-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Radeon R9 290X with Hawaii GPU pictured, has 512-bit 4GB Memory
- Thread starter LtMatt
- Start date
I think they are using it as the GTX 780 with 3gb of vram is at a disadvantage compared to the 4gb 290X.
Probably, i just want some good old fashioned 1080p results.
Just checked my old benches and a Titan would do more than 30fps @4k on bioshock which probably explains why AMD did not use one in the demo.
Having said that 4k bench figures are pretty useless to anyone at the moment.
Gibbo said:
Stop guessing, you will all be smiling when we put product online.
But smiling and laughing are so close to one another
Yes I have seem many Cricket players get hit with the ball and smile afterwards so as not to show how much it hurt.
Just checked my old benches and a Titan would do more than 30fps @4k on bioshock which probably explains why AMD did not use one in the demo.
Having said that 4k bench figures are pretty useless to anyone at the moment.
The twitter comment doesn't say 30FPS, it says "constant 30> FPS". So it's not 30 FPS, it's constantly higher than 30 FPS.
It's not semantics, > is a mathematical symbol that means greater than. Given that fact then it is potentially as fast as a Titan.
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 2,249
Who cares about UltraHD give us some real benchmarks 
This is getting so annoying.
This is getting so annoying.
If we are going to get into the nitty gritty of it neither a Titan or HD 7970 can manage a minimum of 30fps @1080p so a R9 290X has absolutely no chance @4k lol.
There is no way a 290X can manage a constant 30> FPS @4k unless they turn the settings way down lol.
Here is some runs done on a HD 7970 and Titan @1080p and 1600p
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=24769140&postcount=84
If you want an idea of how they would go @4k just half the 1600p numbers.
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 171
First post, been lurking for weeks as I peruse the posts in aid of picking out my new GFX card but thios thread has both made me laugh my arse off and annoyed me. Namely the nVidia fanboys strutting around and rubbing in the rumoured temps from a single benchmark that means sod-all in the grand scheme of things.
Thanks to them I'm now firmly in the AMD corner, I'm a sucker for a good underdog and also the Radeon cards are just better at what I require them for (£ per perf (I'm a skint bugger) and Lux renderer performance). But this thread was important as if I ever have the cash a 290 looks like the card for me, I'm not doing 4k gaming and would be nice to have a AMD beast to brag about
.
Now to the point I wanted to make, it's about Kaapstad and his comment on them picking a 780 because of it's vram shortage in comparison. He's having a dig at AMD, but why wouldn't they pick a 780? It's the card in direct competition with them for the price-range they might sell at and the vram comparisons are much better than using a Titan (33% adv over a 50% disadv). So not only are they pointing out that you can get superior 4k performance, but you can get that for around the same price (yes i know the prices aren't released yet but there's no way in hell they'll price it in the Titan range).
Now, the fact that 4k comparisons are pointless right now means little, both companies are hitching their wagons to the 4k train and there's no point in them picking a Titan because if you have no budget, the Titan will be king if you're wanting 4k gaming (that 50% extra vram).
Perhaps the smug nVidia fanboys should hold their tongues until legitimate benchmarks and temp figures come out, lest they end-up having to consume tons of humble pie for rubbing it in for weeks on end. But of course they'll still have Batman smoke...
Thanks to them I'm now firmly in the AMD corner, I'm a sucker for a good underdog and also the Radeon cards are just better at what I require them for (£ per perf (I'm a skint bugger) and Lux renderer performance). But this thread was important as if I ever have the cash a 290 looks like the card for me, I'm not doing 4k gaming and would be nice to have a AMD beast to brag about
. Now to the point I wanted to make, it's about Kaapstad and his comment on them picking a 780 because of it's vram shortage in comparison. He's having a dig at AMD, but why wouldn't they pick a 780? It's the card in direct competition with them for the price-range they might sell at and the vram comparisons are much better than using a Titan (33% adv over a 50% disadv). So not only are they pointing out that you can get superior 4k performance, but you can get that for around the same price (yes i know the prices aren't released yet but there's no way in hell they'll price it in the Titan range).
Now, the fact that 4k comparisons are pointless right now means little, both companies are hitching their wagons to the 4k train and there's no point in them picking a Titan because if you have no budget, the Titan will be king if you're wanting 4k gaming (that 50% extra vram).
Perhaps the smug nVidia fanboys should hold their tongues until legitimate benchmarks and temp figures come out, lest they end-up having to consume tons of humble pie for rubbing it in for weeks on end. But of course they'll still have Batman smoke...
Boom!! looks good^^
Good God man, I'm not saying it does it, I'm pointing out what the guy on twitter said it does. Note, this does not mean I believe what he is saying but the implication is very clear.
"R9 290X on BioShock Infinite, constant >30 FPS in UltraHD and ~17% faster than GTX 780!:"
For those who didn't click the link and fail to understand what constant and > (greater than) means here's some help.
con·stant
adj.
1. Continually occurring; persistent.
Greater Than >
The symbol > means greater than.
Example: 5 > 3 shows that 5 is greater than 3
Sorry for being an obnoxious ******* here but it seems some people are deliberately ignoring these very simple basics. How anyone can manage to miss such basic concepts that appear in a one line quote is astonishing.
Last edited: