AMD Radeon R9 290X with Hawaii GPU pictured, has 512-bit 4GB Memory

Crackfox · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:19

flopper said:
up to 3 months after release is common.

Didn't the 280X have them day one?

LtMatt · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:19

Lol Broom. Have you tried playing those games with those settings and fps? There's also no where saying what overclocks they ran. In this instance ill go with all the other review sites over this cherry picked one, no offence.

flopper · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:23

Crackfox said:
Didn't the 280X have them day one?

Yes, but those was disguised 7970.
new series tends to be reference first and then might take some time due to nda and not showing cards for unwanted "leaks"

maxilive · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:25

A fair few people up scale their games to 4k as well if their card is capable. Plus would you want to see reviews where ever average fps was 90+, I know I wouldn't I would want to see the card pushed to its knees with some 20-40fps averages so you can see where the hurdles lie for the future.

I'm still running a 5870 which I've had since launch and is still going reasonably well! So I want to see a review of a card that will show some indication of what the card might be like in 3-4 years time. 4k is a good way of showing memory usage which is a big part of what next gen games are going to be about around the end of next year.

I wouldn't mind one of these cards myself they look fantastic considering the price point, not sure if my wallet can quite take the hit at the moment. I'll check back in a few weeks once the dust has settled with the 290 and the 780Ti

Hopefully some big price dashes for the current 780s and AMD never settle bundle returning!

Also I'm not sure what card to go for in terms of features. Do you go the AMD route with Mantle, True Audio and updated crossfire, or the Nvidia route with G-Sync and their live streaming features. I don't think I would be in the market for a new monitor anytime soon though

Boomstick777 · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:26

LtMatt said:
Lol Broom. Have you tried playing those games with those settings and fps? There's also no where saying what overclocks they ran. In this instance ill go with all the other review sites over this cherry picked one, no offence.

No offense taken bud, you seem to be trying to discredit any review site / video review which says anything negative about the 290X, i.e slower when overclocked. The 290X looks like a great performing card at stock, the general consensus from all the reviews is that AMD sacrificed heat / noise / temps to get their, and limited overclocking as well. Those things can't just be ignored, surely not every review that mentions that is wrong?

flopper · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:28

starmanwarz said:
Why is 4K being mentioned so much in here and in reviews? 99% of us don't have 4K monitors.

DX tends to limit stuff.
4k/eyefinity are strong selling points.
1080p you can run a 280x and even lower and still be able to max many games. the difference wont be huge there mainly due to DX limitations and cpu etc..

Jakus · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:28

A little lost for words really

This thing is going to run at 100c in lots of cases !!
In a couple of days time all we are going to be hearing is my PC makes a funny smell when play games :rolleyes:

Then it will be "put an aftermarket cooler on it", yeah and cook the rest of the PC.

ATI just shot themselves in the foot again..very sad

RavenXXX2 · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:29

Jakus said:
A little lost for words really
This thing is going to run at 100c in lots of cases !!
In a couple of days time all we are going to be hearing is my PC makes a funny smell when play games
Then it will be "put an aftermarket cooler on it", yeah and cook the rest of the PC.

ATI just shot themselves in the foot again..very sad

It won't run at 100c, the fan will just increase to keep temps down as well as throttle clocks and volts if required.

LtMatt · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:30

Boomstick777 said:
No offense taken bud, you seem to be trying to discredit any review site / video review which says anything negative about the 290X, i.e slower when overclocked. The 290X looks like a great performing card at stock, the general consensus from all the reviews is that AMD sacrificed heat / noise / temps to get their, and limited overclocking as well. Those things can't just be ignored, surely not every review that mentions that is wrong?

There's only one review what shows that, Linus. No doubt using voltage control on a 780 vs a voltage locked 290.

flopper · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:30

Boomstick777 said:
No offense taken bud, you seem to be trying to discredit any review site / video review which says anything negative about the 290X, i.e slower when overclocked. The 290X looks like a great performing card at stock, the general consensus from all the reviews is that AMD sacrificed heat / noise / temps to get their, and limited overclocking as well. Those things can't just be ignored, surely not every review that mentions that is wrong?

Got to crack a few eggs to get an omelett.
yea 28nm, 440mm chip and it does run hot even if designed that way so I wouldnt be surprised to see thirdparty cooling with waterblocks a lot more common this time.

flopper · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:31

LtMatt said:
There's only one review what shows that, Linus. No doubt using voltage control on a 780 vs a voltage locked 290.

Impossible no review site would do that. :eek:

Jakus · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:33

RavenXXX2 said:
It won't run at 100c, the fan will just increase to keep temps down as well as throttle clocks and volts if required.

Well they should revise the benchmarks for people that will actually run it in a case...Oh! that will be most then :eek:

Marine-RX179 · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:39

Boomstick777 said:
No offense taken bud, you seem to be trying to discredit any review site / video review which says anything negative about the 290X, i.e slower when overclocked. The 290X looks like a great performing card at stock, the general consensus from all the reviews is that AMD sacrificed heat / noise / temps to get their, and limited overclocking as well. Those things can't just be ignored, surely not every review that mentions that is wrong?

To be fair though, going from Gibbo's own review, the limitation really seem to be more on the stock cooler than the card and its components itself. But even with the stock cooler, he has managed to push the core clock to 1200MHz and memory clock to 6400MHz (so far), but of course the noise level would probably be deafening

.

LtMatt · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:42

Marine-RX179 said:
To be fair though, going from Gibbo's own review, the limitation really seem to be more on the stock cooler than the card and its components itself. But even with the stock cooler, he has managed to push the core clock to 1200MHz and memory clock to 6400MHz (so far), but of course the noise level would probably be deafening .

He also said its faster than the 1300mhz 780 they tested in case Broom missed that one, but never mind.

Drizmod · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:46

I don't get it. Why are the reference coolers so rubbish? Why don't they copy a little from after market coolers? Surely these reviews with 95 degrees temps will hurt sales?

SS-89 · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:47

LtMatt said:
He also said its faster than the 1300mhz 780 they tested in case Broom missed that one, but never mind.

If it's the HOF (it must be as he mentioned it at the top) then it will be due to the stock bios issues that it has with power targets, It's well known and documented (I have one and its annoying as other 780's don't suffer from it but I ended up flashing skyn3ts bios so largely irrelevant). My 780 at 1300 outperforms the scores that Gibbo posted for the HOF.

RavenXXX2 · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:48

I have to agree about the weak cooler, it would have been better for AMD to invest in a better cooler and put the card out at $599 to cover the extra cost.

ihatelag · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:50

AMD on temps:

We have designed the 290 Series to operate at a steady state of 95C. By running at 95C, we are both maximizing the performance and minimizing the acoustics of the product. Be assured, that 95C is a perfectly safe temperature at which the GPU can operate for its entire life. There is no technical reason to reduce the target temperature below 95C.

teppic · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:51

Drizmod said:
I don't get it. Why are the reference coolers so rubbish? Why don't they copy a little from after market coolers? Surely these reviews with 95 degrees temps will hurt sales?

The partners no doubt prefer to sell cards with their own branding and design, the reference cards aren't going to be around for long.

Launching a card with low reference clocks is not good for later sales - reviews of future nvidia cards will just compare against reference 290X results.

dave_beast · 24 Oct 2013 at 10:52

RIP Titan

http://hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark11_-_performance/
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark_vantage_-_performance/
http://hwbot.org/benchmark/3dmark_-_fire_strike/

24/10/13 96500 marks

Smoke Radeon R9 290X @ 1407/1651MHz

16/10/13 91219 marks

k|ngp|n GeForce GTX Titan @ 1780/3900MHz

06/09/13 88529 marks

8 Pack GeForce GTX 780 @ MHz

29/09/13 89623 marks

8 Pack