Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)

[LoadsaMoney]

Retails are also 300 series cards.

http://wccftech.com/amd-official-radeon-graphics-roadmap-2015-radeon-300-series-family-fiji-flagship-graphics-chip-incoming/

 

[Diddums]

Dunno, blowers tend to be only one fan. Must be some technical or thermal reason why 2 isn't an option.

Because they'd be competing against each other. The only way to make a blower design more effective is to increase the area of the fins, ie. make the fan thicker or bigger.

Two fans would be a thermal nightmare

 

[shankly1985]

Sorry to jump in, I don't really get 144hz other than it looks smoother. If you can't hold a solid 144 FPS then what happens? I'm probably being really blonde!

It still refreshes at 144hz.
60fps at 144hz is better than 60fps @60hz just feels better.

 

[savagesam117]

It still refreshes at 144hz.
60fps at 144hz is better than 60fps @60hz just feels better.

That's what i thought. So no real benefit running at 144 FPS vsync over 60fps 144hz?

 

[drunkenmaster]

That's what i thought. So no real benefit running at 144 FPS vsync over 60fps 144hz?

There is, games will be smoother then, 144hz/144fps = ultimate gaming experience, 144hz/60fps, decent, but not as smooth in gameplay, 60hz/60fps, less smooth gameplay and more motion blur on the screen, lower image quality.

Basically frame rate is somewhat irrelevant in terms of refresh rate of the screen. Higher refresh rate means a more responsive panel capable of switching faster. At higher refresh rates, be that 60hz compared to 30 or 144 compared to 60, you get less motion blur, better image clarity. As all panels use overdrive features to accelerate pixel response time, these modes work better with smaller steps between two screens, overshoot from overdrive is usually significantly improved if not gone with high refresh screens. There has been no situation in which my 120hz panels haven't improved my overall experience compared to 60hz, browsing the web, scrolling anything, word doc, whatever else, or any and all gaming.

Even on desktop, scrolling up and down a webpage will be smoother on a 144hz panel than a 60hz panel. Higher refresh = great for image quality. Frame rate for separate and different reasons also improves the higher you go. Either is better the higher they go, frame rate is limited by refresh rate, but the reverse isn't true.

 

[savagesam117]

There is, games will be smoother then, 144hz/144fps = ultimate gaming experience, 144hz/60fps, decent, but not as smooth in gameplay, 60hz/60fps, less smooth gameplay and more motion blur on the screen, lower image quality.

Basically frame rate is somewhat irrelevant in terms of refresh rate of the screen. Higher refresh rate means a more responsive panel capable of switching faster. At higher refresh rates, be that 60hz compared to 30 or 144 compared to 60, you get less motion blur, better image clarity. As all panels use overdrive features to accelerate pixel response time, these modes work better with smaller steps between two screens, overshoot from overdrive is usually significantly improved if not gone with high refresh screens. There has been no situation in which my 120hz panels haven't improved my overall experience compared to 60hz, browsing the web, scrolling anything, word doc, whatever else, or any and all gaming.

Even on desktop, scrolling up and down a webpage will be smoother on a 144hz panel than a 60hz panel. Higher refresh = great for image quality. Frame rate for separate and different reasons also improves the higher you go. Either is better the higher they go, frame rate is limited by refresh rate, but the reverse isn't true.

Ah right okay. Yeah i have noticed it is a lot smoother. I need another card to be able to get 144fps in games for it to be the 'ultimate gaming experience'!!

Thanks

 

[Lokken86]

Somehow I cant see the 380 being a rebranded 285. Thats like a 7950 uh uh no way not happening.

 

[Gerard]

Pc Per had a section on the leaks on their podcast.

 

[dogmanstaruk]

i just thought if the 390x are water-cooled how can you crossfire them? most cases only have 1 space for fan/radiator on the beck

I'm wondering if it would fit my Corsair Carbine 240 as i've got a H100i installed in the case too.

Saying that, I'm running a 980GTX so unless the performance jump is substantial I won't be upgrading.

 

[bru]

A couple of thoughts I've had, which may be a bit bonkers but hey ho.

This image

It show the new card, which is fine, but if the new card has one giant heat spreader (water cooled) under the shroud and no fan, then why have the vents, they could have had more output options.

Ok seeing as the card look like it is going to be small, people don't like the idea of having to find places to put the radiator. then why not mount them like this.

It would only make the card as long as the cards we are used to and think of the possibilities of crossfire with a fan between each card in a long push-pull-push-pull-push-pull type arrangement.

 

[[ui]ICEMAN]

Then you pretty much have an air cooled card, possibly even worse due to ambient temps within the case and no direct air outlet/inlet from the card. Without fresh air over the radiator, the water will simply equilibrate over time with the ambient temperature of the case.

 

[triss]

A couple of thoughts I've had, which may be a bit bonkers but hey ho.

This image

It show the new card, which is fine, but if the new card has one giant heat spreader (water cooled) under the shroud and no fan, then why have the vents, they could have had more output options.

Ok seeing as the card look like it is going to be small, people don't like the idea of having to find places to put the radiator. then why not mount them like this.

It would only make the card as long as the cards we are used to and think of the possibilities of crossfire with a fan between each card in a long push-pull-push-pull-push-pull type arrangement.

The Aio mounted like you have it would be a nightmare for airflow and i'd say be worse than a air cooler

 

[Orangey]

Isn't the ports limited by die space? Like you need controllers in there as you do for memory.

 

[Kaapstad]

Even if AMD can make a very small card for the 390X I think this would be a mistake. I think AMD should ensure the reference 390X is about the same size as the reference GTX 980, anything smaller and some people would feel the card looks cheap and lacks value.

 

[Gerard]

Even if AMD can make a very small card for the 390X I think this would be a mistake. I think AMD should ensure the reference 390X is about the same size as the reference GTX 980, anything smaller and some people would feel the card looks cheap and lacks value.

Doubt it, it would look a bit odd for a while but with nvidia going the same route it would soon be the norm. No real point making it any bigger than it has to be if it saves money.

 

[drunkenmaster]

Even if AMD can make a very small card for the 390X I think this would be a mistake. I think AMD should ensure the reference 390X is about the same size as the reference GTX 980, anything smaller and some people would feel the card looks cheap and lacks value.

Nvidia/Apple/Intel/anyone else make something small "wow, what great design and technology to make something smaller and faster than everyone else".

AMD make something smaller "uggh, it's smaller, I know smaller is worse, AMD suck".

Miniaturisation of technology is routinely seen as progress in the industry, but if AMD do this it's bad.... sure. Nvidia on stage talking about how tiny Pascal will be and how brilliantly awesome getting that performance into a small package is, awesome all around no-one made such similar statements about Nvidia making a gpu smaller would be an indication of cheapness or lacking value. The industry as a whole completely disagrees with that viewpoint. That statement sounds completely and utterly absurd.

 

[JediFragger]

Doubt it, it would look a bit odd for a while but with nvidia going the same route it would soon be the norm. No real point making it any bigger than it has to be if it saves money.

Never underestimate the male obsession with the phallus......

 

[Kaapstad]

Nvidia/Apple/Intel/anyone else make something small "wow, what great design and technology to make something smaller and faster than everyone else".

AMD make something smaller "uggh, it's smaller, I know smaller is worse, AMD suck".

Miniaturisation of technology is routinely seen as progress in the industry, but if AMD do this it's bad.... sure. Nvidia on stage talking about how tiny Pascal will be and how brilliantly awesome getting that performance into a small package is, awesome all around no-one made such similar statements about Nvidia making a gpu smaller would be an indication of cheapness or lacking value. The industry as a whole completely disagrees with that viewpoint. That statement sounds completely and utterly absurd.

You don't know much about marketing do you.

Here is an example of why very small is not always best

http://www.techpowerup.com/212369/zotac-teases-an-over-the-top-geforce-gtx-960-graphics-card.html

 

[MrMarvelous]

Is that is a legit picture of the new 3XX card(s) then it looks like it's still running ridiculous hot and AMD can't make a proper air cooler to save their life.

 

[Mal X]

The radiator isn't mounted on the end of the card , it has to be as per the 295x2, but with a full Water block instead, this allows you to make it only 6'' long and of course very thin too, just like a normal water cooled card

that original picture with the blower vents is probably the Air Cooled version...it might therefore be the usual cheap and nasty AMD Ref card.......hot and noisy