What?
-
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.
Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
- Status
What?
And now it's gone. A picture was posted of a 295x2 alongside another graphics card with the slogan 'The world's fastest graphics card alongside the previous fastest graphics card'.
I suspected it was a 7990 alongside the 295x2, but wanted clarification.
I suspected it was a 7990 alongside the 295x2, but wanted clarification.
Last edited:
Someone sneaked a titan x next to it.
But seriously, i do hope the 390 turns out to be a fast card without an AIO cooling setup. AMD always price well and offer a very competitive product. Yes the reference 290 series were hot and loud, but hopefully this can be adressed. If so it could tempt normally nvidia users like me to switch. Shame info on the card is so scant at present.
Tearing? You need G-Sync brother
Lol. I think you meant freesync. Pretty sure he has an amd card and will be upgrading to an amd one
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
If the other card had 3 fans on it then it was a 7990...
Yeah. It was an MSI.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,419
I want something new.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2011
- Posts
- 893
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
This is going on and on, they are trying to frustrate people into buying the 295x2
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Fixed.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 10,756
- Location
- West End, Southampton
It's starting to feel like they have nothing at all. Nvidia have brought out card after card with nothing coming back from AMD. Now the TitanX is out, they've had enough opportunity to tell us what it's going to be, yet not a peep. In a time that they're failing miserably, customer confidence in them is at an all time low, you'd think they'd want to come out with some decent pr to patch the wounds a little. I still don't get their complete silence, just giving ppl like myself another reason to say enough is enough, I'm buying a TitanX/saving my money for 980ti.
My patience is wearing incredibly thin, they are screwing me around to much, not providing drivers with crossfire profiles, not keeping to driver release promises and nothing giving me confidence in the future. I personally think they're finished, or they certainly will be if the price and performance of this next top end card isn't right.
My patience is wearing incredibly thin, they are screwing me around to much, not providing drivers with crossfire profiles, not keeping to driver release promises and nothing giving me confidence in the future. I personally think they're finished, or they certainly will be if the price and performance of this next top end card isn't right.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
That's the problem, a lot of us normal AMD buyers are now seriously considering the green team, that's how bad it's become, I'd seriously consider buying the 980ti and a gsync screen this year, which is bad news for AMD as the screen will be my only monitor upgrade for a good few years which means they won't be getting any money from me potentially ever again, I'm sure im not the only one
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,211
I think people need to remember the AMD card is bringing in new tech in the form of HBM. This is most likely why it's taking AMD longer to release than Nvidia. It's common practise to not leak out details about new products on both sides of the fence. People keep going on about the 980ti but nobody know's proper details about this card and when it's going to release. For all we know the 390x will release before it.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
I should hope it does release before the 980 ti, If it doesn't I'll probably stop waiting and get the ti and my monitor upgrade aswell..
Free-syncs already falling behind for me (because of the minimum range not the ghosting) and if a ti turns up in the 600 quid range I'll probably bite.
minimum range? from my understanding Freesync works between 9Hz and 240Hz! Correct me if im wrong. If the monitor doesn't do that range its the monitor not freesync.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,371
- Location
- Dormanstown.
I keep hearing people going on about HBM.
If the 390X is only say 30% better than the 290X. What good exactly is that HBM memory
?
I don't expect the 390X to be amazeballs (Same as I don't find the new Titan amazeballs) 28nm's killing me.
If the 390X is only say 30% better than the 290X. What good exactly is that HBM memory
?I don't expect the 390X to be amazeballs (Same as I don't find the new Titan amazeballs) 28nm's killing me.
The minimum range is what the monitor can produce and then the monitor just stays at that range and (35Hz for instance) and this is where you see stuttering and tearing. G-Sync works differently and when the monitor hits its minimum refresh range, that is where G-Sync kicks in and sends the last stored frame (that is stored on the modules memory) to make up the shortfall and this keeps gaming smooth at even 25 fps.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
You realise that below a threshold sending the last minimum frame that is stored if the screen hasn't refreshed in time is.... v-sync.... right. G-sync doesn't kick in below minimum refresh, g-sync defaults to v-sync above the max refresh rate and an effectively v-sync mode below the minimum refresh rate. v-sync being just sending frames in the frame buffer(something all cards have had for as long as you can think of) if the new frame isn't ready. If you're acting like that is some kind of g-sync magic you're nuts.
Gaming at lower frame rates, sub 30fps, sucks, it's that simple, smoothness from the screen is one thing, smoothness from the actual gameplay is another entirely. For donkeys years we've had so many people laughing at the console peasants on this forum for gaming at 30fps, laughing at the "you can't see above 30fps" arguments. Now all of a sudden gaming below 30-40fps is brilliant because it's slightly smoother? It still doesn't actually introduce the fluidity that is seeing 60+ frames. Spinning around in an fps, every turn is divided into less images. As with motion blur where there is more than one type, there is more than one type of stutter.
I've said since day one, the only place anyone should want any kind of sync to work is in a 50-100fps range, it should provide small boosts to smoothness without tearing in that range. You don't want to be playing at low fps regardless of sync and above 90-100fps you should be using low motion blur modes anyway.
I don't know anyone, literally anyone who gamed on a 120hz screen and said they couldn't see the difference. 95% of people on here are like "I didn't think it would make such a difference but I'm blown away, I'll never go back". Yet you have the *sync guys saying, whoa, lets run our screens at 25fps and 50hz.... awesome... no thanks. DIminishing returns means say 70hz, a small increase over 60hz, is a much bigger difference than 120hz is from 110hz. So I'd be willing to sacrifice some fps and play in that range in between 60-144hz but I have zero interest in gaming below 60hz. None at all. In games where I have crappy frame rate(the only ones I can name or TWIMTBP/Ubisoft games) I'll take 120-144hz and v-sync, or no v-sync, for the majority of games where it's easy to get 70+ fps, currently I run 120hz, on my next screen maybe I'll run freesync, maybe I'll run 144hz, I really don't know.
Gaming at lower frame rates, sub 30fps, sucks, it's that simple, smoothness from the screen is one thing, smoothness from the actual gameplay is another entirely. For donkeys years we've had so many people laughing at the console peasants on this forum for gaming at 30fps, laughing at the "you can't see above 30fps" arguments. Now all of a sudden gaming below 30-40fps is brilliant because it's slightly smoother? It still doesn't actually introduce the fluidity that is seeing 60+ frames. Spinning around in an fps, every turn is divided into less images. As with motion blur where there is more than one type, there is more than one type of stutter.
I've said since day one, the only place anyone should want any kind of sync to work is in a 50-100fps range, it should provide small boosts to smoothness without tearing in that range. You don't want to be playing at low fps regardless of sync and above 90-100fps you should be using low motion blur modes anyway.
I don't know anyone, literally anyone who gamed on a 120hz screen and said they couldn't see the difference. 95% of people on here are like "I didn't think it would make such a difference but I'm blown away, I'll never go back". Yet you have the *sync guys saying, whoa, lets run our screens at 25fps and 50hz.... awesome... no thanks. DIminishing returns means say 70hz, a small increase over 60hz, is a much bigger difference than 120hz is from 110hz. So I'd be willing to sacrifice some fps and play in that range in between 60-144hz but I have zero interest in gaming below 60hz. None at all. In games where I have crappy frame rate(the only ones I can name or TWIMTBP/Ubisoft games) I'll take 120-144hz and v-sync, or no v-sync, for the majority of games where it's easy to get 70+ fps, currently I run 120hz, on my next screen maybe I'll run freesync, maybe I'll run 144hz, I really don't know.
- Status