• 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

drunkenmaster said:
No, we aren't, kepler isn't anything but an architecture, a full fat GK110 has 2880 cores, a full fat 680gtx has.. ok I can't remember how many cores off hand. It's got nothing to do with gk104, GK110 Nvidia has faster parts they have held back to charge you more for the cut down versions.
Click to expand...

I am sure you know your stuff but I am confused as to what you are saying? I have reread what you said a couple of times and I am obviously barking up the wrong tree and completely lost, as I assumed you was saying that Nvidia releasing GPU after GPU is bad and I assumed that is what you meant.

I based what I said on the 7970 being released several times with a final 280X which has no difference to anything prior (pretty much like the 770/680 (although the 770 does have faster memory over the 680)).

As for the Titan/780/780Ti, these are GPU's that are on the GK110 architecture and giving a big boost over the much older GK104 architecture. Again I think I have completely misunderstood what you are saying, so forgive my ignorance.
 
People might be expecting a bit much in terms of overclocking of memory, just because clocks are low doesn't necessarily mean they'll overclock well. Overclocking memory is both memory and memory controller dependant, all things being equal a wider bus will usually overclock worse. Judging by the design info we have(the 512bit bus is significantly SMALLER than the 384bit bus. Generally the higher the clock something is designed for the further apart you place the transistors. They went 512bit bus and lower clock to reduce the overall size of the memory controller by 20%, there is almost certainly a hit to max stable frequency the memory controller can run at.

However, that doesn't mean it won't overclock either. The memory controller on a 7970 might be capable of a lot more than the memory is capable of, reduce the frequency the controller can run at, it could still be above where memory is.

Will be interesting to see where memory can get to on the card. If they've managed to increase bandwidth by 20% and drop size by 20% while still being capable of same clocks, that is some serious engineering.
 
Boomstick777 said:
Not really sure what you mean bud, was an observation, what I mean is, I'm impressed that a 780 (At any speed) can be faster than two 7970's at stock. That's quite a lot of performance from a single GPU. Considering the 7970 was AMD's previous gens fastest card. For the next gen to be faster than two of them is impressive. Likewise the 290X looks like a beast as well.
Click to expand...

I meant it's not fair to compare a 1300mhz 780 to a stock card. Highly overclocked 7970's in Crossfire would probably be 1-2k points ahead of your overclocked score. It is a nice thought knowing your card can do that though.

At the end of the day it's a synthetic benchmark again though and I doubt in games the crossfired 7970's are slower than 1 780.
 
I do love a good 3DMark/Heaven/Valley for comparison. The game benchmarks are also pretty good (except that metro one).

Anything else is just unusable for accuracy unless the same person done the test and was able to replicate it each time.
 
I only give Valley time of day because i like the music. I do like a bit of firestrike as well, seeing as i won my copy via a competition. Other than that i find them rather tedious.
 
I can just imagine now that the 290X does pip the Titan in the majority of tests, then it gets released with a £850 price tag for the reference board!

I know they probably wont, but remember the FX-9590 (was it that one?) releasee day price?
And that was for something that didn't really come close to trading blows with the ~£450 Intel 3930K as I recall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom