# More Radeon R9 390X Specs Leak: Close to 70% Faster than R9 290X



## btarunr (Mar 16, 2015)

Earlier today, AMD reportedly showed its industry partners (likely add-in board partners) a presentation, which was leaked to the web as photographs, and look reasonably legitimate, at first glance. If these numbers of AMD's upcoming flagship product, the Radeon R9 390X WCE (water-cooled edition) hold up, then it could spell trouble for NVIDIA and its GeForce GTX TITAN X. To begin with, the slides confirm that the R9 390X will feature 4,096 stream processors, based on a more refined version of Graphics CoreNext architecture. The core ticks at speeds of up to 1050 MHz. The R9 390X could sell in two variants, an air-cooled one with tamed speeds, and a WCE (water-cooled edition) variant, which comes with an AIO liquid-cooling solution, which lets it throw everything else out of the window in psychotic and murderous pursuit of performance.

It's the memory, where AMD appears to be an early adopter (as its HD 4870 was the first to run the faster GDDR5). The R9 390X features a 4096-bit wide HBM memory bus, holding up to 8 GB of memory. The memory is clocked at 1.25 GHz. The actual memory bandwidth will yet end up much higher than the 5.00 GHz 512-bit GDDR5 on the R9 290X. Power connectors will be the same combination as the previous generation (6-pin + 8-pin). What does this all boil down to? A claimed single-precision floating point performance figure of 8.6 TFLOP/s. Wonder how NVIDIA's GM200 compares to that. AMD claims that the R9 390X will be 50-60% faster than the R9 290X, and we're talking about benchmarks such as Battlefield 4 and FarCry 4. The expectations on NVIDIA's upcoming product are only bound to get higher.



 

 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 16, 2015)

my $200 newegg gift card is ready. and sell my 290x hopefully for 150 or 200, so 300 outta pocket... not bad if the price of $700 is rumored true.


----------



## erocker (Mar 16, 2015)

I'll be quite disappointed if the pricing is true.  I mean, if the PC market is stagnant (which it is), throwing a 200 dollar markup on their top tier cards is probably not the way to go.

Also, with the factory cooling it seems like there will be a variant with the liquid cooling, not all of them.


----------



## GhostRyder (Mar 16, 2015)

Well lets hope these turn out to be true, I would love to see what an 8gb water-cooled variant of this card is capable of!



erocker said:


> I'll be quite disappointed if the pricing is true.  I mean, if the PC market is stagnant (which it is), throwing a 200 dollar markup on their top tier cards is probably not the way to go.
> Also, with the factory cooling it seems like there will be a variant with the liquid cooling, not all of them.


Indeed, I don't want to see a $700 dollar price point.


----------



## NC37 (Mar 16, 2015)

Been noticing a lot of GPUs relisting themselves as DX12 from 11.2 or 11.1. Now this is listing something else. Is it just assumed that DX11.1 or 2 are automatically DX12 chips?

Price is high, but I only hope they'll drop all the prices to clear out old inventory. Maybe force nVidia to drop as well.


----------



## 荷兰大母猪 (Mar 16, 2015)

Looks much more powerful than Titan X


----------



## 64K (Mar 16, 2015)

" WCE (water-cooled edition) variant, which comes with an AIO liquid-cooling solution, which lets it throw everything else out of the window in psychotic and murderous pursuit of performance."

That's what I want to hear! Flagship GPUs should be like this.


----------



## wiak (Mar 16, 2015)

i bet the water cooler edition is a special one, that cost much, and has binned chips
FYI: HBM is faster than GDDR5

here is a bunch of HBM presentations
http://www.amd.com/Documents/TFE2011_006HYN.pdf
http://www.cs.utah.edu/thememoryforum/mike.pdf (a bit ironic)

a 4096-bit HBM can vary on bandwidth depending on memory freq so 
without futher ado i give to you this eerm nvidia presentation


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 16, 2015)

Wow, you guys are whinging about the alleged $700 price point, but that is $1,000 (roughly) when converted to our currency, and I can't see the base 390X selling for less than $1,200 here, the Liquid cooled version will most likely be around $1,500 once converted to Aussie dollars.
The cheapest new 290X is still $500 here.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 16, 2015)




----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 16, 2015)

If I can get a single gpu that performs at 1.6x the speed of a 290X (or 1.5X GTX 980) and only consumes 250-300W, I'll be quite happy.  It won't touch my 780ti sli performance but at 8Gb (or 12GB) memory it'll fly at 1440p ultra settings.  
Now, what really matters to me is that the after market water blocks and component make up allow for noise free (and I mean coil whine) gaming.


----------



## lukesky (Mar 16, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> If I can get a single gpu that performs at 1.6x the speed of a 290X (or 1.5X GTX 980) and only consumes 250-300W, I'll be quite happy.  It won't touch my 780ti sli performance but at 8Gb (or 12GB) memory it'll fly at 1440p ultra settings.
> Now, what really matters to me is that the after market water blocks and component make up allow for noise free (and I mean coil whine) gaming.


Reference AMD cards 99% of time do not have coil whine. Coil whine is a lot more prevalent in aftermarket PCB like the GTX 970s, Radeon 7950s.


----------



## Cheeseball (Mar 16, 2015)

lukesky said:


> Reference AMD cards 99% of time do not have coil whine. Coil whine is a lot more prevalent in aftermarket PCB like the GTX 970s, Radeon 7950s.



I can attest to this. My HD 7970 with a custom PCB (PowerColor) exhibits coil-whine but my other HD 7970 with the reference PCB (taken from a Dell) does not. Both are overclocked at 1,200 MHz core.

The 7870 XT (Tahiti LE) has a stock HD 7950/7970 PCB and does not exhibit coil-whine. I have this overclocked at 1,250 core.


----------



## arbiter (Mar 16, 2015)

荷兰大母猪 said:


> Looks much more powerful than Titan X



can't tell that based on worthless graph's that show Nothing.



the54thvoid said:


> If I can get a single gpu that performs at 1.6x the speed of a 290X (or 1.5X GTX 980) and only consumes 250-300W, I'll be quite happy.  It won't touch my 780ti sli performance but at 8Gb (or 12GB) memory it'll fly at 1440p ultra settings.
> Now, what really matters to me is that the after market water blocks and component make up allow for noise free (and I mean coil whine) gaming.



AMD never posted specs for TDP, tring to post specs of power plugs gives general TDP won't work. If you look at History AMD used on 2x8pin on a 295x2 and that thing draws from 500-600watts.


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 16, 2015)

lukesky said:


> Reference AMD cards 99% of time do not have coil whine. Coil whine is a lot more prevalent in aftermarket PCB like the GTX 970s, Radeon 7950s.



I'd suggest the percentage of cards (all brands) that have coil whine is way higher than 1%.  Neither my Titan or 780Ti's have it bad but it's there.  Under water, all noises seem more prevalent.  My 7970's had it.  The powercolor LCS was so bad I RMA'd the first one and the replacement was not much better.  My MSI 7970 had less whine but was still there.
I know  the 970's have had some issues with whine as well.  My point is, a nicely built card minimises coil whine but I assure you, it's far more common than the percentage you're stating, it's just a nuisance to varying degrees to different people.  Both Nvidia cards and AMD cards get it.

Judging by all the pre-leaks, the 390X looks to be the card AMD have sorely needed.  Even if the leaks are lies, it's enough to stop me buying a Titan X until I see the 390X.  But if the 390X with 8Gb (and 2 8pin power connectors) is as much as a 12Gb Titan X, it will be a hard call.


----------



## newtekie1 (Mar 16, 2015)

"Up To 1,050MHz"

That translates to "the card will overheat and throttle just like the 290x, but it will last long enough for benchmarks to finish so the reviews look better".


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 16, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> "Up To 1,050MHz"
> 
> That translates to "the card will overheat and throttle just like the 290x, but it will last long enough for benchmarks to finish so the reviews look better".



I know you jest but given the furore over the thermal throttling of the 290(X), I don't think AMD would cock that up again.  Much like Titan X will have a full 12GB memory, not 11.5GB.


----------



## arbiter (Mar 16, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> "Up To 1,050MHz"
> 
> That translates to "the card will overheat and throttle just like the 290x, but it will last long enough for benchmarks to finish so the reviews look better".



yea if AMD does that again, would be bad for them. Most review sites noticed that and adjusted their benchmarking of the card to heat the card operating temp and results after that were used.



the54thvoid said:


> I know you jest but given the furore over the thermal throttling of the 290(X), I don't think AMD would cock that up again.



If AMD decided to even spend money to making a cooler worth a damn this time instead of throwing a 2 generation old cooler on it again.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Mar 16, 2015)

They really need to stop making graphs like that last one.


----------



## Xzibit (Mar 16, 2015)

Price wise its going to be north of $550 GTX 980 base prices.   A $200 premium will put it into $750.  No word on a 390 so that could be a starting point for a 390 and the 390X & WCE filling up to 1k price tags.

I think it all depends on how aggressive  Nvidia is with Titan X pricing.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Mar 16, 2015)

For some reason, I don't see people b**ching about the price of TITAN-X nearly as much as people b**ch about the price of R9 390X, despite TITAN-X looking noticeably slower [on paper] and costing a LOT more.
Double standards FTW.


----------



## arbiter (Mar 16, 2015)

Vinska said:


> For some reason, I don't see people b**ching about the price of TITAN-X nearly as much as people b**ch about the price of R9 390X, despite TITAN-X looking noticeably slower [on paper] and costing a LOT more.
> Double standards FTW.



Someone said rumored price of 700$ for 390x, if that is price of a 4gb version. the 8gb version probably would be around 900$ mark so you are right about double standard. That is just a guess price wise for 8gb one since memory is New don't know what kinda premium it will add on it, could be even more then that. 290x 4gb vs 8gb cards have 120$ premium and that is using memory that is well supplied.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Mar 16, 2015)

Well, Titan X draws near and AMD flood the interwebz via leaks with 390X details, specs, and pricing. Can't say I'm surprised that the benchmarks are as high as the price.


HumanSmoke said:


> Orchestrated leaks that offer plausible deniability have been SOP for both AMD and Nvidia for years. The problem this time for AMD is a _damned if you do, damned if you don't_ situation. If AMD talk up their unreleased parts too much, people will balk at buying their current line-up if they think the new cards are imminent and AMD has to eat a sizeable write down of inventory. If the company don't provide some kind of spoiler, then consumers will assume that AMD's cards are too late and buy Nvidia. *A reasonable course of action would be leak not only performance but a price that still makes the current lineup attractive*.


$700+ isn't going to deter people from buying the current line-up.


----------



## 64K (Mar 16, 2015)

Vinska said:


> For some reason, I don't see people b**ching about the price of TITAN-X nearly as much as people b**ch about the price of R9 390X, despite TITAN-X looking noticeably slower [on paper] and costing a LOT more.
> Double standards FTW.



I'm sorry Vinska to tell you this but it's because AMD buyers want something for nothing and it's killing AMD. They want a top tier GPU but they don't want to pay for the research and engineering costs that made it possible in the first place.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/stockdetails/fi-126.1.AMD.NAS?symbol=AMD&form=PRFISB

AMD Net Profit Margin % -7.32

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/stockdetails/fi-126.1.NVDA.NAS

Nvidia Net Profit Margin % +12.77

AMD has charged too little for their chips for too long and it may very well bankrupt them if they don't stop it.


----------



## erocker (Mar 16, 2015)

Vinska said:


> For some reason, I don't see people b**ching about the price of TITAN-X nearly as much as people b**ch about the price of R9 390X, despite TITAN-X looking noticeably slower [on paper] and costing a LOT more.
> Double standards FTW.


I hate Nvidia's pricing structure.

I hope that helps.


----------



## arbiter (Mar 16, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> $700+ isn't going to deter people from buying the current line-up.



If that 700$ is price of 4gb card i am pretty sure that will since for that price a 4gb card is kinda pointless.



64K said:


> AMD has charged too little for their chips for too long and it may very well bankrupt them if they don't stop it.



Yea they have been also playing standards game lately claiming stuff should be standard of open source. They want stuff for free cause they can't afford to make it themselves.


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 16, 2015)

Vinska said:


> For some reason, I don't see people b**ching about the price of TITAN-X nearly as much as people b**ch about the price of R9 390X, despite TITAN-X looking noticeably slower [on paper] and costing a LOT more.
> Double standards FTW.



Wtf? Are you serious?
1) I'm not seeing much bitching about price.
2) Head over to most Titan threads for a lesson in price bitchery.

Really, there are no double standards here, if anything, less vocal ranting than Titan threads. Go look. Dont make me go find quotes.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Mar 16, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Really, there are no double standards here, if anything, less vocal ranting than Titan threads. Go look. *Dont make me go find quotes*.


Just listing the threads that are top heavy with Titan-branded pricing would take the best part of a day....and require some serious font size reduction just to fit them all on a page!


----------



## arbiter (Mar 16, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> Just listing the threads that are top heavy with Titan-branded pricing would take the best part of a *Week*....and require some serious font size reduction just to fit them all on a page!



Corrected that for ya.


----------



## Naito (Mar 16, 2015)

There be interesting times ahead, indeed.


----------



## xvi (Mar 16, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> "Up To 1,050MHz" That translates to "the card will overheat and throttle just like the 290x, but it will last long enough for benchmarks to finish so the reviews look better".


If it's available, shouldn't they use it? Yeah, it conveniently makes benchmarks look better and yes, AMD's marketing department will squeeze every last drop of PR they can out of it, but it also gives us as consumers the ability to get more out of our cards via aftermarket cooling instead of having them locked down from the get-go.


----------



## Rahmat Sofyan (Mar 16, 2015)

When this kind of news get into TPU.com newsroom,That's something really interesting...

and maybe true .


----------



## arbiter (Mar 16, 2015)

xvi said:


> If it's available, shouldn't they use it? Yeah, it conveniently makes benchmarks look better and yes, AMD's marketing department will squeeze every last drop of PR they can out of it, but it also gives us as consumers the ability to get more out of our cards via aftermarket cooling instead of having them locked down from the get-go.



IMO that is a cop out, its a way to claim card is faster then what it will really run. Throwing a crap cooler on the card that can't reasonable cool the card. People gave nvidia hell for the 970 fiasco and AMD using that is just as bad yet they get a pass to do it.


----------



## lastcalaveras (Mar 17, 2015)

If the 390x is this quick and the 380x is just a rebrand of the 290x I see a huge gap in the performance line-up.


----------



## Rowsol (Mar 17, 2015)

ZoneDymo said:


> They really need to stop making graphs like that last one.



I know right, so deceptive.


----------



## GhostRyder (Mar 17, 2015)

arbiter said:


> IMO that is a cop out, its a way to claim card is faster then what it will really run. Throwing a crap cooler on the card that can't reasonable cool the card. People gave nvidia hell for the 970 fiasco and AMD using that is just as bad yet they get a pass to do it.


There is a difference, you can replace a cooler but you cannot replace the built in memory structure.



Naito said:


> There be interesting times ahead, indeed.


It sure is going to be something this round that's for sure, biggest jump in performance in awhile.



arbiter said:


> Yea they have been also playing standards game lately claiming stuff should be standard of open source. They want stuff for free cause they can't afford to make it themselves.


Not really, open source means it is more likely to be used than if its closed source.  If you keep something locked up where no one can use it without extreme royalties people are not going to use it...


xvi said:


> If it's available, shouldn't they use it? Yeah, it conveniently makes benchmarks look better and yes, AMD's marketing department will squeeze every last drop of PR they can out of it, but it also gives us as consumers the ability to get more out of our cards via aftermarket cooling instead of having them locked down from the get-go.


Well there was a problem with the way it was listed, however I feel after they patched the cooler performance things evened out to being just fine.  Mine for example are reference OC models and were all able to maintain the clocks under tests.  But whatever, that's in the past so I hope this round we will be fine from the get go.


64K said:


> I'm sorry Vinska to tell you this but it's because AMD buyers want something for nothing and it's killing AMD. They want a top tier GPU but they don't want to pay for the research and engineering costs that made it possible in the first place.
> http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/stockdetails/fi-126.1.AMD.NAS?symbol=AMD&form=PRFISB
> 
> AMD Net Profit Margin % -7.32
> ...


AMD has to earn back the OEMs more than anything.  They already have plenty of performance and show they can compete fine, its more of the problem with less big name OEM's using their parts plus when you include that consumers automatically view the company with less on the shelves as the "off brand company". 

Well, I just am curious now about these 8gb cards and the WC editions...


----------



## Mysteoa (Mar 17, 2015)

ZoneDymo said:


> They really need to stop making graphs like that last one.



For who is deceptive for the one that can't read the Y scale? Nobody is going to buy the card based on that graph. It will only make you a little exited before you see the scale on the graphs.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Mar 17, 2015)

arbiter said:


> Yea they have been also playing standards game lately claiming stuff should be standard of open source. They want stuff for free cause they can't afford to make it themselves.



Keep in mind that
open source != free to write
a vast majority of "serious" open-source code is, in fact, written by paid[1] developers, working on it full-time.
So, making it open source doesn't mean they don't have to pay for it being written. (and AMD does hire quite a few developers to write FOSS code for them)

[1]and paid quite well at it, too.


----------



## AsRock (Mar 17, 2015)

Xzibit said:


> Price wise its going to be north of $550 GTX 980 base prices.   A $200 premium will put it into $750.  No word on a 390 so that could be a starting point for a 390 and the 390X & WCE filling up to 1k price tags.
> 
> I think it all depends on how aggressive  Nvidia is with Titan X pricing.



nVidia aggressive on their top tier card ?, erm extremely surprised if that happened.


----------



## xvi (Mar 17, 2015)

arbiter said:


> IMO that is a cop out, its a way to claim card is faster then what it will really run. Throwing a crap cooler on the card that can't reasonable cool the card. People gave nvidia hell for the 970 fiasco and AMD using that is just as bad yet they get a pass to do it.


I agree that it skews benchmarks higher than what real-world would be and that's definitely not ideal, but there are cases where people will see those boost clocks most of the time even in real-world on inexpensive stock coolers (read: not the Bahamas).
The alternative here is to make the card run slow all the time even if the conditions are perfect for 24/7 boost clock speeds.

The solution is a practice that I believe most review websites do follow, which is to simply play through a game and record clock speeds and temps over time. A good review would test real-world clock speeds even after the card has heated up.


lastcalaveras said:


> If the 390x is this quick and the 380x is just a rebrand of the 290x I see a huge gap in the performance line-up.


Don't forget the 390 non-X. We don't have specs for that yet. Even then, I don't think a performance gap this big isn't unheard of, is it?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Mar 17, 2015)

NC37 said:


> Been noticing a lot of GPUs relisting themselves as DX12 from 11.2 or 11.1. Now this is listing something else. Is it just assumed that DX11.1 or 2 are automatically DX12 chips?


No.  DX12 is DX12.  DX11.2 cards are not fully compatible with DX12.  If you try to play a DX12 game on DX11.2 hardware, the features added in DX12 will not work.



Vinska said:


> For some reason, I don't see people b**ching about the price of TITAN-X nearly as much as people b**ch about the price of R9 390X, despite TITAN-X looking noticeably slower [on paper] and costing a LOT more.
> Double standards FTW.


I think it's because people looking at 390X are actually going to buy it.  TITAN-X, not so much.  Real pain versus imagined pain (on the wallet).


I do hope the WCE is reasonably priced.  It's about a 4x step up from my 5870.  $400/450 maybe but I'm not about to blow $500+ on it.


----------



## AsRock (Mar 17, 2015)

390X w\WC under $500 is totally dreamland.  Expecting at least $700 but i am ok with i got now so no rush here and to be honest if i upgrade i am after a die shrink at least how ever good or bad this card is.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Mar 17, 2015)

That's what I'm afraid of.  I hope the non-WCE one isn't butchered (hopefully only slightly slower clocks) and is in my price range.  I'm thinking I would be happy with 900+ MHz.


----------



## manofthem (Mar 17, 2015)

The 390x is shaping up nicely, looking forward to it if true. After this launch, I'll be making my next gpu purchase, which depends on things to be seen.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Mar 17, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> No.  DX12 is DX12.  DX11.2 cards are not fully compatible with DX12.  If you try to play a DX12 game on DX11.2 hardware, the features added in DX12 will not work.


That probably depends upon the features used by developers. What was clarified a week ago was the feature levels ( AFAIK DX12 does not have a hardware level component, and feature wise supports 11_0, 11_1, 12_0, and 12_1 )






Nvidia's Maxwell doesn't support Tier 3 resource binding, and AMD doesn't support conservative rasterization Tier 1, so it will depend upon whether these are implemented. Conservative rasterization most assuredly will, but not DX features are automatic for gaming (DX11.2 springs to mind.)









FordGT90Concept said:


> I think it's because people looking at 390X are actually going to buy it.  TITAN-X, not so much.  Real pain versus imagined pain (on the wallet).


Probably a safe assumption for the latter. Titan X will give an insight into what is to come. I suspect the real battle will be between the 390X and 980 Ti. If the former lives up to todays hype than that augers well for the latter as also worthy of the wait.


----------



## HM_Actua1 (Mar 17, 2015)

Is this %70 on the review models....?


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 17, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> "Up To 1,050MHz"
> 
> That translates to "the card will overheat and throttle just like the 290x, but it will last long enough for benchmarks to finish so the reviews look better".



Most people don't use a fan curve, I use one, just the custom default from MSI AB and my reference 290x has never throttled or gone past 70 celsius...  all about dat idle temp staying low and the curve.

Hatas gon hate.  que taylor swift song bros


----------



## arbiter (Mar 17, 2015)

xvi said:


> I agree that it skews benchmarks higher than what real-world would be and that's definitely not ideal, but there are cases where people will see those boost clocks most of the time even in real-world on inexpensive stock coolers (read: not the Bahamas).
> The alternative here is to make the card run slow all the time even if the conditions are perfect for 24/7 boost clock speeds.
> 
> The solution is a practice that I believe most review websites do follow, which is to simply play through a game and record clock speeds and temps over time. A good review would test real-world clock speeds even after the card has heated up.



I under stand things are never perfect in most people's systems, but in case of 290x even with Open air benches which does help keep video card cooler. A lot of reviews under stock fan profiles would seen a 15-20% drop in clocks to 800-850mhz after 5-10min. AMD could manned up and spent some $ on the cooler that could least keep the card near the 1000mhz they said. If on open air bench couldn't keep barely over 800mhz in testing that is terrible. Yea i know can after market cooler for them but shouldn't need to rely on that for card to run at speeds they claim.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Mar 17, 2015)

That's gonna be one monster of a card!

Wonder if the AIO cooling solution will get in the way of multiple card configs, I'm sure I wont be able to fit two separate 120mm or 140mm coolers on my current HAF-XB Radeon build...

What's weird is that one of those slides was leaked a couple of days ago, and ppl called it out as a fake because of a couple of typos:






Notice how "functionallity" was misspelled, and Direct X 12_Tier has a weird underscore.

Now in this new leak, the typos have been corrected; oh well, it might that the slide was fixed between the time it was leaked and this new presentation... Kinda suspicious though 

Source: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-radeon-390x-wce-water-cooled-edition.html


----------



## Para_Franck (Mar 17, 2015)

Why don't they release it and take my money already, before I spend it on something else much more useless, like a new receiver/controller for my custom RC truck.


----------



## newtekie1 (Mar 17, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> There is a difference, you can replace a cooler but you cannot replace the built in memory structure.



And the advertised specs on the AMD actually skewed benchmarks which lead to worse than expected performance by the consumer.  I'm amazed that people are totally ok with AMD listing and advertising clock speeds that they know their cards can't maintain in stock form.  However, nVidia lists some incorrect specs on private spec sheets, specs that they don't advertise openly, and everyone freaks out.



xvi said:


> If it's available, shouldn't they use it? Yeah, it conveniently makes benchmarks look better and yes, AMD's marketing department will squeeze every last drop of PR they can out of it, but it also gives us as consumers the ability to get more out of our cards via aftermarket cooling instead of having them locked down from the get-go.





xvi said:


> The alternative here is to make the card run slow all the time even if the conditions are perfect for 24/7 boost clock speeds.



Then do what nVidia does and pick an at least obtainable base clock that can be maintained constantly.  Then let the card boost if temperature allows.  Give at least a guaranteed base clock that the card won't go lower than.  But then again, advertising the core clock at 600MHz would be an embarrassment...


----------



## librin.so.1 (Mar 17, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> But then again, advertising the core clock at 600MHz would be an embarrassment...


600MHz? Does it really fall down THAT much?
I mean not counting those [sadly, rather often] cases when clueless average joe users have coolers covered with 2 years worth of dust. (But to be fair that sometimes even pushes otherwise normally cool cards to _critically_ downclock to minimal clocks in effort not to melt. And that is a fault of user negligence, not fault of "bad design")


----------



## newtekie1 (Mar 17, 2015)

Vinska said:


> 600MHz? Does it really fall down THAT much?
> I mean not counting those [sadly, rather often] cases when clueless average joe users have coolers covered with 2 years worth of dust. (But to be fair that sometimes even pushes otherwise normally cool cards to _critically_ downclock to minimal clocks in effort not to melt. And that is a fault of user negligence, not fault of "bad design")



Yep, brand new cards in my Corsair 650D, on the quiet BIOS the cards actually went below 600MHz, on the extreme BIOS I saw as low as 600MHz after a while gaming(roughly half an hour).


----------



## arbiter (Mar 17, 2015)

Vinska said:


> 600MHz? Does it really fall down THAT much?
> I mean not counting those [sadly, rather often] cases when clueless average joe users have coolers covered with 2 years worth of dust. (But to be fair that sometimes even pushes otherwise normally cool cards to _critically_ downclock to minimal clocks in effort not to melt. And that is a fault of user negligence, not fault of "bad design")



Think about it, it would drop to 800mhz stock fan curve, in an Open air bench. Now stick that in a case with bad air flow so it gets pretty hot. 600mhz is very possible.



newtekie1 said:


> Then do what nVidia does and pick an at least obtainable base clock that can be maintained constantly.  Then let the card boost if temperature allows.  Give at least a guaranteed base clock that the card won't go lower than.  But then again, advertising the core clock at 600MHz would be an embarrassment...



Well nvidia cards can do 90+c as well but they prefer to keep it lower. It does cost performance but life of the card is enhanced. I offset temp target of mine to 85c even though never gets there. Was running around 65-70c on AC with it clocked about 1500mhz.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Mar 17, 2015)

15th Warlock said:


> What's weird is that one of those slides was leaked a couple of days ago, and ppl called it out as a fake because of a couple of typos. Notice how "functionallity" was misspelled


The typo actually makes it more likely that the slide is genuine IMO


15th Warlock said:


> and Direct X 12_Tier has a weird underscore.


That isn't a typo. Decimal point for DX revision, underscore for feature level.


15th Warlock said:


> Now in this new leak, the typos have been corrected; oh well, it might that the slide was fixed between the time it was leaked and this new presentation... Kinda suspicious though


Conscientious AMD PR flack leaker. Real time leak revision - now that is good hustle!


arbiter said:


> Think about it, it would drop to 800mhz stock fan curve, in an Open air bench. Now stick that in a case with bad air flow so it gets pretty hot. 600mhz is very possible.


I think W1zzards own review here indicated a drop to that. The drop was transient, but the trend is/was apparent.


----------



## timta2 (Mar 17, 2015)

I don't think +70% faster than a 290x at $700 will be very impressive, if that's what it will be.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Mar 17, 2015)

timta2 said:


> I don't think +70% faster than a 290x at $700 will be very impressive, if that's what it will be.



Well I can't say I agree, yes, the price might be a tad high, but 290X was $549 on release and went all the way up to $799 a few weeks after due to the bitcoin bubble. That was over a year ago.

Now this new card, if it includes an AIO water cooler, that sorta justifies the $100 premium, over the $549 original launch price for the 290X with its lackluster cooler; as far as that 60~70% faster at 4K figure, we haven't had such a high performance jump in many generations, for me that is very impressive, considering we've only seen a 10~15% performance jump for quite a few generations now.

So 40~50% performance jump from GTX980 to Titan-X, but at a $999 price. Anything over 60% performance jump from AMD's previous flagship, probably putting this card in the same league as a much more expensive card from the green team, sounds like quite an impressive achievement to me.

No matter what, we are in for a dozy as PC gamers. 4K maxed out rendering from a single GPU will finally become a real possibility, and the release of the VR headsets towards the end of the year will require the all the GPU power available in these new cards.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Mar 17, 2015)

if Amd gotta charge $700 to make a profit and survive and the card delivers $700 worth of performance...... I say well done! If this is fluff.......i feel sorry for them.  There is not gonna be another mining boom and major cpu releases are  a year(hopefully) away....they need a home run ....right now.


----------



## arbiter (Mar 17, 2015)

15th Warlock said:


> Now this new card, if it includes an AIO water cooler, that sorta justifies the $100 premium, over the $549 original launch price for the 290X with its lackluster cooler; as far as that 60~70% faster at 4K figure, we haven't had such a high performance jump in many generations, for me that is very impressive, considering we've only seen a 10~15% performance jump for quite a few generations now.



700$ for what probably be 4gb card. If you are a 4k a adopter that probably won't be enough ram wise. Can only guess what 8gb version will cost but i would put guess probably 900$ for that extra ram. That 60-70% figure AMD claims probably was using that 8gb card not the 4gb card. If that turns out to be the case well can't give nvidia any more crap over Titan pricing anymore.

200$ premium is within realm of possible as its 120$ atm for 8gb 290x over 4gb one. Just due to fact of new type of memory gonna be bit a more $.

edit: as i think about it, wouldn't shock if those graph's were 290x 4gb vs 390x 8gb card. They don't say it on graph so in all likely hood that is what it was


----------



## Kyuuba (Mar 17, 2015)

erocker said:


> I'll be quite disappointed if the pricing is true.  I mean, if the PC market is stagnant (which it is), throwing a 200 dollar markup on their top tier cards is probably not the way to go.
> 
> Also, with the factory cooling it seems like there will be a variant with the liquid cooling, not all of them.


As for the current status of AMD's marketshare expect that price, they need to recover some money.


----------



## natr0n (Mar 17, 2015)

very excite.


----------



## GhostRyder (Mar 17, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> And the advertised specs on the AMD actually skewed benchmarks which lead to worse than expected performance by the consumer.  I'm amazed that people are totally ok with AMD listing and advertising clock speeds that they know their cards can't maintain in stock form.  However, nVidia lists some incorrect specs on private spec sheets, specs that they don't advertise openly, and everyone freaks out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Simple solution, turn the fan speed up another notch or cool it another way.  Though again after the update from amd mine never throttled in a single gpu config on uber mode.  I don't think most people care about the specs being wrong in the 970 except the memory itself.



Vinska said:


> 600MHz? Does it really fall down THAT much?
> I mean not counting those [sadly, rather often] cases when clueless average joe users have coolers covered with 2 years worth of dust. (But to be fair that sometimes even pushes otherwise normally cool cards to _critically_ downclock to minimal clocks in effort not to melt. And that is a fault of user negligence, not fault of "bad design")


Well my three didn't throttle at least on uber, they went to around 800 on quiet.  But that was my test bed in an lanboy air case.





15th Warlock said:


> Well I can't say I agree, yes, the price might be a tad high, but 290X was $549 on release and went all the way up to $799 a few weeks after due to the bitcoin bubble. That was over a year ago.
> 
> Now this new card, if it includes an AIO water cooler, that sorta justifies the $100 premium, over the $549 original launch price for the 290X with its lackluster cooler; as far as that 60~70% faster at 4K figure, we haven't had such a high performance jump in many generations, for me that is very impressive, considering we've only seen a 10~15% performance jump for quite a few generations now.
> 
> ...


Everyone is shooting for 4k as the goal right now.  At this point either of these GPUs will do the lower without breaking a sweat so the real question come to who can do the higher part better.

It's exciting to see such a massive jump!


----------



## jateruy (Mar 17, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> Simple solution, turn the fan speed up another notch or cool it another way.  Though again after the update from amd mine never throttled in a single gpu config on uber mode.  I don't think most people care about the specs being wrong in the 970 except the memory itself.
> 
> 
> Well my three didn't throttle at least on uber, they went to around 800 on quiet.  But that was my test bed in an lanboy air case.
> ...



But...I don't want my mom to think I'm still up just done shower using her hair dryer in the midnight or I'm boiling water making a coffee while snapping some food when I'm not supposed to, and then she comes check me realized I'm right in hot gaming and all the sudden you know what's gonna happen...


----------



## Xzibit (Mar 17, 2015)

jateruy said:


> But...I don't want my mom to think I'm still up just done shower using her hair dryer in the midnight or I'm boiling water making a coffee while snapping some food when I'm not supposed to, and then she comes check me realized I'm right in hot gaming and all the sudden you know what's gonna happen...


----------



## Sony Xperia S (Mar 17, 2015)

15th Warlock said:


> That's gonna be one monster of a card!



AMD were first and perhaps the only ones with GDDR4, later with GDDR5, now with HBM. Not to mention all process jumps done before nvidia.
Indeed, it will be almighty card, and will not have the stupid titanIC name. 



15th Warlock said:


>



Maxwell doesn't support DX 12 Tier 3, it is restricted to lower Tiers.
AMD again on the win here.


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 17, 2015)

Sony Xperia S said:


> Indeed, it will be almighty card, and will not have the stupid titanIC name.



It looks indeed to be s great card, perhaps my next. However, if you think Titan is a silly name, perhaps you should be reminded of the AUSUM (awesome) switch on the 6990, which unlocked Uber mode....
AMD do silly as well.


----------



## RCoon (Mar 17, 2015)

Would be a pleasant surprise if AMD come out on top this time. AMD hasn't been able to control pricing structure since the release of the 7970! Even then it was tame.



Sony Xperia S said:


> AMD again on the win here.



Doesn't mean much if they can't turn a profit for at least one quarter this year.


----------



## bogami (Mar 17, 2015)

Is 1.25 Gbs Taipo?  5 Gbs on R9-290X !   4Q R9-395X


----------



## Relayer (Mar 17, 2015)

15th Warlock said:


> That's gonna be one monster of a card!
> 
> Wonder if the AIO cooling solution will get in the way of multiple card configs, I'm sure I wont be able to fit two separate 120mm or 140mm coolers on my current HAF-XB Radeon build...
> 
> ...



Might have been purposeful so AMD can track leakers???



newtekie1 said:


> And the advertised specs on the AMD actually skewed benchmarks which lead to worse than expected performance by the consumer.  I'm amazed that people are totally ok with AMD listing and advertising clock speeds that they know their cards can't maintain in stock form.  However, nVidia lists some incorrect specs on private spec sheets, specs that they don't advertise openly, and everyone freaks out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A bit off topic, don't you think? Accident?



15th Warlock said:


> Well I can't say I agree, yes, the price might be a tad high, but 290X was $549 on release and went all the way up to $799 a few weeks after due to the bitcoin bubble. That was over a year ago.
> 
> Now this new card, if it includes an AIO water cooler, that sorta justifies the $100 premium, over the $549 original launch price for the 290X with its lackluster cooler; as far as that 60~70% faster at 4K figure, we haven't had such a high performance jump in many generations, for me that is very impressive, considering we've only seen a 10~15% performance jump for quite a few generations now.
> 
> ...


I don't think the AIO is the culprit. It's probably more to do with HBM and yields. Although I don't really know what yields are like on a design like this. I'm just guessing maybe not good because of the new tech.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Mar 17, 2015)

Relayer said:


> Might have been purposeful so AMD can track leakers???


You mean that the leaks co-incidentally just happen to go public within two days of AMD's main rivals flagship card launch, and AMD aren't a party to it - moreover, they lay traps to actively discourage anyone from crashing Nvidia's party...






Relayer said:


> I don't think the AIO is the culprit.


I'm inclined to agree. Complexity and the publicized costs of the interposer package make HBM and its packaging the likely cause

BTW: Triple posting??? Are you new to internet forums?


----------



## Ferrum Master (Mar 17, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> It looks indeed to be s great card, perhaps my next. However, if you think Titan is a silly name, perhaps you should be reminded of the AUSUM (awesome) switch on the 6990, which unlocked Uber mode....
> AMD do silly as well.



Well nothing beats Creative in the silly department...

Well no matter what... I guess I will need to put an AMD sticker on my piggy bank... the question is... how many pigs...


----------



## HumanSmoke (Mar 17, 2015)

Ferrum Master said:


> Well nothing beats Creative in the silly department...


And that's just their driver team

/rimshot


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 17, 2015)

Caring1 said:


> Wow, you guys are whinging about the alleged $700 price point, but that is $1,000 (roughly) when converted to our currency, and I can't see the base 390X selling for less than $1,200 here, the Liquid cooled version will most likely be around $1,500 once converted to Aussie dollars.
> The cheapest new 290X is still $500 here.


If I lived in Australia on a "sunshine coast", I would rarely, if ever, play games.    You are still the winner in this, ;p


----------



## nunyabuisness (Mar 17, 2015)

lynx29 said:


> my $200 newegg gift card is ready. and sell my 290x hopefully for 150 or 200, so 300 outta pocket... not bad if the price of $700 is rumored true.



I did the same thing 2 weeks ago. I dumped my R9 290 windforce. I bought it 2nd hand for 270AU and I sold it for $275AU on ebay. I thought I did well haha. I have a crappy 6450 2gb as a stand in, waiting on seeing some real reviews of the 300 series, if its not as good as they say, and if the 380 (R9 290 respin) doesnt save a lot of power. ill be buying the 980 when Nvidia drop the price to compete


----------



## buggalugs (Mar 17, 2015)

arbiter said:


> I under stand things are never perfect in most people's systems, but in case of 290x even with Open air benches which does help keep video card cooler. A lot of reviews under stock fan profiles would seen a 15-20% drop in clocks to 800-850mhz after 5-10min. AMD could manned up and spent some $ on the cooler that could least keep the card near the 1000mhz they said. If on open air bench couldn't keep barely over 800mhz in testing that is terrible. Yea i know can after market cooler for them but shouldn't need to rely on that for card to run at speeds they claim.



 Those reference cooler cards disappeared after a few weeks anyway,  non-reference cards came out early and anyone who has a 290X got the partner cards like ASUS DirectCUII, Sapphire Tri-X, Gigabyte Windforce etc which came with beefy overclocks , and its not an issue. So not only did it not throttle, it had big overclocks and still didn't throttle.  So that whole issue is irrelevant. 

  You cant even buy a reference 290X now, and I havent seen them on sale for ages at my local stores.


  Anyhow the 390X looks good, it will be interesting to see if the water cooler improves performance over a good non reference cooler like the DirectCUII, Tri-X, or Twinfrosr. I'm going to bet that its not......unless AMD decide to bin chips for the WC model and I cant see them doing that.


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (Mar 17, 2015)

What I really liked is that AMD has finally taken up SK Hynix chips for the VRAM, which is a good thing. Up to 8GB of High Bandwidth Memory on a super-massive 4096-bit Interface is crazy with bandwidth speed at 640GB/s, which is around 2.5 times more faster than my current pixel pusher. DX12 & Mantle Ready aside, I think the price tag once converted will be around MYR2.5k range with tax applied. Crazy, but in a good way. NVIDIA I think will start having sales issues once the R9 390X makes an entrance in the high end VGA card market.


----------



## GhostRyder (Mar 17, 2015)

Sony Xperia S said:


> AMD were first and perhaps the only ones with GDDR4, later with GDDR5, now with HBM. Not to mention all process jumps done before nvidia.
> Indeed, it will be almighty card, and will not have the stupid titanIC name.





the54thvoid said:


> It looks indeed to be s great card, perhaps my next. However, if you think Titan is a silly name, perhaps you should be reminded of the AUSUM (awesome) switch on the 6990, which unlocked Uber mode....
> AMD do silly as well.


Wait, Titan is considered a silly name???  I actually thought it was pretty cool for a name, just the branding I have a problem with (By that I mean it being a professional sortta card like the 580 and below used to do).  I think as far as silly goes though, names being stupid or not are what lead people to the cards more than numbers do at times.



Relayer said:


> I don't think the AIO is the culprit. It's probably more to do with HBM and yields. Although I don't really know what yields are like on a design like this. I'm just guessing maybe not good because of the new tech.


Well with this new development that there will be an 8gb variant that maybe the cause for delay, that is my guess.



buggalugs said:


> Those reference cooler cards disappeared after a few weeks anyway,  non-reference cards came out early and anyone who has a 290X got the partner cards like ASUS DirectCUII, Sapphire Tri-X, Gigabyte Windforce etc which came with beefy overclocks , and its not an issue. So not only did it not throttle, it had big overclocks and still didn't throttle.  So that whole issue is irrelevant.
> 
> You cant even buy a reference 290X now, and I havent seen them on sale for ages at my local stores.


The 290X reference card was not really unexpected to me at least, its a cheap blower which most people buying on that grade of card they (My guess) assumed people would more than likely do their own cooling and prefer the money savings over putting an expensive cooler.  They were wrong (Again my guess) which is probably why the new cooler is going to have an AIO model.

You know, such a nice performance jump keeps tempting me to replace my trio of R9 290X cards.  Do not really think I could justify it though and would rather wait another generation but heck depending on the performance at the end I might trade up for a pair of the 8gb cards if the performance is real!


----------



## fullinfusion (Mar 17, 2015)

Won't even entertain these threads till the actual numbers and reviews come out..

But in all honesty I think AMD has finally managed to pull a rabbit outa there hat this time around 

Pair two of these suckers up with a good 8 core amd chip and we be rock n Rollin but where's the CPU?


----------



## ZoneDymo (Mar 17, 2015)

fullinfusion said:


> Won't even entertain these threads till the actual numbers and reviews come out..
> 
> But in all honesty I think AMD has finally managed to pull a rabbit outa there hat this time around
> 
> Pair two of these suckers up with a good 8 core amd chip and we be rock n Rollin but where's the CPU?



Man, that first part is like saying "dont mean to be offensive but...." and then proceed with saying something horribly offensive


----------



## Casecutter (Mar 17, 2015)

Is there any truth to the GM200 being used in the Quadro M6000?
I was informed the Nvidia had intended the GM200 basically as for GeForce gaming parts as it offers minimal FP64 support.  If they use fully enabled GM200 for TitanX and now the M6000, wonder what that has the 980Ti working out like?  Perhaps given that volumes now being routed to professional use, there's a ability inseeing  TitanX cost efficiently broadened, meaning we might be misplaced on how Nvidia will/can price it.

Edit: Well there goes hope... saw the $999 price that's now confirmed for the TitanX.


----------



## ironwolf (Mar 17, 2015)

> AMD claims that the R9 390X will be 50-60% faster than the R9 290X



Perhaps my math-fu is off but how is that "close to 70% faster?" 

Or am I reading too much into the %s mentioned?


----------



## 64K (Mar 17, 2015)

ironwolf said:


> Perhaps my math-fu is off but how is that "close to 70% faster?"
> 
> Or am I reading too much into the %s mentioned?



If you're referring to this line in post #1

"AMD claims that the R9 390X will be 50-60% faster than the R9 290X, and we're talking about benchmarks such as Battlefield 4 and FarCry 4."

then I took that to mean he was referring to those two games in particular. Possibly overall in gaming the average will be close to 70% faster than R9 290x.

Edit: Or it might be that AMD is saying 50%-60% and the "leak" source is saying close to 70%


----------



## Casecutter (Mar 17, 2015)

ironwolf said:


> Perhaps my math-fu is off but how is that "close to 70% faster?"
> 
> Or am I reading too much into the %s mentioned?


 
No it's just by btarunr and his Hyperbole... He can't conprehand what he writes.

"AMD claims that the R9 390X will be 50-60% faster than the R9 290X"

I see people working this up into such a lather, that's folks think they'll have need on bring in a "bulldozer" to push it around.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Mar 17, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> If I can get a single gpu that performs at 1.6x the speed of a 290X (or 1.5X GTX 980) and only consumes 250-300W, I'll be quite happy.  It won't touch my 780ti sli performance but at 8Gb (or 12GB) memory it'll fly at 1440p ultra settings.
> Now, what really matters to me is that the after market water blocks and component make up allow for noise free (and I mean coil whine) gaming.



It _will_ touch or beat your 780 Ti performance.  It is 70% stronger than a 780 Ti and has up to 2.66x more VRAM.  Sorry :/


----------



## ensabrenoir (Mar 17, 2015)

....all sounds familiar. ....ill hold my judgment till release day


----------



## The N (Mar 17, 2015)

i would love to see, how AMD will beat NVIDIA with its new upcoming next gen chip


----------



## arbiter (Mar 17, 2015)

buggalugs said:


> Those reference cooler cards disappeared after a few weeks anyway,  non-reference cards came out early and anyone who has a 290X got the partner cards like ASUS DirectCUII, Sapphire Tri-X, Gigabyte Windforce etc which came with beefy overclocks , and its not an issue. So not only did it not throttle, it had big overclocks and still didn't throttle.  So that whole issue is irrelevant.



Problem was at the time of the release of the 290x, it took 3 months before non-reference cards came out not couple weeks. AMD had to get something out at the time to compete with 780 and they put a cooler on it and shipped it.


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 17, 2015)

Captain_Tom said:


> It _will_ touch or beat your 780 Ti performance.  It is 70% stronger than a 780 Ti and has up to 2.66x more VRAM.  Sorry :/



I run Classifieds which run 15% faster than normal 780ti's. But I'd trade down in absolute performance for a single card.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Mar 17, 2015)

fullinfusion said:


> Won't even entertain these threads till the actual numbers and reviews come out..
> 
> But in all honesty I think AMD has finally managed to pull a rabbit outa there hat this time around
> 
> Pair two of these suckers up with a good 8 core amd chip and we be rock n Rollin but where's the CPU?



No shit. Where's my steamroller?


----------



## Captain_Tom (Mar 17, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> I run Classifieds which run 15% faster than normal 780ti's. But I'd trade down in absolute performance for a single card.



Haha the 390X will overclock as well.


----------



## shk021051 (Mar 18, 2015)

i'm glad i  waited for amd instead of 970 3.5 G


----------



## Greg Wants 390x (Mar 19, 2015)

I'll be waiting for the 3xx reviews.  I would like to be notified somehow when Tech Powerup gets their hands on it.


----------



## 64K (Mar 19, 2015)

Greg Wants 390x said:


> I'll be waiting for the 3xx reviews.  I would like to be notified somehow when Tech Powerup gets their hands on it.



R9 390x will probably drop sometime around June. R9 380x should be pretty soon. It's not very long now.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Mar 19, 2015)

shk021051 said:


> i'm glad i  waited for amd instead of 970 3.5 G



.......careful......there is still time for Amd to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory......


----------



## Greg Wants 390x (Mar 19, 2015)

Is this true, that AMD is waiting to release the entire new line in june?
http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...-its-radeon-r9-300-series-lineup-at-computex/


----------



## Relayer (Mar 23, 2015)

ensabrenoir said:


> .......careful......there is still time for Amd to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory......


Hopefully new management will avoid this type of thing.


----------



## Jaffakeik (Apr 1, 2015)

I dont understand why ppl write its a Leaked information.ITs not leaked its been put on internet for reason by ati itself to advert next product so ppl starting to gather money. Because its very strange that all products get leaked like this from ati nvidia,they should by now know who leaked the info and would get fired by now,but if it continues obviously its not a leak its been done on purpose for companies so consumers could get idea what to expect.


----------



## Deadlyraver (Apr 10, 2015)

We will buy the 200 series GPUs till the end of next year anyway.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 12, 2015)

Caring1 said:


> Wow, you guys are whinging about the alleged $700 price point, but that is $1,000 (roughly) when converted to our currency, and I can't see the base 390X selling for less than $1,200 here, the Liquid cooled version will most likely be around $1,500 once converted to Aussie dollars.
> The cheapest new 290X is still $500 here.



This is what happens when you live on an Island at the bottom of the earth.


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 13, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> This is what happens when you live on an Island at the bottom of the earth.


Well when you put it that way, we are blessed, bring on the northern nuclear winter


----------

