Sapphire R9 285 Dual-X OC 2 GB

[Sony Xperia S]

A lot of words, card still sucks.

The card doesn't suck, it is just a problem in you who doesn't see the obvious potential.

I like it because of more future-proof 4K hardware encode/decode support and very good gaming performance as shown in the review in the following titles:

Bioshock Infinite,
Diablo III: Reaper of Souls,
Metro: Last Light,
Thief,
Watch_Dogs,
Wolfenstein: The New Order

Just improve your vision, this card is, after all, just a better replacement for the R9 280. No one forces you to accept it as anything else.

 

[MrStim]

why use old drivers for the review?
wont the newer drivers be more optimized? time issue?
Dont agree with the review conclusion as well.

R9 285: 14.30 Beta 2

 

[Hilux SSRG]

The card doesn't suck, it is just a problem in you who doesn't see the obvious potential.

I like it because of more future-proof 4K hardware encode/decode support and very good gaming performance as shown in the review in the following titles:

Bioshock Infinite,
Diablo III: Reaper of Souls,
Metro: Last Light,
Thief,
Watch_Dogs,
Wolfenstein: The New Order

Just improve your vision, this card is, after all, just a better replacement for the R9 280. No one forces you to accept it as anything else.

How many of those games are AMD optimized similar to NVidia's "Gameworks"? Look at Wolfenstein and you will see the disappointment.

 

[Big_Vulture]

Lol, I'm just laughing when AMD say something big . They sad earlier it will be efficient as Maxwell

 

[Steevo]

The card doesn't suck, it is just a problem in you who doesn't see the obvious potential.

I like it because of more future-proof 4K hardware encode/decode support and very good gaming performance as shown in the review in the following titles:

Bioshock Infinite,
Diablo III: Reaper of Souls,
Metro: Last Light,
Thief,
Watch_Dogs,
Wolfenstein: The New Order

Just improve your vision, this card is, after all, just a better replacement for the R9 280. No one forces you to accept it as anything else.

I see the light, a card aimed at 1080 gaming, cant even make 50FPS in Watch_Dogs. or is it Watch Dogs... http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-285-tonga,3925-9.html

Very good gaming support, where a card essentially made in 2012 sinks its battleship, if we had this card and then they released the 280X as an improvement at a lower cost, we would cheer, but no, its a slower card at a higher price.

Future proof 4K, http://www.ultrahdtv.net/movies/page/2/ cause we all want to watch ink drops.

By the time 4K is an actual player in the market once blu-ray players are updated, in late 2015 when we finally have a possible disc to support it, once all the hundreds of other pieces fall into place we will worry about what standards are, and I am going to guess this card won't be the thing to own then, it will probably be left behind as both companies move ahead.

Wait, puppies bath..... so cute, so awesome, I will now buy a entire 4K setup just to watch a short movie about a puppies bath. Thank god you showed me the light!!!

http://www.imdb.com/list/ls051448087/

I hear breakfast at Tiffany's was mastered in 8K, making it even more future proof.

 

[Eagleye]

why use old drivers for the review?
wont the newer drivers be more optimized? time issue?
Dont agree with the review conclusion as well.

R9 285: 14.30 Beta 2

The Gigabyte R9 285 WindForce OC and its 176W average for gaming comes in almost 40 Watts lower than a moderately overclocked AMD Radeon R9 280 reference graphics card

191W @ average (torture test) OpenCL and DirectCompute

AMD Catalyst 14.7 specifically would have this card compete much better

 

[Steevo]

The Gigabyte R9 285 WindForce OC and its 176W average for gaming comes in almost 40 Watts lower than a moderately overclocked AMD Radeon R9 280 reference graphics card

191W @ average (torture test) OpenCL and DirectCompute

AMD Catalyst 14.7 specifically would have this card compete much better

Its the same driver everyone else is using, 14.300

W1zz tests power use right at the card too, there will always be some variation between manufacturers and GPU dies.

A whole 40W lower? So an end user could buy a much smaller PSU? Save lots of money?

 

[newtekie1]

Very disappointing card. Same price as a 770, but consumes significantly more power and performs noticeable worse. Just disappointing is all I can say.

 

[Assimilator]

It's not like they built a hype right from the start that the 285 will offer "phenomenal" power efficiency and performance.

Um, actually, AMD was throwing the phrase "GTX 760 killer" around like nobody's business. And a GTX 760 killer this card is most certainly not.

 

[Assimilator]

p.s. @W1zzard Catalyst 14.8 WHQL is out, when you gonna update the download links on TPU main page?

 

[Casecutter]

Window 8.1 can use Catalyst 14.7 beta 2 / Win7 is still calling to use Catalyst 14.6 beta

Those saying the 770 is pricing is similar... here in the States the bulk are still <$300; that one Zotac is a rare occurrence.

Honestly this will not move pricing... well one price these 285's! When AMD can drop a 295X2 down to $999 this with a lower cost PCB and menory needs to be a $210 with say a $20 rebate in play.

 

[The Mac]

People getting shocked at the results like it is news. The card runs a bit faster than the 280 - check. It consumes a bit less power than the 280 - check. It's not like they built a hype right from the start that the 285 will offer "phenomenal" power efficiency and performance.

Agreed, its a little more expensive than a 280, so there will be some great deals on 280, reducing inventory.

280 is no longer in production per AMD, so this is a great market strategy to clear the chanel of 280s, and replace with all the new tech.

Not sure what all the fuss is about, it was rumored to be a pitcairn replacement, instead its a Tahiti replacement.

Sounds like a win to me.

The flagship is coming with Fiji, this was NEVER supposed to be it.

 

[W1zzard]

p.s. @W1zzard Catalyst 14.8 WHQL is out, when you gonna update the download links on TPU main page?

not listed on amd.com, yes i know it's floating around the internet, but i rather wait a day for official + release notes

 

[HumanSmoke]

It's not like they built a hype right from the start that the 285 will offer "phenomenal" power efficiency and performance.

You mean like this

translating to this

AMD claim "up to 15%" faster, so I guess 0.37% does - at least semantically- fall into that range

 

[The Mac]

Wrong res, needs to be 1440.

This may change at that rez.

My guess is AMD also used no AA.

 

[the54thvoid]

Wrong res, needs to be 1440.

This may change at that rez.

My guess is AMD also used no AA.

So between 3% at 1080p and 3.7% at 1660p. Excuse HumanSmoke's arithmetic And AMD perform better at AA but that might just be the 4GB cards?

Let's just agree it's meh.... 290X is awesome, let's not muddy AMD's waters with a slightly revamped 7970-esque performer.

I can't wait for the GTX 980 to come out because I'll gladly stick my boot into that as well

 

[GhostRyder]

Very disappointing card. Same price as a 770, but consumes significantly more power and performs noticeable worse. Just disappointing is all I can say.

Are you referring to the GTX 760? Because I cannot find a GTX 770 for less than 300...Well I just found one for 274 from Zotac but thats the only one ive seen blow 300.

Its the same driver everyone else is using, 14.300

W1zz tests power use right at the card too, there will always be some variation between manufacturers and GPU dies.

A whole 40W lower? So an end user could buy a much smaller PSU? Save lots of money?

That is what ive been seeing around though it seems to depend on the card itself. 40 watts less roughly to get around 280X performance still is pretty nice and at least shows some improvements while we wait for the next generation. I am just more disappointed in the lack of ram...

Was never meant to be the biggest game changer ever...Just meant to show performance to watt improvements and give something to replace the dated 280/X series eventually.

Um, actually, AMD was throwing the phrase "GTX 760 killer" around like nobody's business. And a GTX 760 killer this card is most certainly not.

It seems to be pretty consistently better than the 760 so I would say its a better option seeing as how they are priced roughly the same.

p.s. @W1zzard Catalyst 14.8 WHQL is out, when you gonna update the download links on TPU main page?

I had not seen that yet 0_0

 

[HumanSmoke]

So between 3% at 1080p and 3.7% at 1660p. Excuse HumanSmoke's arithmetic

You're in a habit of comparing overclocked cards with stock as a viable benchmark comparison?
Stock vs stock is 27.1 fps (R9 285) vs 27.0 fps (GTX 760) - which by my reckoning is 0.37%

Are you referring to the GTX 760? Because I cannot find a GTX 770 for less than 300...Well I just found one for 274 from Zotac but thats the only one ive seen blow 300.

Probably depends where you shop. NCIX has a couple of non-reference models at a quick glance: PNY GTX 770 ($265) and an EVGA ACX ($280 after MIR)

 

[Mathragh]

Well, atleast this card is an excellent test platform for their color compression tech which apparently improves memory bandwidth efficiency by around 40%, thus negating a big chunk of the deficit caused by the 256 bus.
I can see that tech being especially important for APU's, where bandwidth really is quite limited, and I guess its also more economical for big cards.

Furthermore, I guess this card is also a bit more future proof (when bought with at least 4GB) if you recon tessellation will be more important in the future, as this card has as much tessellation power as the 290(x).

Apart from that, I also feel that this card is a bit of a let-down, especially when it comes to the promised power improvements. However with apparently an equally sized die, and even more transistors than tahiti, I guess this is what you get.
Other sites did sometimes get power use numbers that were quite different from here, like hardware.info, where their card used even less than the 760, and in this regard I really think AMD did quite a bit of damage by only releasing non-stock and factory overclocked cards to reviewers, potentially with voltages way over spec(although voltages are comparable to other non-x stock cards). Its sad to see them shooting themselves in the foot like this, by either overpromising, or doing a bad job at handing out proper cards.

On a last note, I found that the first page of the review had a bit of a negative undertone. I might be alone in this, but I thought it mention worthy as I don't think this is the intention. I can certainly see why it would be there, but at least leave us in ignorance while crunching through your review!

Thanks for the review as always!

 

[revin]

Thank you wizz!
It seem's a 3Gb 280X is better for most games ect,
Isn't the 280X a better deal ?
I was thiking of going 7970/Ghz since it'd be a good improvement, and price's coming down, but the 3Gb 280x's had caught my eye last couple months

so what am I missing ?? { Please be cordial}

 

[GhostRyder]

Well, atleast this card is an excellent test platform for their color compression tech which apparently improves memory bandwidth efficiency by around 40%, thus negating a big chunk of the deficit caused by the 256 bus.
I can see that tech being especially important for APU's, where bandwidth really is quite limited, and I guess its also more economical for big cards.

Furthermore, I guess this card is also a bit more future proof (when bought with at least 4GB) if you recon tessellation will be more important in the future, as this card has as much tessellation power as the 290(x).

Apart from that, I also feel that this card is a bit of a let-down, especially when it comes to the promised power improvements. However with apparently an equally sized die, and even more transistors than tahiti, I guess this is what you get.
Other sites did sometimes get power use numbers that were quite different from here, like hardware.info, where their card used even less than the 760, and in this regard I really think AMD did quite a bit of damage by only releasing non-stock and factory overclocked cards to reviewers, potentially with voltages way over spec(although voltages are comparable to other non-x stock cards). Its sad to see them shooting themselves in the foot like this, by either overpromising, or doing a bad job at handing out proper cards.

On a last note, I found that the first page of the review had a bit of a negative undertone. I might be alone in this, but I thought it mention worthy as I don't think this is the intention. I can certainly see why it would be there, but at least leave us in ignorance while crunching through your review!

Thanks for the review as always!

I agree there seem to be many different discrepancies on power usage. It may have something to do with the selection of the overclock edition cards like stated. Maybe we will see things more clearly as more of these come out. But some card makers way over estimate power needs and volt those cards way further than needed!

 

[Mathragh]

I agree there seem to be many different discrepancies on power usage. It may have something to do with the selection of the overclock edition cards like stated. Maybe we will see things more clearly as more of these come out. But some card makers way over estimate power needs and volt those cards way further than needed!

aye, and there apparently also are some 290(x) cards suffering from very high power use accompanied by higher temperatures at the moment. Its only some cards, and with the latest driver that suffer from it, but it makes one wonder if not something similar is happening here..
would both explain why the poweruse is higher than what we were let to believe it should be, and why the card is actually drawing even more than the PCI spec allows.
I wonder if this is why anandtech hasnt posted its review yet.

 

[HumanSmoke]

It seem's a 3Gb 280X is better for most games ect,
Isn't the 280X a better deal ?

Probably....and likely to get better since AMD just confirmed that the 280 is EOL*(after an active product run of .5 months), so it stands to reason that the 285X when it releases - probably as soon as the GTX 9xx are announced, it will do the same for the 280X

*

R9 280 is going away – you’ll find some pretty amazing deals online, so get it while you can! - Evan Groenke, Product Manager AMD desktop graphics

 

[W1zzard]

Because I cannot find a GTX 770 for less than 300...Well I just found one for 274 from Zotac but thats the only one ive seen blow 300.

I've seen the ZOTAC card twice in the last 2 weeks around $275 on Newegg (guess it's been there for these 2 weeks but don't know for sure). I hear other cards trade spots with it from time to time. So there is a single GTX 770 available for $275 all the time

 

[Darksword]

Might as well spend $269.99 for an R9 280X and get a faster card with 3GB VRAM.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202046

I knew the R9 285 would be a pointless card.