• 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.

*** Proper 390X review & discussion thread ***

Mayh3M said:
It's definitely a re-brand but from judging from real world performance it seems to be doing quite well. AMD just needed it to compete with the 980 which it doesn't do at 1080p, but it definitely does at 1440p and and higher resolutions. Importantly, it seems to consume less power than the 290X and stays cooler too:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,1.html
Click to expand...

It only beats the 980 in 3 out of 9 of those benchmarks in your link at 1440p

Also remember this is the MSI gaming edition which is factory overclocked against a reference 980. I suspect if it was 980 msi gaming versus the 390x msi gaming then the 980 would be soundly beating it across the board.

Also, the 980 draws 171 watts and the 390x draws 258 watts (more than a 980Ti). The MSI 980 gaming also runs almost 10 degrees cooler.

I don't know how AMD think they can get away with charging so much for one of these. There is only a £40 difference in the price at the mo between the 980 and 390x gaming as well.
 
Last edited:
Jono8 said:
It only beats the 980 in 3 out of 9 of those benchmarks in your link at 1440p

Also remember this is the MSI gaming edition which is factory overclocked against a reference 980.

The 980 draws 171 watts and the 390x draws 258 watts (more than a 980Ti)

I don't know how AMD think they can get away with charging so much for one of these.
Click to expand...

That's true 980 clocks like a beast too. But still it looks to be a noticeably better than the 290X.
 
Orangey said:
Videocardz isn't the one saying it. It's just a link where you can read it.

Why are you trying so hard to crap on it? DP already got banned for doing what you're doing.
Click to expand...

And why are you so obsessed with getting people banned. It is pathetic that if you don't like what someone says you start trying to infer they will be banned. Just grow up.
 
Last edited:
If you're going to have 'proper' reviews and maintain this separate thread, you can remove Tom's.

They're one of the sites astroturfing for NVIDIA. They used the older, non-recommended drivers (15.5) rather than 15.15 (which shows a large performance gain for all AMD cards and particularly the 390X and are the 3xx / Fury launch drivers).

Also, remove any other reviews using 15.5 for 3xx please.
 
Last edited:
Mayh3M said:
That's true 980 clocks like a beast too. But still it looks to be a noticeably better than the 290X.
Click to expand...

It is a real shame as AMD had a big chance to get some price wars going here.

If the 390x was £300 it would be really good value for money and it would start to make the 980 look a bit expensive.

At the moment it is £50 too much and just looks like a naff alternative to the faster, more efficient 980 which only costs £20 more (cheapest for cheapest on ocuk at the moment)

Silly AMD.
 
Stanners said:
And why are you so obsessed with getting people banned. It is pathetic that if you don't like what someone says you start trying to infer they will be banned. Just grow up.
Click to expand...

One comment is an obsession? :confused:

I would prefer that people stick to the topic, do you want to talk about the 300 series?
 
Jono8 said:
It is a real shame as AMD had a big chance to get some price wars going here.

If the 390x was £300 it would be really good value for money and it would start to make the 980 look a bit expensive.

At the moment it is £50 too much and just looks like a naff alternative to the faster, more efficient 980 which only costs £20 more (cheapest for cheapest on ocuk at the moment)

Silly AMD.
Click to expand...

Give it time, they'll soon drop when they realise they're not shifting. A £50/75 drop and they'll become a decent proposition.
 
pmc25 said:
If you're going to have 'proper' reviews and maintain this separate thread, you can remove Tom's.

They're one of the sites astroturfing for NVIDIA. They used the older, non-recommended drivers (15.5) rather than 15.15 (which shows a large performance gain for all AMD cards and particularly the 390X and are the 3xx / Fury launch drivers).

Also, remove any other reviews using 15.5 for 3xx please.
Click to expand...

Toms is removed for now, if they update with newer drivers let me know and I'll put it back up. Thanks for pointing it out. :)
 
For something that was only meant to a rebrand these are quiet impressive given they keep pace with the gtx 980 and have twice the vram. I'm now very interested in what Fiji brings to the table.
 
Nutella33 said:
Your looking at the wrong section. Look at orangey's post. They state double the tessellation performance. It's actually under the witcher 3 tab. Under "apples to apples". Like I said.
Click to expand...

lol you really make me laugh, you do realise they are the same when clock for clock.

you said in another thread

''I know the paper specs are the same, how about reading what I linked to? The overclock and extra ram arnt the reason for improved tessellation performance. Nor does your link comment on gcn variation''.

So in one game which had bad performance anyway you based double the tesselation on that one review and you didn't mention about clockf for clock scaling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom