• 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!!!!!!)

Status
Not open for further replies.
r7slayer said:
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.
Click to expand...

What's quoted as possible and what's actually available are very different, They have a few months to get models on the market offering what I want but as I said I'm getting tired of waiting. Current offerings come with minimum levels of 48 with the LG 21:9 and 40 with the Benq 1440p. The LG was my original choice but that is useless as even with my current 290x the fps will often dip below that in lots of titles and when it does free-sync does nothing to help unlike G-sync.
 
drunkenmaster said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'm not looking to run games at massive frame rates, I'm looking to play games and have them look as good as they can. Doing that makes tonnes of games run in the 30's and 40's with lower dips at times. That's on a 4790k and 290x at 1080p. So if I up the resolution to a 2560 x 1080 or 1440 the frame rates going to be the same or a little less. Either way I will be under the free-sync range pretty consistently. I'm not a competitive gamer I'm a casual gamer looking to be able to run games as smoothly as I can while keeping them as visually beautiful as they can be.
 
It's definitely a slow year for Freesync monitors, which is a shame because it was supposed to be the renaissance for AMD. That being said, Gsync doesn't offer many more alternatives either so it's a crap-shoot all-around. Exception being the sole Acer 4k with Gsync.
 
drunkenmaster said:
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.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you've tried GSync for any amount of time DM but I've been playing alien isolation at 4k with a single 780, it drops into the high twenties at times and is still perfectly playable. To me the difference is stunning.
 
straxusii said:
I don't know if you've tried GSync for any amount of time DM but I've been playing alien isolation at 4k with a single 780, it drops into the high twenties at times and is still perfectly playable. To me the difference is stunning.
Click to expand...

Thats what I have been hoping for, that g-sync/freesync make games at 30-60FPS playable for me because atm I need a constant 60+ to enjoy games. I'm struggling to find any reviews that cover it though because is so down to the user rather than something measurable
 
From another thread

manius said:
yer its http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-167-PC out of stock with no ETA and they told me powercolor could not fix or replace so im assuming there not making anymore
Click to expand...

Seems that Powercolour are out of stock for the PCS+ 290 and they can't fix or replace so I would guess the other AIB partners are also going to start getting out of stock ?

Does this seem an imminent release of the R9-3XX series ? :)
 
africanos23 said:
From another thread



Seems that Powercolour are out of stock for the PCS+ 290 and they can't fix or replace so I would guess the other AIB partners are also going to start getting out of stock ?

Does this seem an imminent release of the R9-3XX series ? :)
Click to expand...

NO...........we wont get the 390X till june.....FACT

but they need to release some marketing very soon, because this is so damned annoying now
 
Mal X said:
NO...........we wont get the 390X till june.....FACT

but they need to release some marketing very soon, because this is so damned annoying now
Click to expand...

If you said it's a fact, I guess it is ;)

The problem is more about the 3 month gap of no high-end AMD cards in stock IMO. (don't know the stock available from other AIBs, but I guess everyone is clearing house as fast as possible)
 
Orangey said:
AMD have stopped shipping chips a while back I think.

How can they go through April and May with nothing to sell though...
Click to expand...

They will recommend GTX970 and GTX980s ;) and if the cut down Titan X comes out at a reasonable price before the R9-390X its GAME OVER IMHO.

unless HBM = Nuclear Reactor Power (minus the heat LOL)
 
africanos23 said:
If you said it's a fact, I guess it is ;)

The problem is more about the 3 month gap of no high-end AMD cards in stock IMO. (don't know the stock available from other AIBs, but I guess everyone is clearing house as fast as possible)
Click to expand...

you've only got 8 weeks and it could be announced next month for a release date on the 1st of June :D:D

the problem is it's so damned boring to wait, that i'm tempted to buy at the end of this week

but it's not a priority, because getting my RIG fixed is and it's still bust a week later
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom