AMD "Hawaii" R9 290X GPU Specifications Revealed

[TheHunter]

And that Chinese site leaked some benchmarks too, actually a lot!
http://udteam.tistory.com/539

Like I had a thought 10-40% faster then Titan., Newer drivers will fix the rest, 7000 series driver boost anyone and extra 150-200mhz OC and its a killer gpu

imo not bad at all for max 600€.

 

[haswrong]

512bit @ 4Gb ram & 48 ROPs is pretty much confirmed.

too bad i cant afford liquid helium to cool it..

 

[HumanSmoke]

And that Chinese site leaked some benchmarks too, actually a lot!
http://udteam.tistory.com/539

Like I had a thought 10-40% faster then Titan.Newer drivers will fix the rest, 7000 series driver boost anyone and extra 150-200mhz OC and its a killer gpu

According to the poster (getwinder) 1020/5000 effective were the highest stable clocks he achieved with the card. A better comparison would be stock vs. stock, or max oc vs. max oc. My guess is that he was running up against a board limit if the power delivery is 8+6 pin.

BTW: Those aggregated percentage "Overall analysis" charts...might pay to take them with a grain of salt. According to the chart,

this supposed 290X has a 22.3% gain over the Titan for the Valley bench w/AA, yet the results chart has the AMD behind the Titan in both AA tests (along with both of the other benches) ???

 

[haswrong]

And that Chinese site leaked some benchmarks too, actually a lot!

korean site

*goes in hiding*

 

[Blín D'ñero]

[...]

BTW: Those aggregated percentage "Overall analysis" charts...might pay to take them with a grain of salt. According to the chart,
http://cfile30.uf.tistory.com/image/21137437523E214027FF46
this supposed 290X has a 22.3% gain over the Titan for the Valley bench w/AA, yet the results chart has the AMD behind the Titan in both AA tests (along with both of the other benches) ???
[...]]

You totally misread. That chart merely shows the decline in performance when moving from
1920 x 1080 -> 2560 x 1600 . Per card. Again: compared to itself from 1920 to 2560 resolution performance.

EDIT: no sorry, that's their second set of 3 charts. The first (which you copied) is about the performance decrement between using no AA or AA. Per card. Compared to itself.
They say: "As you can see, the Titan and the 780 drop 33-34% in performance (when applying AA), whereas ........... Yes. Yes ....... " ...the R9 290XT would drop 29.9% performance according to their chart.

 

[german103]

First post from a new member. Check.
Unsubstantiated claim. Check.
Lack of parameters for said claim. Check.

Seems legit.

http://videocardz.com/45753/amd-radeon-r9-290x-slightly-faster-gtx-titan

yeye i know it's a rumor

 

[HumanSmoke]

EDIT: no sorry, that's their second set of 3 charts. The first (which you copied) is about the performance decrement between using no AA or AA. Per card. Compared to itself.

Gotcha. My bad.
Kind of seems like an odd metric to use given the non-stock clocks, and the probabilities of the user of a $600-1000 card using no AA in their in-game settings.
Anyhow the performance difference between OC'ed AMD part, the stock 780, and stock Titan using the highest game i.q. benchmarks comes out to be 1.7% and 4% over Titan at 1920 and 2560 respectively, and 7.8% and 11.6% over the GTX 780.

Not overly conclusive without knowing what the reference core/boost/memory clocks are on the AMD part

 

[mirakul]

Gotcha. My bad.
Kind of seems like an odd metric to use given the non-stock clocks, and the probabilities of the user of a $600-1000 card using no AA in their in-game settings.

Not overly conclusive without knowing what the reference core/boost/memory clocks are on the AMD part

I think using non-stock clock is the most accurate metric, because GPU Boost makes 780 and Titan run at ~1GHz out of the box, reference design. If you compare a non-OC AMD card with and auto-OC-but-claimed-default nVi card, the result will be a joke, just like TPU's benchmark of recent GPU.

 

[HumanSmoke]

I think using non-stock clock is the most accurate metric, because GPU Boost makes 780 and Titan run at ~1GHz out of the box, reference design. If you compare a non-OC AMD card with and auto-OC-but-claimed-default nVi card, the result will be a joke, just like TPU's benchmark of recent GPU.

The R9-290X is claimed to have a dynamic boost function also- therefore "stock" vs. "stock" is more applicable IMO.

There is also the no small matters of the card being benched obviously being a development/validation board ( shitty generic blower fan, jumpers on the PCB, relatively Spartan layout) which is in the AMD designs favour. The other matter is that the 2816 core version is supposed to reserved for FirePro boards while the Radeon part would have 2560 enabled- so which of the two is being benchmarked?

 

[german103]

2816 for firepro? source?

that would be disappointing

 

[HumanSmoke]

2816 for firepro? source?

Sure

AMD’s Radeon R9 290X equipped with Hawaii XT GPU is said to have at least 2560 Stream Processors. Some claim it will have 2816, which is not exactly confirmed. In fact the information we have indicates that the full Hawaii GPU will go straight to FirePro model, whereas the 2560 edition will be used for a Radeon flagship.

 

[Xzibit]

According to the poster (getwinder) 1020/5000 effective were the highest stable clocks he achieved with the card. A better comparison would be stock vs. stock, or max oc vs. max oc. My guess is that he was running up against a board limit if the power delivery is 8+6 pin.

Wouldn't that mean if the card is OC'd the card performes well enough to beat GTX TITAN and still use less power while being OC'd @ 1020/5000

 

[Crap Daddy]

The leak appears to be legit. Regardless if it's OCed or not this card seems to be at/or above Titan levels which means around 35% increase in perf over 7970GHz edition. Great stuff. Since Nvidia moved the price up for flagships I can't see this card selling for less than $600, more like $650 with games bundle.

 

[Prima.Vera]

And that Chinese site leaked some benchmarks too, actually a lot!
http://udteam.tistory.com/539

That "Chinese" site, is actually Korean. But who cares, Asians right?

 

[HumanSmoke]

Wouldn't that mean if the card is OC'd the card performes well enough to beat GTX TITAN and still use less power while being OC'd @ 1020/5000

Why would you be confused? The benchmarks are showing exactly that.

Which is why I noted that only a certain amount can be taken from the available information- i.e.
1. If the AMD card has a dynamic boost similar to Nvidia's then it would stand to reason that a better cooler would produce better results than the basic shroud of the engineering sample.
So, depending on the shipping clocks, and whether the card ships with a dynamic boost, the card could be faster...or slower than these benchmarks. Hardly definitive. The only certainty I think is that the shipping reference card overclocks better than 1020/5000 - at least I would hope so given what the GTX 780 and Titan can achieve with a larger die.

2. Maximum boost in benchmarks of the reference part will determine how it fares in reviews. Will an OC'ed card beating a more expensive card when overclocked is laudable. It is neither unusual, nor the basis for most comparisons. Case in point being that an overclocked HD 7950 or GTX 670 would also best a stock HD 7970 or GTX 680. While the benchmarks show the ability it is taken as read that the 7970/680 will also overclock in turn to restore the balance of power in most cases. A more recent example would be an OC'ed 780 beating a stock Titan - all kudos to the Jetstream, but no one is suggesting that turning up the frequency of the Titan will allow the 780 to retain its lead.

 

[TheHunter]

That "Chinese" site, is actually Korean. But who cares, Asians right?

Ah right lol sorry all Korean ppl



Anyway I can't wait on 25th!

 

[jigar2speed]

Stop trolling. The postings were concerned with - and only mentioned- relative performance of three cards- nowhere was pricing used until you just bought it up. Classic straw man argument.

Wow, so when my argument is not as per your convenience,i am suddenly a troll ?

The argument started when i said after overtaking GTX 780 there is not much left to overtake Titan - You yourself told me that Titan is 8% faster hence my argument was valid, i.e - there is not much left to overtake once you are done beating GTX 780.

What part of "reference" don't you understand?

Seriously ? Tell me whose the troll now ? - I gave you a link of a review of overclocked GTX 780 which beats Titan that means if AMD's flagship card is faster than GTX 780 it will easily be able to beat TITAN - hence forth i was showing you the valid point but you are smoking some good trolling stuff here. - (Link for those who are lazy like me-
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_780_SC_ACX_Cooler/26.html )

It may have escaped your notice that the EVGA GTX 780 SuperClocked isn't a reference SKU.
From the article that you linked to, here's W1zzard to explain the difference:

I don't think i need to explain again...

 

[HumanSmoke]

Wow, so when my argument is not as per your convenience,i am suddenly a troll ?

Nope. You're suddenly a troll when everyone else is debating the performance and you're talking price.

Seriously ? Tell me whose the troll now ? - I gave you a link of a review of overclocked GTX 780 which beats Titan that means if AMD's flagship card is faster than GTX 780 it will easily be able to beat TITAN

If the AMD card is faster than the reference GTX 780 (as shown in the benches) it doesn't automatically follow that the AMD card is faster than an overclocked GTX 780 as you linked to.
Case in point: AMD card. Unigine Valley 1.0 bench at 4xAA (1920x1080) 70.1 fps

GTX 780 overclocked (on air cooling). Unigine Valley 1.0 bench at 8xAA (1920x1080) 84.3 fps

 

[RCoon]

Wow, so when my argument is not as per your convenience,i am suddenly a troll ?

The argument started when i said after overtaking GTX 780 there is not much left to overtake Titan - You yourself told me that Titan is 8% faster hence my argument was valid, i.e - there is not much left to overtake once you are done beating GTX 780.




Seriously ? Tell me whose the troll now ? - I gave you a link of a review of overclocked GTX 780 which beats Titan that means if AMD's flagship card is faster than GTX 780 it will easily be able to beat TITAN - hence forth i was showing you the valid point but you are smoking some good trolling stuff here. - (Link for those who are lazy like me-
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_780_SC_ACX_Cooler/26.html )



I don't think i need to explain again...

Nope. You're suddenly a troll when everyone else is debating the performance and you're talking price.

If the AMD card is faster than the reference GTX 780 (as shown in the benches) it doesn't automatically follow that the AMD card is faster than an overclocked GTX 780 as you linked to.
Case in point: AMD card. Unigine Valley 1.0 bench at 4xAA (1920x1080) 70.1 fps
http://cdn.videocardz.com/images/2013/09/ch3_valley_2.jpg

GTX 780 overclocked (on air cooling). Unigine Valley 1.0 bench at 8xAA (1920x1080) 84.3 fps
http://i.imgur.com/inCc6cG.jpg

Calm your tits boys, wait 2 days and we'll see if all this arguing was even worth it over rumored benchmarks, which you do not know are false or not.

 

[jigar2speed]

Nope. You're suddenly a troll when everyone else is debating the performance and you're talking price.

If the AMD card is faster than the reference GTX 780 (as shown in the benches) it doesn't automatically follow that the AMD card is faster than an overclocked GTX 780 as you linked to.
Case in point: AMD card. Unigine Valley 1.0 bench at 4xAA (1920x1080) 70.1 fps
http://cdn.videocardz.com/images/2013/09/ch3_valley_2.jpg

GTX 780 overclocked (on air cooling). Unigine Valley 1.0 bench at 8xAA (1920x1080) 84.3 fps
http://i.imgur.com/inCc6cG.jpg

Are you even making sense ? Was there a rule not to talk about pricing ? also, I never said any of what you are trying to say.

EDIT: Oh and please don't start with pathetic attempts of show casing specific results that shows Titan is faster than AMD's flagship and in other GTX 780 has even higher scores. It just makes you look more sad, cause both the results were produced using different PC configs.

If the AMD card is faster than the reference GTX 780 (as shown in the benches) it doesn't automatically follow that the AMD card is faster than an overclocked GTX 780 as you linked to.

knock knock - Anybody home ? I have constantly said if AMD's card is faster than GTX 780 it will have no trouble beating TITAN - hence i gave the reference of Overclocked GTX 780.

I see you are trying very hard to spin this, but it is clear now whose the troll here.

 

[HumanSmoke]

Calm your tits boys, wait 2 days and we'll see if all this arguing was even worth it over rumored benchmarks, which you do not know are false or not.

Two days! I was under the impression that the 25th was reserved for AMD's PowerPointGasm. Unless some sites are releasing previews/reviews I think we're some weeks away from resolving anything other than the spec sheet....and I'm not wholly convinced that we'll get all the information in any case. I could see AMD playing this out for all it's worth. Presentation..>...controlled leaks....>...teaser previews from certain sites...>..reviews...>...actual launch.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Two days! I was under the impression that the 25th was reserved for AMD's PowerPointGasm. Unless some sites are releasing previews/reviews I think we're some weeks away from resolving anything other than the spec sheet....and I'm not wholly convinced that we'll get all the information in any case. I could see AMD playing this out for all it's worth. Presentation..>...controlled leaks....>...teaser previews from certain sites...>..reviews...>...actual launch.

whilst im skint till christmass anyway , i do hope your wrong as the earlier they are out the better the chance of me getting one this fall(<americanism from me) for reasonable money

 

[Xzibit]

AMD Hawaii-based graphics cards to mass ship in October

As AMD is set to announce its next-generation high-end GPU codenamed Hawaii, graphics card players including Asustek Computer, Micro-Star International (MSI), Sapphire and PowerColor are expected to start mass shipping related products in October, according to sources from the upstream supply chain.