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

Gregster · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:05

Sorry if I am a little slow here and unknowing what is what but the power draw for me isn't a big thing at all but people must be aware that a 6+8 pin doesn't mean 300W max.

My Titan (original) could pull over 450W (468W if my memory serves) with a 6+8 pin at the wall according to my MM. Not sure how that translates but that was just a Titan on its own PSU.

Ayahuasca · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:07

Some people don't like supporting nVidia due to their business practices. Also better drivers isn't really true at the moment. They've released a few in succession that cause crashes for a lot of their users. AMD drivers are spot on for single card.

Deleted User 234324 · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:10

RavenXXX2 said:
Why is it a day one buy if it's on par with the ti? from where I'm sitting Nvidia offer the better drivers, software and game support with big titles running Nvidia gameworks.

You would have to be a big AMD fan to drop the ti for a similar performing fury with less memory if they are priced similarly.

Because I've been using ATI since the 9800XT and perfectly happy with them, never had an issue with the hardware or drivers so why deviate from that.

As for the memory argument, until the fury is actually out and people can test it, no one knows how the 4GB will affect the cards.

Mtom · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:11

RavenXXX2 said:
Why is it a day one buy if it's on par with the ti? from where I'm sitting Nvidia offer the better drivers, software and game support with big titles running Nvidia gameworks.

You would have to be a big AMD fan to drop the ti for a similar performing fury with less memory if they are priced similarly.

Well its off topic, but NV drivers lately prone to crash, and the better software support....imho gameworks is crap, it only prevents amd optimization.

From my viewpoint thats the bigest problem AMD has....people think NV is better because NV cards run well in NV and AMD titles, while AMD cards suffer in NV titles.
Actually its not because NV cards are better but because they crippling AMD cards in NV games.

Silent_Scone · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:18

Everything you just said down to a crisp is exactly what AMD want you to think, because that is what they're telling you. What you need to do is compare the hardware and the technology as what it does for you and how well it does it at both a hardware and software level. The PR machine constantly contradicts itself, but it's a moral perspective as well. For instance in this case, you obviously strongly believe that NVIDIA should hand hold for AMD and that they should be allowed to reap benefits from a multimillion dollar investment.

Martini1991 · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:22

Again, for me, I just want a 40% over a 290X, for the same price as a launch day 290X.
So, 450 quid.

Martini1991 · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:24

Ayahuasca said:
Some people don't like supporting nVidia due to their business practices. Also better drivers isn't really true at the moment. They've released a few in succession that cause crashes for a lot of their users. AMD drivers are spot on for single card.

If we judged both companies fairly, we'd never buy any cards.

But the 970 fiasco was too far for me, I'm really not wanting to buy an Nvidia card.

layte · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:25

Ayahuasca said:
Some people don't like supporting nVidia due to their business practices. Also better drivers isn't really true at the moment. They've released a few in succession that cause crashes for a lot of their users. AMD drivers are spot on for single card.

That is true, but even the last known stable drivers offer better support (or at least better performance from comparable cards) for the latest titles such as PCars and W3 than AMD.

Similarly, we know from recent issues, that AMD's support for developers can be somewhat lacking, with them being prepared to place blame for under performing titles on the developer rather than their own driver team. Unfortunately the PCars developers have blown the lid on that.

Edit: To be somewhat on topic, I do hope AMD's new card is a monster, and Nvidia do seem a little complacent recently.

Gregster · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:26

Mtom said:
Well its off topic, but NV drivers lately prone to crash, and the better software support....imho gameworks is crap, it only prevents amd optimization.

From my viewpoint thats the bigest problem AMD has....people think NV is better because NV cards run well in NV and AMD titles, while AMD cards suffer in NV titles.
Actually its not because NV cards are better but because they crippling AMD cards in NV games.

When you look at some of the GameWorks titles (Batman origins/WatchDogs etc) when AMD can be bothered to sort drivers out, they get very good performance.

http://www.techspot.com/review/827-watch-dogs-benchmarks/page3.html

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014..._performance_video_card_review/4#.VXlhDflVhBc

http://www.techspot.com/review/733-batman-arkham-origins-benchmarks/page3.html

I know this isn't the place and it seems like I am defending NVidia (I am because I like what GameWorks brings). but too many people are quick to blame everyone except the guys at AMD (even AMD have blamed SMS and NVidia for AMD's poor performance in PCars) but the reality is, when they have finished throwing out their toys, they get very good performance via driver updates, so Like Tom Petersen said in his interview with PCPer, "If AMD can get drivers out 2 weeks or a month later, why can't they do it from day 1"? (or something like that).

That is all I will say on it but it does make me shake my head that AMD and its users are so quick to point the finger.

Anyways, back on topic

whyscotty · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:27

Jono8 said:
Indeed. Slightly faster than a 980Ti and £400-£450 would be sweet.

Less than £500 and I'll probably risk Xfire.

Kirby Wurm · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:27

If I were buying a card this gen a Fury X with comparable performance and price to the Ti would be my choice, the reasons being I may finally escape texture flickering (it's dogged me in certain games with my 570/680/780/970) and 4GB will be enough for 1080P for the lifespan I'd have the card for. Plus it'd support AMD and competition is important (this is a secondary factor, I wouldn't scupper myself with an inferior card for this reason for example.)

Bonjour · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:28

Single card driver support seems pretty good atm. With only 4GB VRAM, you probably wouldn't be looking to Crossfire a pair of Furies anyway.

Martini1991 · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:31

Bonjour said:
Single card driver support seems pretty good atm. With only 4GB VRAM, you probably wouldn't be looking to Crossfire a pair of Furies anyway.

Lol.

ubersonic · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:31

Comparable price/performance wouldn't do it for me, it needs to be better in one area, the ASUS Strix 980ti will be out soon and will be 6-8% faster than reference 980ti while being silent at idle and quiet at load, that's my target for Fury to beat on price performance not the reference 980.

Ayahuasca · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:33

ubersonic said:
Comparable price/performance wouldn't do it for me, it needs to be better in one area, the ASUS Strix 980ti will be out soon and will be 6-8% faster than reference 980ti while being silent at idle and quiet at load, that's my target for Fury to beat on price performance not the reference 980.

I'd say the 980ti Hybrid is a more fair comparison if the Fury is AIO cooled only.

I expect Fury X or whatever the top card is called to beat the TX.

Gregster · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:33

Overclocking will be interesting and especially memory overclocking. Overclocking GDDR5 bring very little gains compared to the core but I will be interested to see how the core clocks and if HBM gives any gains at all.

ubersonic · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:36

Ayahuasca said:
I'd say the 980ti Hybrid is a more fair comparison if the Fury is AIO cooled only.

The 980ti Hybrid uses an AIO that was designed as a standalone upgrade for for the reference cooler, as a result it a VRM fan which from what we have seen so far the Fury does not, this is why I have interest in the fury because it has the potential to be pretty quiet, if it had a VRM fan I would simply be waiting on the Strix.

Ayahuasca · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:38

ubersonic said:
The 980ti Hybrid uses an AIO that was designed as a standalone upgrade for for the reference cooler, as a result it a VRM fan which from what we have seen so far the Fury does not, this is why I have interest in the fury because it has the potential to be pretty quiet, if it had a VRM fan I would simply be waiting on the Strix.

...and I've already told you previously the VRM fan runs at minimum speed and is inaudible...

The fan on the radiator on both cards will be louder...

Gregster · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:42

VRM's need only a minimal fan to blow over them and don't need a roaring fan to keep them cool.

Nexus18 · 11 Jun 2015 at 11:42

The problem with gameworks games for me is the insane micro stutter... doesn't matter what FPS I get nor what settings I use, I can't get rid of the micro stutter. TW 3 and BAO aren't too bad compared to watch dogs, far cry 3/4, dying light etc. but they still aren't as smooth as other games like GTA 5, bf 4, AI etc.

Also, was it not said by one of the developers that they can't optimise nvidia gamework code for AMD users.... of course nothing wrong with that considering it is nvidia's tech. but still, as a "gamer", it is frustrating that you have to pick sides.

Either way, I am not keen on gameworks and I just hope that BAK runs really well on AMD hardware. Considering the **** that nvidia AND the game developers have been getting lately for gameworks and not just from AMD users, I would expect both parties to do a better job with optimisation from now on....

Hopefully with AMD attending the E3 show this year and partnering up with microsoft, we will get quite a few AMD sponsored titles.