# Radeon R9 390X and R9 390 to Feature Faster Memory, Core Over Predecessors



## btarunr (Jun 15, 2015)

AMD's upcoming Radeon R9 390X and R9 390 performance-segment graphics cards reportedly feature higher GPU and memory clocks over the products they are a re-branding of, the R9 290X and R9 290, respectively. The 28 nm "Grenada" silicon they are based on, is identical to "Hawaii," down to the last transistor. This has been confirmed by leaked GPU-Z screenshots, which reveal the device-IDs of the two cards to be identical to those of the R9 290X and R9 290. Since the Device-IDs are the same, GPU-Z is reading the chip as "Hawaii." The code-name "Grenada" appears in the BIOS version string. 

Unlike older, more blatant re-brands, such as GeForce 8800 GT to 9800 GT, AMD did drop in a few changes. To begin with, the memory amount has been doubled on both cards, to 8 GB. The memory clock has been increased from 1250 MHz (5.00 GHz GDDR5-effective), to 1500 MHz (6.00 GDDR5-effective), resulting in memory bandwidth increase to 384 GB/s, up from 320 GB/s. The core clock speed on the R9 390X is 1050 MHz (up from 1000 MHz on R9 290X); and 1000 MHz on the R9 390 (up from 947 MHz on the R9 290). 



 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 15, 2015)

> The 28 nm "Grenada" silicon they are based on, is identical to "Hawaii," down to the last transistor



I think Rejzor promised to eat his shoes if this happened.

I'll let him get away with it this time, but this is why you should never play "I'm going to eat my shoes" with unreleased products.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jun 15, 2015)

cool! waiting for the benchmarks.. i think they will be ~10% better.


----------



## Joss (Jun 15, 2015)

What a sad story all this is...


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 15, 2015)

We really didn't need a crystal ball for this...

Ever since the HBM announcement on the new release this was clear as day.


----------



## ne6togadno (Jun 15, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> I think Rejzor promised to eat his shoes if this happened.
> 
> I'll let him get away with it this time, but this is why you should never play "I'm going to eat my shoes" with unreleased products.


meanwhile in slovenia @RejZoR...


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 15, 2015)

I'm not that mean... lol.  Leather tastes something awful (don't ask).


----------



## ne6togadno (Jun 15, 2015)

that particular one from picture isnt made from leather but from suger


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 15, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> I think Rejzor promised to eat his shoes if this happened.
> 
> I'll let him get away with it this time, but this is why you should never play "I'm going to eat my shoes" with unreleased products.



Aaaaah, but I've also said for AMD to close the doors on release day. Not looking good so far...

Realeasing same units configuration as R9-290X, but with GCN 1.2 and framebuffer compression, fair enough. It was the sole reason why I was defending R9-390X up till this point (based on speculations). But this here, this is just fucking lazy AMD...

I'll just overclock my HD7950 even further and chew one shoe while doing it. They aren't seeing my money this year. Only thing that might convince me is vanilla Fury, but based on how lazy fucks they've become, I'm not having great hopes. Even if it'll be a performance success, it sure won't be anywhere near "affordable". And yet another boring year goes by in graphics industry...


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jun 15, 2015)

All I can say is, all about pricing, price this a good amount below the 290x and we will all be happy.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jun 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Aaaaah, but I've also said for AMD to close the doors on release day. Not looking good so far...
> 
> Realeasing same units configuration as R9-290X, but with GCN 1.2 and framebuffer compression, fair enough. It was the sole reason why I was defending R9-390X up till this point (based on speculations). But this here, this is just fucking lazy AMD...
> 
> I'll just overclock my HD7950 even further and chew one shoe while doing it. They aren't seeing my money this year. Only thing that might convince me is vanilla Fury, but based on how lazy fucks they've become, I'm not having great hopes. Even if it'll be a performance success, it sure won't be anywhere near "affordable". And yet another boring year goes by in graphics industry...




maybe its not lazyness but a lack of funds..


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 15, 2015)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> maybe its not lazyness but a lack of funds..



That's my concern.  R&D like seen in the Fury must be paid for...  AMD doesn't have an infinite amount of cash right now.


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 15, 2015)

The R&D already done was the Tonga. They'd just have to transplant that on top of R9-290X and into the R9-390X like it was speculated from the very beginning. Instead they've gone into the shitty rebranding. FU AMD. Rebranding of R9-380X, I'd accept that, but 390X as well, no. Just no.


----------



## Debat0r (Jun 15, 2015)

I really hope some big-budget company buys AMD soon, because they're not putting up a real fight right now...
Technology should be advancing exponentially, but without competition it's getting slower and slower every year 

Without any proper investment, I hate to say this, they really aren't gonna survive for much longer. Oh well, guess there's nothing we can really do about it, except wait and hope the consequences aren't too harsh.



> AMD doesn't have an infinite amount of cash right now.


And the first competitor for greatest understatement of 2015 is *drumroll* this quote!


----------



## btarunr (Jun 15, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> I think Rejzor promised to eat his shoes if this happened.
> 
> I'll let him get away with it this time, but this is why you should never play "I'm going to eat my shoes" with unreleased products.



If Grenada was different from Hawaii (eg: GCN update), then they would have given it a different device ID. Else it would confuse the fvck out of drivers/applications. It's the same exact chip.


----------



## Xzibit (Jun 15, 2015)

ZoneDymo said:


> All I can say is, all about pricing, price this a good amount below the 290x and we will all be happy.



Don't think they are replacing the 290/X.  There is no 390/X with 4GB and AMD never officially launched the 290/X 8GB version that was left to AIBs.

390X 8GB = ? / $389
290X 4GB = $349/$299
390 8GB = ? / $329
290 4GB = $289/$239

The rumored pricing...
*AMD Radeon 300 Series Pricing Confirmed – Very Aggressive Performance Per Dollar Focused Positioning*

BestBuy selling 390 for $369


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 15, 2015)

$389 for R9-390X 8GB. This translates to 389€ + store margin = +400€. Sorry, but nope. It's a god damn last year tech with a new BIOS.


----------



## NC37 (Jun 15, 2015)

Xzibit said:


> Don't think they are replacing the 290/X.  There is no 390/X with 4GB and AMD never officially launched the 290/X 8GB version that was left to AIBs.
> 
> 390X 8GB = ? / $389
> 290X 4GB = $349/$299
> ...



Well the 390X will be intro'd at a lower price than the 290X was. But its not much. Literally just paying for 290X/8GB versions. For that matter, might as well keep an eye on those 8GB 290X models. Might catch them on some deals.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jun 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> $389 for R9-390X 8GB. This translates to 389€ + store margin = +400€. Sorry, but nope. It's a god damn last year tech with a new BIOS.



i agree that that would be expensive, but if it can compete in that price point why not? gpu's are generally too expensive imo.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jun 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> $389 for R9-390X 8GB. This translates to 389€ + store margin = +400€. Sorry, but nope. It's a god damn last year tech with a new BIOS.


Agree. In Europe and East Asian countries the price will be way over 400€.


----------



## haswrong (Jun 15, 2015)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> maybe its not lazyness but a lack of funds..


its neither, they hit the limit of the indian brain..



NC37 said:


> Well the 390X will be intro'd at a lower price than the 290X was. But its not much. Literally just paying for 290X/8GB versions. For that matter, might as well keep an eye on those 8GB 290X models. Might catch them on some deals.



what exactly is the overpriced, outdated, overheating, unoverclockable, superold tech good for?


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 15, 2015)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> i agree that that would be expensive, but if it can compete in that price point why not? gpu's are generally too expensive imo.



Because technology is generally supposed to march forward.

Don't get me wrong, my wallet loves that my 2 year old tech is running circles around all games in 1080p and will likely do it for 2+ more years.  My brain however, tells me this isn't right...



haswrong said:


> its neither, they hit the limit of the indian brain..



Huh?


----------



## Xzibit (Jun 15, 2015)

NC37 said:


> Well the 390X will be intro'd at a lower price than the 290X was. But its not much. Literally just paying for 290X/8GB versions. For that matter, might as well keep an eye on those 8GB 290X models. Might catch them on some deals.



Always look for deals.

All the 390/X that have been shown have an improved cooler.  Need to see reviews to see if there is any benefit.


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Jun 15, 2015)

That 8GB Memory is delicious, if you look at the most new games, I think 4GB is just inadequate. This sure will make the product future proof too.


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 15, 2015)

I'd rather buy potentially broken and flawed GTX 970 then. At least it's still faster now even if that 3,5GB memory thing proves to be problematic in the future and lastly, it still costs freaking less.


----------



## haswrong (Jun 15, 2015)

Legacy-ZA said:


> That 8GB Memory is delicious, if you look at the most new games, I think 4GB is just inadequate. This sure will make the product future proof too.


that would make fury x very future unproof. which i think it is, but not due to the memory, but i saw the particle simulation benchmark and it was half the performance of titan x.. and that sais it all. rip amd..


----------



## jigar2speed (Jun 15, 2015)

If this is the same exact chip than how is the power consumption down ???


----------



## FYFI13 (Jun 15, 2015)

I'm so happy that i bought GTX970 instead of waiting for 390/390X. I guess so are current 290/290X owners. Fail AMD.


----------



## rooivalk (Jun 15, 2015)

jigar2speed said:


> If this is the same exact chip than how is the power consumption down ???


208W is for GPU chip only, not for entire card.
290X is also 208w (exact number).

Kinda weird though, since 390X has slightly faster clock, shouldn't it affecting the power consumption, maybe a watt more?


----------



## 64K (Jun 15, 2015)

I've been thinking that the 390x just needs to compete with the GTX 980 at a reasonable price. The Fury cards are for competing with the 980 Ti. I think people think it's an easy thing to come up with a faster architecture on the same 28nm process. Maxwell is a great architecture and more efficient than Kepler or we wouldn't be setting the bar so high for Fury. If the Fury X can compete with the 980 Ti at a reasonable price then AMD has probably done all they can for now. 

I think the 390x is going to sell well anyway. For every one of us that knows what it is there are probably a dozen others that don't read tech sites and will buy it anyway just because 390 is a bigger number than 290 so it must be better.


----------



## mroofie (Jun 15, 2015)

Prima.Vera said:


> Agree. In Europe and East Asian countries the price will be way over 400€.


Will nearly be double the price in my country xD


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jun 15, 2015)

haswrong said:


> that would make fury x very future unproof. which i think it is, but not due to the memory, but i saw the collision simulation benchmark and it was half the performance of titan x.. and that sais it all. rip amd..


why do you have to be an a$$?? we all saw the leaked tests.. so what? untill there are some real world gaming benchmarks everything on performance is just speculation and hot air. go drink some coffee or eat a chocolate or something and stop b$ch$ng about things we cannot know yet. in the end of the day noone is forcing you to buy it, if you dont like it go buy the titan or the 980ti or whatever.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 15, 2015)

rooivalk said:


> 208W is for GPU chip only, not for entire card.
> 290X is also 208w (exact number).
> 
> Kinda weird though, since 390X has slightly faster clock, shouldn't it affecting the power consumption, maybe a watt more?


I think XFX overclocked the card.  I suspect your standard 390X will be running the same clock (1 GHz) as 290X.

That MSI picture shows 100 MHz overclock on the GPU and 275 MHz overclock on the memory.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jun 15, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> Because technology is generally supposed to march forward.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, my wallet loves that my 2 year old tech is running circles around all games in 1080p and will likely do it for 2+ more years.  My brain however, tells me this isn't right...
> Huh?



i agree mate, but what can you do... i supose they didnt try anything else because they are stuck with the 28nm node.. i dont really know, but i dont like the fact that if you want to play everything maxed out with decent frames you have to venture in the 400$+ market..


----------



## snakefist (Jun 15, 2015)

...and all of those comments are relevant HOW?

We all knew what will happen, well at least I did, when 28nm was chosen. Of course people will buy those cards (3xx), just not the people you think of. 

Nobody sane will replace 290x (or NVIDIA with similar capabilities, for that matter) with 390x. New buyers, ones who want upgrade over old existing tech, or jump a level in performance, will. 

Perhaps 390x won't be labeled as 'noisy' anymore - and that's about it...

If I decide to upgrade my mid-range AMD card, I won't definitely buy the same model of the new generation. Or would with NVIDIA, for that matter. 

Both companies made an effort to produce top-tier GPUs only, and will probably be reducing prices of the rest of the lineup graudally, as times passes by. Until real new architecture, based on 14/16nm arrives...

If someone wonders about 960 - well, that is just an 'experiment' - 'ok, we can make this also, but we won't design whole new line out of it'. In the price range the card is, it is nothing revolutionary - remember that until recently AMD had 'the best GPU which doesn't need auxiliary power'. I doubt they make more money on 960 than they do on other mid and low range GPUs.

The only group who SHOULD get excited (or disappointed) is a small one consisting of top-whatever-it-costs players (I imagine they are players with very high demands) - and they have to wait this painful 3-4 more days until benchmarks appear...

The rest of us will just have to continue with our lives, watch the price drops and buy 3xx instead 2xxx instead 7xxx when it happens


----------



## mirakul (Jun 15, 2015)

haswrong said:


> that would make fury x very future unproof. which i think it is, but not due to the memory, but i saw the collision simulation benchmark and it was half the performance of titan x.. and that sais it all. rip amd..



Again with this, sigh.

FuryX has 4 GB of HBM, not GDDR5. Some people keep comparing oranges with apples. 

And do most people here buy cards for collision simulation?


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 15, 2015)

mirakul said:


> Again with this, sigh.
> 
> FuryX has 4 GB of HBM, not GDDR5. Some people keep comparing oranges with apples.
> 
> And do most people here buy cards for collision simulation?



So, in your tiny mind HBM suddenly allows more than 1GB of data on a 1GB VRAM size? Or it will swap textures SO fast that it can do the same with half the framebuffer? That is some pretty awesome interlacing then 

Are you retarded or just plain stupid? 4GB = 4GB. Except when its a 970 you are talking about...


----------



## GhostRyder (Jun 15, 2015)

Big disappointment in my book as I was hoping we would see GCN 1.2 (Tonga) under the hood with more Stream processors.  Well at least they have refined the process enough where the memory and cores can be overclocked better by AIB's.  Wonder how much better it overclocks compared to the 290X?

Still I will wait until we see more of these in the market and the drivers because I still am curious about these cards and these leaks...


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 15, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> Big disappointment in my book as I was hoping we would see GCN 1.2 (Tonga) under the hood with more Stream processors.  Well at least they have refined the process enough where the memory and cores can be overclocked better by AIB's.  Wonder how much better it overclocks compared to the 290X?
> 
> Still I will wait until we see more of these in the market and the drivers because I still am curious about these cards and these leaks...



I never even asked for more shaders. I'd be perfectly happy with exact same count, but with GCN 1.2. Not this fucking lazy disgrace with a fucking reflashed BIOS and extra 4GB of VRAM. They needed almost 2 years for this pile of bullshit? Like F U AMD.


----------



## btarunr (Jun 15, 2015)

jigar2speed said:


> If this is the same exact chip than how is the power consumption down ???



Power consumption ≠ TDP.


----------



## 64K (Jun 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I never even asked for more shaders. I'd be perfectly happy with exact same count, but with GCN 1.2. Not this fucking lazy disgrace with a fucking reflashed BIOS and extra 4GB of VRAM. They needed almost 2 years for this pile of bullshit? Like F U AMD.



Look on the bright side. At least you know what it is. Most people buying it probably won't.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Jun 15, 2015)

64K said:


> Look on the bright side. At least you know what it is. Most people buying it probably won't.



Are you talking about fast food or sausages? Most people buying dedicated cards know it, if not system builders ie shops know it... the percent that do the upgrades based on yellow snow sightings is quite rare...


----------



## happita (Jun 15, 2015)

If this "re-branding" was the case all along, they just should've released all the cards < Fury and Fury X months ago to steal a few sales from Nvidia. THEN release the Fury/Fury-X in these next few days. Much needed sales lost because AMD wanted to launch the majority of their product line in one shot.

And while we're on the topic of rebrands, these cards have more memory and are overclocked by 50Mhz each. Makes me think back when 290/290X was launched at how bad the overheating issues were.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Jun 15, 2015)

happita said:


> these cards have more memory and are overclocked by 50Mhz each.



The fact is AIB parters had such cards with Hawaii too... 8GB and clocked higher... but still it does not touch the G80/G92 rebrand streak.


----------



## dados8756 (Jun 15, 2015)

what... if this just a joke ,it not funny anymore because april mop was over -_-" , im Radeon user ,but who care??? Stupid AMD...


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 15, 2015)

If they released R9-390X back in October, I'd * maybe * buy it. But now, I might just as well wait some more for actual Artic Islands. If I've waited for so fucking long I can wait some more. And if they plan to pull this rebranding shit for the 3rd time with Artic Islands, they can just piss off. I don't need them to be around anymore then.

Now I'm off to eating some shoes and overclocking my HD7950...


----------



## v12dock (Jun 15, 2015)

If the price/performance is right who cares if its a re-brand


----------



## happita (Jun 15, 2015)

v12dock said:


> If the price/performance is right who cares if its a re-brand



Sure, the price/performance will be right....by 2016 or right before Arctic Islands comes out. I don't think prices will change much since there is no competition for Nvidia this generation. For people looking to upgrade, it's best to look out for some good 290/290X deals because I'm sure they will be aplenty.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jun 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I never even asked for more shaders. I'd be perfectly happy with exact same count, but with GCN 1.2. Not this fucking lazy disgrace with a fucking reflashed BIOS and extra 4GB of VRAM. They needed almost 2 years for this pile of bullshit? Like F U AMD.


 I meant more shaders compared to the 285 (IE the same core count in the Hawaii Pro and XT).

Its definitely not a good thing, however I am still reserving my comments until I see it in the market more than these leaks/early sales.  I am still a bit skeptical personally but that is just me...


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 15, 2015)

Why would they bullshit us all this time? They could just openly say, we're using same shader count as with R9-290X but we're gonna smack some sweet GCN 1.2 love on it. And we'd go fucking insane screaming "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY". But instead I just want to scream two words that start with F and U. Aaargh it makes me mad. I was waiting almost 8 months for fucking nothing...


----------



## fullinfusion (Jun 15, 2015)

Well isn't this a nice how dee do wake up.. 

A re-brand, great! Wtf is AMD doing over there besides a shitty rebrand on there 3 series.. And twice the memory plus higher clocks lol what a joke... Fu%k both my 290 and 290x both run the same clocks at stock. 

So AMD, have you cooled this rebranded bastard down? Being built straight down to the last transistor, identical, I pretty much have no doubt in my mind these will be just as hot as there older brothers...


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Jun 15, 2015)

If this is supposed to be Hawaii, then we are again running with the old, shitty problem of high power consumption, leakage, and consequently high temps for which 290X was condemned for.  Well that's just sh*t. I really thought AMD would bring to this new 390/X lineup some brand new chip, at least crippled Fiji, but IT DIDN'T.

I don't know how AMD's gonna sue people to buy their 300 series, because every SKU is rebrand, and more importantly, they have the same inherent overheating problem and high power consumption as 200 series (and 7000 series). I think they just gave Nvidia more space in the market, and no way it would make sense to "upgrade" to 300 series, unless someone is looking for more vRAM, because clock speeds doesn't impress. Get an aftermarket cooler or the stock could do well enough, do few tweaks and you are at the new cards' level, and maybe better. The BIOS is just new, and the more vRAM, but nothing else.

Boooo AMD! You let us down.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 15, 2015)

Hmmmm...so now what to do.  My 6850s are just not cutting it anymore but I don't see a reason to buy something this generation.  I was hoping AMD would trim power consumption / heat from the 390/X.  My ambient temps are around 28C and I don't feel like having a 300 watt heater next to me.

I was going to buy a 970 but I don't like being lied too (I know it still performs excellent and overall is an excellent card but they knew it wouldn't sell as well if they advertised it as 3.5gb and they tried to blow smoke up our asses as a miscommunication between departments - bs).


----------



## btarunr (Jun 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> I'd rather buy potentially broken and flawed GTX 970 then. At least it's still faster now even if that 3,5GB memory thing proves to be problematic in the future and lastly, it still costs freaking less.



All my games run just fine.



v12dock said:


> If the price/performance is right who cares if its a re-brand



AMD had the opportunity to make Grenada to be a chip with GCN 1.2, and some new stuff, such as HDMI 2.0. Most of the R&D was already done (GCN 1.2 on Tonga, HDMI 2.0 on Fiji). The resulting chip wouldn't have been much different from Hawaii. But nooo. AMD's investment in Grenada is all of firing up a BIOS editor and changing one tiny little string.


----------



## mirakul (Jun 15, 2015)

Vayra86 said:


> So, in your tiny mind HBM suddenly allows more than 1GB of data on a 1GB VRAM size? Or it will swap textures SO fast that it can do the same with half the framebuffer? That is some pretty awesome interlacing then
> 
> Are you retarded or just plain stupid? 4GB = 4GB. Except when its a 970 you are talking about...



4 oranges is different from 4 apples. HBM is different from a 7-years-old tech called GDDR5.

4 GB of HBM, with a proper scheduler from driver, can do the same thing 12 GB of GDDR5 able to do at 4k.

Back to the topic, AMD did the same rebrand scheme in 2xx series. It's not a good move, but still is the only choice for them now. Money does make people do shit things


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Jun 15, 2015)

I don't get it, what is wrong with AMD? Are they running short of funds, are their engineers and R&D have nothing in their brains (or maybe living under rocks), or is there a traitor in AMD suggesting how it should plan its step, to get it destroyed?

I feel bad for AMD, I am not a fanboy of AMD, neither of nvidia, but I really want it to trample nvidia for few years. I don't think HBM would do any good to AMD anyway, since nvidia's new arsenal, aka Pascal is coming with HBM v2, that would shatter anything of AMD's built fame over Fiji XT. Shrinking lithographies doesn't do the talking, you need better GPU architecture.


----------



## 64K (Jun 15, 2015)

moproblems99 said:


> Hmmmm...so now what to do.  My 6850s are just not cutting it anymore but I don't see a reason to buy something this generation.  I was hoping AMD would trim power consumption / heat from the 390/X.  My ambient temps are around 28C and I don't feel like having a 300 watt heater next to me.
> 
> I was going to buy a 970 but I don't like being lied too (I know it still performs excellent and overall is an excellent card but they knew it wouldn't sell as well if they advertised it as 3.5gb and they tried to blow smoke up our asses as a miscommunication between departments - bs).



If your 6850s aren't cutting it then that's a good reason to upgrade. An XFX 290x is $270 at Newegg with rebate if you can buy there or wait for the prices to dip even more when 390x arrives in stores. It may be many months before we will see Arctic Islands and if you're gaming at 1080p 60 Hz then that would be overkill anyway so yeah a 290x/390x would be a possible upgrade.




Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> I don't get it, what is wrong with AMD? Are they running short of funds, are their engineers and R&D have nothing in their brains (or maybe living under rocks), or is there a traitor in AMD suggesting how it should plan its step, to get it destroyed?
> 
> I feel bad for AMD, I am not a fanboy of AMD, neither of nvidia, but I really want it to trample nvidia for few years. I don't think HBM would do any good to AMD anyway, since nvidia's new arsenal, aka Pascal is coming with HBM v2, that would shatter anything of AMD's built fame over Fiji XT. Shrinking lithographies doesn't do the talking, you need better GPU architecture.


Things are tight at AMD right now. They lost over $400 million last year and another $170 million the first quarter this year even with the console market to themselves.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jun 15, 2015)

Vayra86 said:


> So, in your tiny mind HBM suddenly allows more than 1GB of data on a 1GB VRAM size? Or it will swap textures SO fast that it can do the same with half the framebuffer? That is some pretty awesome interlacing then
> 
> Are you retarded or just plain stupid? 4GB = 4GB. Except when its a 970 you are talking about...



Keep from becoming personal next time.


----------



## rruff (Jun 15, 2015)

Legacy-ZA said:


> That 8GB Memory is delicious, if you look at the most new games, I think 4GB is just inadequate. This sure will make the product future proof too.



4GB is only inadequate if the card has high processing power and these don't. Sure, now you will be able to run the best textures and AA and not have any frame buffer issues, but *it will only be at 15fps. *

For CF it's nice, but isn't DX12 going to allow frames to be split between cards? So soon even the advantage in CF will be nil. 

No doubt 8GB will be a big selling point for the masses who don't know any better. I guess success depends on how many in that category are in the market for a $350-$400 card.


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Jun 15, 2015)

64K said:


> Things are tight at AMD right now. They lost over $400 million last year and another $170 million the first quarter this year even with the console market to themselves.



They could arrange a partnership with the big companies like Samsung and hire workforce, if that makes sense.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 15, 2015)

64K said:


> If your 6850s aren't cutting it then that's a good reason to upgrade. An XFX 290x is $270 at Newegg with rebate if you can buy there or wait for the prices to dip even more when 390x arrives in stores. It may be many months before we will see Arctic Islands and if you're gaming at 1080p 60 Hz then that would be overkill anyway so yeah a 290x/390x would be a possible upgrade.



I see how my statement was confusing.  I do need to upgrade, you are correct.  However, when I built my brother's computer with a 290, the heat was ridiculous.  I don't really have the budget to buy new this year and next year when the real cards come out.  I don't really like buying cards on ebay...like I said decisions.  I suppose since it would only be a year or less I could probably deal with a 290X.

Edit:  I also should have said the cards on offer really aren't that compelling.  I also don't think that the 290X is overkill for 1080.  Minimum frames really aren't that good for games like BF4, and TW3.


----------



## v12dock (Jun 15, 2015)

happita said:


> Sure, the price/performance will be right....by 2016 or right before Arctic Islands comes out. I don't think prices will change much since there is no competition for Nvidia this generation. For people looking to upgrade, it's best to look out for some good 290/290X deals because I'm sure they will be aplenty.



We still don't know Fiji's performance. If Fiji can take on 980 TI and Titan X and they price the 3xx cards accordingly then how is no competition.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 15, 2015)

mirakul said:


> 4 oranges is different from 4 apples. HBM is different from a 7-years-old tech called GDDR5.
> 
> 4 GB of HBM, with a proper scheduler from driver, can do the same thing 12 GB of GDDR5 able to do at 4k.
> 
> Back to the topic, AMD did the same rebrand scheme in 2xx series. It's not a good move, but still is the only choice for them now. Money does make people do shit things



No, you can schedule all you want, but it won't alleviate VRAM minimum requirements. To lower those further, the ball needs to move to game developers. You overestimate HBM. As long as GDDR5 is still on the market, which it will be for at least half a decade still, games will not be built around HBM properties.


----------



## DarkOCean (Jun 15, 2015)

290/290x both already had 6ghz memory chips but clocked lower so this IS just a clock bump rebrand, nothing changed phisically, just double density chips wich is pontless on a card featuring this level of performance.


----------



## mirakul (Jun 15, 2015)

Vayra86 said:


> No, you can schedule all you want, but it won't alleviate VRAM minimum requirements. To lower those further, the ball needs to move to game developers. You overestimate HBM. As long as GDDR5 is still on the market, which it will be for at least half a decade still, games will not be built around HBM properties.



First, 'VRAM minimum requirement' is just a generic term. Shadow of mordor is a stupid game with 6GB requirements, but you still can start game with a 2GB card. 

Second, games is not build around HBM or GDDR5. It's the driver which controls how the VRAM is used. The ball doesn't need to and never be moved to devs.

Finally, do you really understand how a graphic card works before posting stuff here?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 15, 2015)

DarkOCean said:


> 290/290x both already had 6ghz memory chips but clocked lower so this IS just a clock bump rebrand, nothing changed phisically, just double density chips wich is pontless on a card featuring this level of performance.



This


----------



## Steevo (Jun 15, 2015)

Most likely a few small tweaks that don't change the actual working of the die, but save power and allow for more stable memory and core speeds, much like the decoupling caps from the 1800 to the 1900. 

That was the card purchase thst taught me to not be on the leading edge of cards until the numbers were in.


----------



## GLD (Jun 15, 2015)

I am down for a R9 3xx card. Give me a card with DX12, a faster core and newer/faster memory, and lower power consumption AMD. Windows 10 with DX12 and a DX12 capable AMD gpu...2015 is looking good for my gaming computer.


----------



## Exceededgoku (Jun 15, 2015)

So I'm confused, are these the cards that were seen in "benchmarks" outperforming the Titan X?

And are now appearing to just be a rebrand plus some extra RAM, core speed?

Or am I at a complete loss?


----------



## INSTG8R (Jun 15, 2015)

I guess if I can get away with Win10 next month when it comes out I can wait until there are actually DX12 games and a 2nd gen of DX12 cards to go with it...



Exceededgoku said:


> So I'm confused, are these the cards that were seen in "benchmarks" outperforming the Titan X?
> 
> And are now appearing to just be a rebrand plus some extra RAM, core speed?
> 
> Or am I at a complete loss?


No that is "Fury" the Fiji XT chip, totally different card.


----------



## dwade (Jun 15, 2015)

So they have the time and money to give 290x 8GB of VRAM, but not their 2015 flagship Fury X. LOL.


----------



## mirakul (Jun 15, 2015)

dwade said:


> So they have the time and money to give 290x 8GB of VRAM, but not their 2015 flagship Fury X. LOL.


8GB of DDR5.
4GB of HBM.


----------



## rruff (Jun 15, 2015)

INSTG8R said:


> No that is "Fury" the Fiji XT chip, totally different card.



Yes, hopefully AMD will have a good performer at the high end and these rebadges will still cover all the performance bases... but damn! It'd be nice to get a little extra *something* new in the lower tiers. And no, slightly higher clocks and more (useless!) vram for more money doesn't cut it.



mirakul said:


> Second, games is not build around HBM or GDDR5. It's the driver which controls how the VRAM is used. The ball doesn't need to and never be moved to devs.
> Finally, do you really understand how a graphic card works before posting stuff here?



I don't know that much, but I think vayra86 is talking about frame buffer size limitations. The frame needs to fit in the space allocated. Doesn't matter how fast the vram is.


----------



## mirakul (Jun 15, 2015)

rruff said:


> I don't know that much, but I think vayra86 is talking about frame buffer size limitations. The frame needs to fit in the space allocated. Doesn't matter how fast the vram is.


It would be best if all stuff need in one frame are stored in VRAM (read>done). If not, GPU have to wait until all data for the frame is ready. (read>wait>read>done). The wait part, when the VRAM need to get new stuff from RAM, is irrelevant with PCIe 3.0 speed, and the delay was mostly caused by the additional read part.

However, with HBM the speed of this read part is 9 times smaller than that of GDDR5 at same clock. In FuryX and TitanX case, this ratio reduce to 0.6 times smaller due to different clock. Some simple math from here show that with good scheduler from driver, 4GB capacity is not that big issue with frames of 4GB-8GB zone. At 8GB-12GB zone, the difference will be more clear, but the GPU also suffers here, which make the delay of memory less significant. In short, 4GB of HBM on FuryX can keep up with 12GB of TitanX in 4GB-8GB zone, and is superior in sub 4GB area.


----------



## happita (Jun 15, 2015)

v12dock said:


> We still don't know Fiji's performance. If Fiji can take on 980 TI and Titan X and they price the 3xx cards accordingly then how is no competition.



That is but just one card. The whole 3XX line is pretty much the same exact cards from last generation. How much more performance does an extra 50MHz on core realistically give you in games? The OC headroom I fear will be close to nil. Factor on top of that the 290/290X were BOTH overheating beasts that needed to be tamed by AIB partners ASAP because reviews were bashing the crap out of AMD's reference boards. When the 390/390X come out, please compare the prices with current 290/290X and tell me if that is competition.


----------



## v12dock (Jun 15, 2015)

happita said:


> That is but just one card. The whole 3XX line is pretty much the same exact cards from last generation. How much more performance does an extra 50MHz on core realistically give you in games? The OC headroom I fear will be close to nil. Factor on top of that the 290/290X were BOTH overheating beasts that needed to be tamed by AIB partners ASAP because reviews were bashing the crap out of AMD's reference boards. When the 390/390X come out, please compare the prices with current 290/290X and tell me if that is competition.



If the 390X is as fast or faster than 970 and cost slightly less or equal then how is there not competition. You are also assuming that they have not addressed the heat and power issues of the 290X. Given the capitalistic environment in which both companies exist AMD isn't going to create a package that won't sell. Also Maxwell doesn't offer any features that AMD can't offer with GCN.  

So far with the leaks we have seen AMD has an answer to the entire Maxwell line up.


----------



## Hayder_Master (Jun 15, 2015)

i hear HPM memory max support 4gb, how they make it 8gb ?


----------



## happita (Jun 15, 2015)

Hayder_Master said:


> i hear HPM memory max support 4gb, how they make it 8gb ?



This is the first generation of HBM, which only supports one stack that totals to 4GB if I'm not mistaken. Next generation of cards will have 2nd generation HBM totaling 8GB.



v12dock said:


> If the 390X is as fast or faster than 970 and cost slightly less or equal then how is there not competition. You are also assuming that they have not addressed the heat and power issues of the 290X. Given the capitalistic environment in which both companies exist AMD isn't going to create a package that won't sell. Also Maxwell doesn't offer any features that AMD can't offer with GCN.
> 
> So far with the leaks we have seen AMD has an answer to the entire Maxwell line up.



How can you address overheating by adding 4GB more VRAM and also a slight overclock with no architectural changes to the chip design? I just don't see the logic there. But like everyone else, I guess we will have to wait and see when they are properly reviewed.


----------



## bogami (Jun 15, 2015)

Everything tells me thes predestined price for AMD R-9 390X is how much profit   NVIDIA generated by larger RAM capacity on TITAN-X.
And now margin and tax away. $ 200 price is quite a lot of $ 100 for the development which is zero, $ 100 production -which is over kill. Poor customers! Crooks  love to fuck us!
Card has demonstrated its strength in the 4k gameplay has a lot of usage and size compared to  the GTX980. Well RAM is obtained at a better price. How much it actually benefits is the question. 8GB RAM R-9 290X was more expensive and equally effective as 4Gb RAM R9-290X.
How much has been changed on processor ,or was only the name change?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 15, 2015)

Hayder_Master said:


> i hear HPM memory max support 4gb, how they make it 8gb ?



Simple, the 390/X does not use HBM and instead uses GDDR5.


----------



## ne6togadno (Jun 15, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> .... Aaargh it makes me mad. I was waiting almost 8 months for fucking nothing...


on the other hand, 290s prices will drop cause all vendors would like to ride them off and get "new"  390s so you can catch really nice deal for 290x oc it and have 4gb version of 390.
i have 7970 and 290x and 290x is much better so it will worth.

edit: keep an eye on this guys


----------



## v12dock (Jun 15, 2015)

happita said:


> This is the first generation of HBM, which only supports one stack that totals to 4GB if I'm not mistaken. Next generation of cards will have 2nd generation HBM totaling 8GB.
> 
> 
> 
> How can you address overheating by adding 4GB more VRAM and also a slight overclock with no architectural changes to the chip design? I just don't see the logic there. But like everyone else, I guess we will have to wait and see when they are properly reviewed.



More effective cooling and changes to the manufacturing process GloFo high density libraries among other things. We will just have to wait and see.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 15, 2015)

happita said:


> How can you address overheating by adding 4GB more VRAM and also a slight overclock with no architectural changes to the chip design? I just don't see the logic there. But like everyone else, I guess we will have to wait and see when they are properly reviewed.



Making a better cooler, I am guessing.  Aftermarket R9 290X's did not overheat bad (if at all).


----------



## cuneytcam (Jun 15, 2015)

When the reviews will be up? Is it going to be published after AMD event?


----------



## Dia01 (Jun 15, 2015)

What's stopping anyone flashing their current 290 with a 390 BIOS or am I missing something?


----------



## Aquinus (Jun 15, 2015)

mirakul said:


> 4 GB of HBM, with a proper scheduler from driver, can do the same thing 12 GB of GDDR5 able to do at 4k.


That's bull because there comes a point where the latency from streaming textures from system memory takes too long to be useful because you need all of the data for the scene to get rendered on the GPU. Yes, HBM is faster but you know what isn't? PCI-E and DMA via memory mapped I/O. You're not going to stream textures any faster when GDDR5 is already faster than the PCI-E bus. On top of that, bandwidth isn't the problem half of the time, it's latency. I suspect HBM will shine when a lot of VRAM is used, however it does absolutely nothing to change the requirement of any size of VRAM for any task. It's still limited by where it gets it's data from if it suddenly has to resort to streaming from system memory which is the problem I'm encountering now with my 6870s.

Also streaming textures slows down performance linearly because it has to re-send data that the GPU doesn't have on every redraw, so the bigger the share, the longer the draw takes (and more time GPU spends doing nothing I might add.) I can't underestimate how much that destroys performance as it's many factors slower than dedicated memory.

Simple fact is that 4GB, is 4GB, is 4GB.


----------



## Ralfies (Jun 16, 2015)

So,

Grenada = Hawaii
Antigua = Tonga
Trinidad = Curacao = Pitcairn
Tobago = Bonaire

I'm not a fan of AMD's new tactic of giving old GPU's new codenames when they're rebranded. Also, as great as Pitcairn was, it has no place on a GPU lineup in 2015. A further cut down Tonga would have made more sense (though maybe not financially).


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 16, 2015)

Dia01 said:


> What's stopping anyone flashing their current 290 with a 390 BIOS or am I missing something?



Well, 8GB, for starters...


----------



## Dia01 (Jun 16, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> Well, 8GB, for starters...



Yeah I realised that quickly after posting


----------



## btarunr (Jun 16, 2015)

Dia01 said:


> What's stopping anyone flashing their current 290 with a 390 BIOS or am I missing something?



The PCB is the same, but reference 390 has 8GB, and reference 290 has 4GB. Memory timings will differ. Memory brand support will differ, too. You will brick your card.


----------



## ne6togadno (Jun 16, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> Making a better cooler, I am guessing.  Aftermarket R9 290X's did not overheat bad (if at all).


the only time i have seen 72C on my card was while running gpuz render test. fans hit 50% and was barely audiable


----------



## Xzibit (Jun 16, 2015)

happita said:


> How can you address overheating by adding 4GB more VRAM and also a slight overclock with no architectural changes to the chip design? I just don't see the logic there. But like everyone else, I guess we will have to wait and see when they are properly reviewed.



Temps were never a problem for AIBs.

The current 390/X that have been show have improved cooler over there 290/X part.


----------



## arbiter (Jun 16, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> The R&D already done was the Tonga. They'd just have to transplant that on top of R9-290X and into the R9-390X like it was speculated from the very beginning. Instead they've gone into the shitty rebranding. FU AMD. Rebranding of R9-380X, I'd accept that, but 390X as well, no. Just no.



Yea if they named it 380x would got away with it mostly, still some backlash but not making it 390x. I won't even say it, even with all flak i got last few weeks/months.



snakefist said:


> Both companies made an effort to produce top-tier GPUs only, and will probably be reducing prices of the rest of the lineup graudally, as times passes by



Not sure if you were paying attention, Nvidia didn't produce just top tier only gpu's. Well less you consider 960 top tier which wasn't its mid range one.



mirakul said:


> 4 GB of HBM, with a proper scheduler from driver, can do the same thing 12 GB of GDDR5 able to do at 4k.





Aquinus said:


> That's bull because there comes a point where the latency from streaming textures from system memory takes too long to be useful because you need all of the data for the scene to get rendered on the GPU. Yes, HBM is faster but you know what isn't? PCI-E and DMA via memory mapped I/O. You're not going to stream textures any faster when GDDR5 is already faster than the PCI-E bus.



Mirakul as Aquinus said, that is complete BS. that 4gb buffer gets full which at 4k is pretty easy even with newer games 1440p can do it, it CAN'T do the same. 640GB/s memory can be brought to a crawl if data is stored in system memory which will be crippled to ~30GB/s. It would be like 2 computers doing photo shop on using say 10MP images. 1 has 4gb ram and an SSD, other has 16gb ram but an HDD. yea SSD will make the 4gb machine a bit faster but when you have to constintly access the ssd for data or store data instead of system memory which is much faster it will slow things down.



Hayder_Master said:


> i hear HPM memory max support 4gb, how they make it 8gb ?





happita said:


> This is the first generation of HBM, which only supports one stack that totals to 4GB if I'm not mistaken. Next generation of cards will have 2nd generation HBM totaling 8GB.


HBM1 is limited to 4gb as happita said, HBM2 which isn't completely ready yet has a max of 32gb.



cuneytcam said:


> When the reviews will be up? Is it going to be published after AMD event?


When ever the NDA ends is when you will see them. Would have to ask someone that knows the date of that if they know and can say.


----------



## RejZoR (Jun 16, 2015)

Exactly. I'd kinda ignore it if it was only R9-380X and below that got rebranded. But also rebranding R9-390X is juts unacceptable.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 16, 2015)

well ...




i have a 390 so ... albeit the fact that i can't reach a stable 1500 on vRAM... (1050 core is stable but i keep it at 1000)





i could only run one heaven but it always hang up at the 25/26 scene xD


----------



## Joss (Jun 16, 2015)

This KitGuru video sums up things very well.

http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/zardon/amd-fiji-hbm-and-product-rebadging/


----------



## mirakul (Jun 16, 2015)

GreiverBlade said:


> well ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The trick for stable 1500MHz is an increase in memory voltage, which was locked in 290/290x


----------



## haswrong (Jun 16, 2015)

moproblems99 said:


> Hmmmm...so now what to do.  My 6850s are just not cutting it anymore but I don't see a reason to buy something this generation.  I was hoping AMD would trim power consumption / heat from the 390/X.  My ambient temps are around 28C and I don't feel like having a 300 watt heater next to me.
> 
> I was going to buy a 970 but I don't like being lied too (I know it still performs excellent and overall is an excellent card but they knew it wouldn't sell as well if they advertised it as 3.5gb and they tried to blow smoke up our asses as a miscommunication between departments - bs).


you could get a second hand 970.. i wouldnt hold it against you.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 16, 2015)

haswrong said:


> you could get a second hand 970.. i wouldnt hold it against you.



That very well is a possibility.  I already checked on 290Xs but they are averaging just a touch below retail so not much incentive there.


----------



## 64K (Jun 16, 2015)

snakefist said:


> Both companies made an effort to produce top-tier GPUs only, and will probably be reducing prices of the rest of the lineup graudally, as times passes by. Until real new architecture, based on 14/16nm arrives...




Nvidia actually provided something for everyone with Maxwell

Entry Level 750/750 Ti
Mid Range 960/970/980
High End 980 Ti/Titan X


----------



## haswrong (Jun 16, 2015)

happita said:


> That is but just one card. The whole 3XX line is pretty much the same exact cards from last generation. How much more performance does an extra 50MHz on core realistically give you in games? The OC headroom I fear will be close to nil. Factor on top of that the 290/290X were BOTH overheating beasts that needed to be tamed by AIB partners ASAP because reviews were bashing the crap out of AMD's reference boards. When the 390/390X come out, please compare the prices with current 290/290X and tell me if that is competition.


i hope peeps at tpu are absolutely super-enthusiastic about re-benching all games with the new re-brands  +1fps ftw?


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 16, 2015)

Wasn't paper launch today????  Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## PCGamerDR (Jun 16, 2015)

I just want to 390nonX to be able to beat the 970 in most benchmarks doesnt have to be in all of them and then i can give my precious money to AMD, please gods of pixels hear my prayer!, my gtx550ti is too old and wants to retire.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 17, 2015)

mirakul said:


> It would be best if all stuff need in one frame are stored in VRAM (read>done). If not, GPU have to wait until all data for the frame is ready. (read>wait>read>done). The wait part, when the VRAM need to get new stuff from RAM, is irrelevant with PCIe 3.0 speed, and the delay was mostly caused by the additional read part.
> 
> However, with HBM the speed of this read part is 9 times smaller than that of GDDR5 at same clock. In FuryX and TitanX case, this ratio reduce to 0.6 times smaller due to different clock. Some simple math from here show that with good scheduler from driver, 4GB capacity is not that big issue with frames of 4GB-8GB zone. At 8GB-12GB zone, the difference will be more clear, but the GPU also suffers here, which make the delay of memory less significant. In short, 4GB of HBM on FuryX can keep up with 12GB of TitanX in 4GB-8GB zone, and is superior in sub 4GB area.



It will be interesting to see how it pans out. So far there is no evidence anywhere that suggests what you are saying is going to actually work that way in practice *and* result in good gameplay.

Theoretically, yes its possible. In practice, we know there are many hurdles to be taken to turn that performance into a smooth gameplay experience. It took Nvidia a couple of driver updates to get their 970 with its memory arch working the way it should, and there are still fundamental issues with Maxwell drivers, including an unusually high number of crashes even outside the game. And it is only since a couple of years that we have had attention for microstutter/frame pacing issues and are looking to eliminate them from the driver. All this goes to show that while theoretically stuff 'should work fine' it really doesn't and the driver already is a huge collection of tweaks and per-game optimization.

HBM is going to force AMD into a separate driver dev process. Do you see it happening when the third rebrand is not even getting its Tonga optimizations?

I'm just being a realist instead of an optimist.


----------



## andy721 (Jan 9, 2016)

According to my GPU-Z my specs are almost the same as the R9 390(X)  wow, as I predicted this would happen and continue.  Technology is milked with model names and numbers.  Each 3-6months to a year the performance only goes up 0.15-0.20%, sadly the price is the only thing that goes way up and not the performance.  I see the pattern, I know this HBM(2)+ is just bullshitting their way through manipulating everything explaining how much quicker and better it is when really you just wasted another $400-$600 on another shitty graphics card.  I'm wondering if we reached a peak with this technology due to fake science limiting us to the true potential of technology.



Xzibit said:


> Always look for deals.
> 
> All the 390/X that have been shown have an improved cooler.  Need to see reviews to see if there is any benefit.



Don't tell people to buy this card, it's a waste of money.  They conned everyone same with NVIDIA.  It's all milked technology and you all know it.


----------



## arbiter (Jan 9, 2016)

andy721 said:


> Don't tell people to buy this card, it's a waste of money.  They conned everyone same with NVIDIA.  It's all milked technology and you all know it.


Well, AMD conned people with same card, just rebranded and tweaked bios. Nvidia cards had a new gpu though on same 28nm. nvidia cards weren't really a con as much as AMD cards were.


----------



## andy721 (Jan 10, 2016)

arbiter said:


> Well, AMD conned people with same card, just rebranded and tweaked bios. Nvidia cards had a new gpu though on same 28nm. nvidia cards weren't really a con as much as AMD cards were.


They're all in on the whole con amd and nvidia doesn't matter they're all in the same boat.  I hate them both but what choice we have unless we can create our own, a better one at that which we can if we have the materials they use to create video cards which is just a custom heat sink and plastic/processors with a few programming here or there and testing under pressure/temps for stability.  I wouldn't mind not paying 400-500bucks per graphics card every 5years or so.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jan 10, 2016)

arbiter said:


> Well, AMD conned people with same card, just rebranded and tweaked bios. Nvidia cards had a new gpu though on same 28nm. nvidia cards weren't really a con as much as AMD cards were.


Uhh, no that is not all they did dude...  Plus his argument is pretty valid this round since those slight changes were enough to keep the cards in the same ballpark as Nvidia's "new" cards.

The only cards that actually improve anything much this round is the GTX 980ti/Titan X, and the Fury's with the GTX 980ti holding the crown.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 11, 2016)

I told people to grab up the R# 2xx cards for a reason. XD

Do note that 390X has double the memory.  Overclocking doesn't change that.


----------



## arbiter (Jan 11, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I told people to grab up the R# 2xx cards for a reason. XD
> 
> Do note that 390X has double the memory.  Overclocking doesn't change that.


Do note as well that 290x had same 8gb versions as well i guess that slipped your mind.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 11, 2016)

They were OEM and quite rare.


The picture @andy721 posted shows a 4 GiB 290 versus an 8 GiB 390X.


----------



## arbiter (Jan 11, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> They were OEM and quite rare.
> The picture @andy721 posted shows a 4 GiB 290 versus an 8 GiB 390X.


Rare? really? took 2 sec loaded newegg and "290x 8gb" even now there is still 2 of them for sale you can buy. they weren't rare.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jan 11, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> They were OEM and quite rare.
> 
> 
> The picture @andy721 posted shows a 4 GiB 290 versus an 8 GiB 390X.


 


arbiter said:


> Rare? really? took 2 sec loaded newegg and "290x 8gb" even now there is still 2 of them for sale you can buy. they weren't rare.


Even if they are rare or not is not the point.  A rebrand consists of the same exact package being branded with a new label as in they took the graphics card off the line making the previous iteration and put a different sticker on them.  That is not the case with this card unlike cards like the R9 280/X which were rebrands of the HD 7950 and 7970 with some minor variations in core clocks (Similar to like the HD 7870 and 270/X).  The point is if we took a R9 290X and an R9 390X and clocked them to the same levels the 390X would still outperform it because there is more than just 4 more gigabytes of VRAM changed on the card (including improved memory timings for starters) which alone would make it not a rebrand except of the special versions of the R9 290X with 8gb.  Does not mean people should be rushing off to the store to purchase the cards if they own the previous generation, but its still improved none the less.

Also, this thread is quite old and its an ancient subject at this point. since the last time this was really discussed was a couple months ago.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jan 11, 2016)

andy721 said:


> View attachment 70938
> According to my GPU-Z my specs are almost the same as the R9 390(X)  wow, as I predicted this would happen and continue.  Technology is milked with model names and numbers.  Each 3-6months to a year the performance only goes up 0.15-0.20%, sadly the price is the only thing that goes way up and not the performance.  I see the pattern, I know this HBM(2)+ is just bullshitting their way through manipulating everything explaining how much quicker and better it is when really you just wasted another $400-$600 on another shitty graphics card.  I'm wondering if we reached a peak with this technology due to fake science limiting us to the true potential of technology.





andy721 said:


> Don't tell people to buy this card, it's a waste of money.  They conned everyone same with NVIDIA.  It's all milked technology and you all know it.



Thread necro and double post, two capital offenses on many a forum.

FYI


----------



## erocker (Jan 11, 2016)

Please don't revive an old thread to continue a long dead argument.


----------

