their desk - much noisier in my HAF-X (which is a very open design and sits higher on the carpet with the wheels on it). I'm sure it would be even louder (and the room in general) on hard flooring.

It's a bit like designing a good room for audio, soft furnishing/panels/carpet to absorb unwanted noise/reflections etc. 

The "trick" of course is doing that with the PC and still keeping effective heat dissipation. I'm mining on my 290x when not gaming, lowers the gas bill during the winter months (and of course increases the electricity one). "Summer" (Ireland) will be another matter.


----------



## Recus (Jan 26, 2014)

XFX 290 Black Edition Double Disappointing is slower than reference GTX 780.


----------



## charkoth (Jan 26, 2014)

Figured I should mention that I've OC'ed my card to 1100GPU, 1300 GPU Voltage, 5748 Memory Clock and 125 Power Target. I set the fan to 75% as well and it is barely audible. It ran 6 hours of Far Cry 3 rock stead and my highest Temp was 86C, usually sitting at 85C.

I tried the settings posted in the Hardwarecanucks review and I get artifacting while in game. I'll keep tweaking the numbers and see what I can come up with but I think I'm pretty close to maximum on air.


----------



## zzzaac (Jan 28, 2014)

I've got the MSI 290 Gaming, and its both quiet and the card stays cool, not to mention it came with Hynix memory.

Highly recommend MSI Gaming for both the 290 and the X

You also get 3 years warranty


----------



## Relayer (Jan 28, 2014)

W1zzard said:


> I agree, it's not ideal. Heat will migrate sideways though and into the pipes on the sides.


Contact on those side pipes is awful though. They should at least sweat some solder in there to help out.


----------



## Relayer (Jan 28, 2014)

FreedomEclipse said:


> *Id hate to have 94'c of heat dumped inside my case...* I dont think no amount of airflow will be able to keep the inside of your case fairly cool let alone the nightmare of it when it comes to crossfire unless you live in the north pole or have the AC chill your room to 8-10'c (if thats even possible) - watercooling them is a must.
> 
> for single cards though, id rather have a reference cooler so the heat gets dumped outside of the case.



That's not how it works. It doesn't matter if the chip is running 95°C or 65°C. If it's using the same amount of power, it's dumping the same amount of heat into your case. It's just that the cooler is more efficiently removing it from the chip in the 2nd case.


----------



## Steevo (Jan 28, 2014)

Recus said:


> XFX 290 Black Edition Double Disappointing is slower than reference GTX 780.


Its also **supposed** to be priced at $399. Its just unfortunate for gamers that its way better at making money mining with complex math, but its nice you came in to thread crap.


----------



## boogerlad (Jan 30, 2014)

Even though this card draws more power at its maximum, is it because it has higher sustained core speeds than the reference version?


----------



## adulaamin (Feb 2, 2014)

Great review as always. Is there any chance you might review the MSI R9 290X Gaming OC card? I only have the Gaming and Tri-X cards to choose from and you'll be reviewing the Tri-X soon so I'm hoping you get to review the Gaming card also.


----------



## W1zzard (Feb 2, 2014)

The MSI 290X Gaming review is almost finished, and the Sapphire Tri-X sample should be arriving early next week


----------



## adulaamin (Feb 3, 2014)

W1zzard said:


> The MSI 290X Gaming review is almost finished, and the Sapphire Tri-X sample should be arriving early next week



Can't wait!


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Feb 3, 2014)

adulaamin said:


> Can't wait!


off topic, dinnu ka baguio lakay ^_^


----------



## RejZoR (Feb 24, 2014)

Why is it so hard to chuck in models from last series so you know if it even makes sense to upgrade? I have a HD7950 and with this test, it tells me absolutelly nothing. Just bunch of fancy numbers. Like anyone with GF 780Ti is going to buy a R9 290X. Pointless. It's those with one generation or two back who are most interested in performance of new series.


----------



## W1zzard (Feb 24, 2014)

hd 7950 is included in all summaries. obviously there needs to be some kind of cutoff, otherwise we'd have 35 cards in each graph


----------

