RejZoRI don't get this gimmick. If any of the manufacturers paid some attention to the fan curves, we'd have absolutely silent graphic cards for few years already. Instead, on my massive WindForce 3X, the fan curve was carved by an idiot. Typical summer idle is 55°C, meaning anything below this has to be minimum RPM, in my case 30% speed which is absolutely silent. And when temperature increases, increase fan speed from here on. Not already at 40°C and make it unbearably noisy when it hits just 60°C. It's idiotic. These GPU's can handly 85°C with ease. So why the hell make such massive cooler cards so noisy?

I'm currently running HD7950 core at 1,2GHz using 1,3V and VRAM at 6 GHz and the card hardly makes much noise and yet the temperature remains below 80°C. If I can pull this off in my office, surely a multibillion company like ASUS or Giagbyte can as well. But they just don't bother doing it right.

hojnikbSo... when are we expecting to see some shoe eating madness ? :)

JossThis should had been the 290x launch 18 months ago.

the54thvoidThe maturity of the 28nm process means TSMC have dialled in the power consumption. Allows higher clocks for less heat and power.
Its still a 290X though. Bring sold at the same price...

the54thvoidThe maturity of the 28nm process means TSMC have dialled in the power consumption. Allows higher clocks for less heat and power.

GhostRyderYea but they are a lot better than what was believed and what even I thought was going to be the end result.

I don't applaud the rebrand, but it seems the process has improved at least a decent amount to achieve those numbers. Sadly though I wish we had GCN 1.2 on those cards for the other improvements on that board as well as the power draw. But at least this is a decent step up (Especially considering that's lower power while containing 4 more gb of ram and a higher core clock of 1100mhz on that model). The process matured quite a bit for that improvement.

You can tweak any 290X close to the 390X performance wise, the faster memory won't make a big difference as the 290X already had a ton of memory bandwidth

the54thvoidTo quote a very relevant statement from your links conclusion:



The MSI Gaming is 1100MHz which is 10% above Hawaii speeds. So it trades blows with a card that replaced the 780ti (arguably Nvidia's aim with GM204 was to drastically reduce power consumption but match GK110 performance).

So really, R9 390X versus GTX 980 is really, R9 290X versus GTX 780ti all over again. Yawn (for both). One caveat, the GTX 980 (GK110 performance rival) draws 171 Watts in your linked review. The 390X draws 258. So 390X equals 980 performance using 50% more power. Is that really an achievement?

And before the light brigade charges in with crap about TDP doesn't matter - AMD themselves are certainly espousing Fiji's power/performance metrics, even more so with their Nano.

No, these cards are dull. Fury is (looking to be) awesome. Even if it is on par with 980ti - I think it's a prestige looking part. 6 more days, then we can talk about 980ti / Fury X battles.

GhostRyderWas not claiming it to be amazing or super interesting, just a note that its better than it used to be at least all around. I mean just talking straight core clocks and memory all my 290X's are at 1125/1475 so mine outperform even the MSI. However they probably use a significant amount more power just to do that. I am not claiming this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, just that for what your getting its not a bad deal including that it is improved a bit more than just the an exact copy (which has been where a lot of the debate on how bad the 3XX series is).

I as well am mostly interested in the Fury more than anything else in the series. However its to see there was some improvements down the line at least instead of just putting a different sticker on a box.

I agree, I think the GTX 980 was aimed to just reduce power (err the whole series) over its last predecessor instead of offer serious improvements in the performance area (Which was reserved for the GTX 980ti/TitanX).

GhostRyderYea but they are a lot better than what was believed and what even I thought was going to be the end result.
I don't applaud the rebrand, but it seems the process has improved at least a decent amount to achieve those numbers.

RejZoRI don't get this gimmick. If any of the manufacturers paid some attention to the fan curves, we'd have absolutely silent graphic cards for few years already. Instead, on my massive WindForce 3X, the fan curve was carved by an idiot. Typical summer idle is 55°C, meaning anything below this has to be minimum RPM, in my case 30% speed which is absolutely silent. And when temperature increases, increase fan speed from here on. Not already at 40°C and make it unbearably noisy when it hits just 60°C. It's idiotic. These GPU's can handly 85°C with ease. So why the hell make such massive cooler cards so noisy?

I'm currently running HD7950 core at 1,2GHz using 1,3V and VRAM at 6 GHz and the card hardly makes much noise and yet the temperature remains below 80°C. If I can pull this off in my office, surely a multibillion company like ASUS or Giagbyte can as well. But they just don't bother doing it right.

TallencorCan two of these 390x's be crossfired and use 16G of mem total with Dx 12?

james888How good is your case airflow? How hot is your climate? I bet the gpu vendors take this into account and make a fan curve that will be effective for most users. You, knowing your hardware configuration, can perfect your fan curve. This is one of the benefits of owning a pc.

HumanSmokeHardOCP's power consumption figuresare at odd's with Hilbert's also

HumanSmokeThe OC of the MSI card makes the result more marked (and the differing driver used might also contribute). When the clocks are normalized, the difference is marginal.


HardOCP's power consumption figuresare at odd's with Hilbert's also

CasecutterBrent goes through the Clock to Clock exercise to disprove any differences on use the extra memory... at the lower speed on 1440p. We knew that answer.... Brent. I was hoping to see power. I suppose to truly find any ASIC quality differences they'd need an 8Gb 290X (hopefully of the same AIB) that would've offered if there was any proof in AMD's pudding in enhanced efficiency. (or lower the TDP from 290W to now 275W)

Edit: Ok just looking at W1zzard numbers there no way they have any claim to that lower TDP...