Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
AMD Radeon™ Discussion V12, Latest - 14.12 | WHQL - 14.12
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
 Jun 13 2015, 11:35 AM
|
|
QUOTE(hazard_puppet @ Jun 13 2015, 10:18 AM) lol this guy doesnt even knew about r9 290x doesnt have crossfire port..haha QUOTE(JohnLai @ Jun 13 2015, 10:40 AM) And this poor guy actually thinks 390x has 4096 GCN cores.......  I think he didn't know about 390x being a rebranded/refined version of 290x with 2816 GCN cores..... Yup.  He put this card on ebay after that for $100 extra. Pictar of watercooled Fury X.  Sauce: http://www.pcper.com/news/Graphics-Cards/A...2-x-8-pin-PowerThis post has been edited by Acid_RuleZz: Jun 13 2015, 06:18 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 13 2015, 07:02 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(S4PH @ Jun 13 2015, 06:23 PM) I like the part he says "this monster of a videocard" this matsalleh dono anything cakap berapi api This guy duno anything about the card. There's a new rumor about AMD didn't give the Fury X sample to major reviewers prior to unveiling in 3 days. This drama is getting out of control. |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 14 2015, 12:08 PM
|
|
|
3DMark13 comparison between R9-290 XFX R9-390 Double D vs EVGA GTX970 ACX2.0+ by LTT forum member Suika.
Added on Gonna be time to take it back, I think Microsoft locked the PS4 on purpose.
I do have benchmarks up on OP, but here's them on another page for those two lazy to skip back forward. Benchmarks are basically the 290 vs. 970, there really isn't a performance gain in the 390. What a shame. I'm impressed with the cooler, at least.
We'll start with standard Fire Strike, nothing special. Just 1080p goodness.
Nobody should be surprised, but I am. The R9 390 is very close to the GTX 970, the combined score is even higher but graphics score is fairly lower. The actual FPS differences are not significant, but what I'm wondering is; What about driver updates? The 390 isn't validated on 3DMark because of the driver, so maybe there are still optimizations to be made. It would be interesting to see at least. OK, moving on.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Fire Strike Extreme. Maybe kicking up the resolution will favor the R9 390's extra VRAM and bus width?
The R9 390 is falling behind by a few FPS, but is somehow doing better in physics. I mean, I didn't overclock the 4790k between runs, but twice now it's had a better physics score. I dunno, weird.
Let's kick it up a notch; 4K. Maybe this is where we can see the 390 pull ahead.
The FPS differences are marginal now, what I really want to see is crossfire versus SLI now, especially on 4K. Maybe that's where we could see the advantage in RAM and where the 390 might win. Maybe we'll see the 390 win on driver updates. I don't know. It'll be neat to see, though.
Now the interesting thing for me was thermals and audio levels. With the EVGA GTX 970 SSC, I can hear the fans ramp up during benchmarks, but the XFX R9 390 DD has remained consistent in each test. Not dead silent, but still very quiet in comparison to the 970 ramping up. I don't have any professional equipment to test it, but I can say that, while the 390's fans run all the time, they seem quieter than the 970's on load. Oh, and thermals. Interesting stuff.
EVGA GTX 970 ACX2.0+
Max Temp in FurMark: 79C
XFX R9 390 DD
Max Temp in FurMark: 71C
Make of that what you will, but don't forget that the 970 has 0db mode, and FurMark is not a realistic gaming load. Real GPU temperatures are lower. |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 14 2015, 03:52 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(terradrive @ Jun 14 2015, 01:25 PM) Oh okay, I guess it is a sound testing methodology to compare a 11% overclocked GTX 970 against a stock speed R9 390... So a 11% overclocked GTX 970 is ~7% faster than stock R9 390. okwell, that's the card he currently using. |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 15 2015, 02:30 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Unseen83 @ Jun 15 2015, 01:14 AM) here vid of the guy who upload vid of his r9 390x note that he use driver come with gpu not latest driver 15.5 -snip- Actually the driver he used is newer in term of packaging compare to 15.5 but without Witcher 3 and pCars improvement. http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=399410 |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 16 2015, 11:01 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Unseen83 @ Jun 16 2015, 04:08 AM) wow Benq and AMD finally giv linus a virgin sacrifice.. to satisfied linus on freesync lcd  -snip- I'm more interested in Acer XG270HU but willing to wait for IPS variant or/and UltraWide. Hexus review stated the monitor Freesync range was between 40hz-144hz but Tomshardware states the range is between 30hz-144hz |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 16 2015, 11:56 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(S4PH @ Jun 16 2015, 11:13 AM) those monitors are bangsawan grade monitor bro  I'll wait till it to be affordable for peasants. |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 01:08 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 01:15 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE Radeon R9 Fury X: June 24 availability, watercooling design, 649 US dollars
Radeon R9 Fury July 14 availability, air cooling designs 549
Radeon R9 Nano: Summer 2015, only 15 centimeters long
Radeon R9 Fury X2: Autumn 2015: Dual Fiji QUOTE(JohnLai @ Jun 17 2015, 01:12 AM) The only problem is the fury X consuming a crazy amount of power despite the HBM switch saving. What is the power consumption? |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 01:18 AM
|
|
|
The rebrand families.  All pictures courtesy of Agent181 from LTT forum. |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 01:23 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(kintsuchi @ Jun 17 2015, 01:22 AM) i wish i had money to upgrade 390 look so promising  390 is 290. Everyone should upgrade to Fiji.  |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 01:23 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(hfi @ Jun 17 2015, 01:22 AM) What's the vram for the Furies ? 4GB HBM. |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 01:46 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(stringfellow @ Jun 17 2015, 01:30 AM) Meaning that the Dual Fiji + HBM card (coming in the fall 2015) is the world's fastest graphics card. Which means, it's a dual GPU card on a single PCB. Ala R9 295X2. Which means a single Fiji with HBM card is NOT the world's fastest graphics card? I reckon the Fury X won't beat 980Ti/Titan-X, that's why they priced them pretty low despite come wc and HBM. QUOTE(JohnLai @ Jun 17 2015, 01:35 AM) The nano version consumed half of 290x power according to one of the presenter. One of the slide mentioned 4x performance/watt (I believe this is for HBM compared to GDRR5) 290X (2816 cores) consumed 290watts (in general). Fury X (4096 cores), let assume if this one still uses GDDR5 for some rough calculation 2816 = 290watts 4096 = 421watts Under 28nm node, it is a suicide to use GDDR5 with 4096 GCN cores. Now, let take a optimistic look on samsung GDDR5 power consuming in watts http://www.samsung.com/us/business/oem-sol...Green-GDDR5.pdf-.- 290X has 512bit width and 16 chips of 256Mb of GDDR5. Since Fury will use 4GB of HBM as well (4 HBMs stacked around the GPU core, simply takes the 4x performance/watt and divide it accordingly) Rough calculation will indicate the Fury X power consumption to be around 300 watts plus/minus 10%. As I said, this is just a rough estimate, AMD probably will overclock the GPU core at insane amount (reason for water cooling), so my estimated calculation is minimum possible value. A stock 290x consumed around 250-260 watts on average. Lisa Su mentioned Fury Nano card offer 2x performance/watts compare to 290x. The power saving doesn't come from using HBM alone btw. |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 02:10 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(terradrive @ Jun 17 2015, 01:48 AM) They claimed Fury Nano is half the power usage of 290X and 2X performance/watt than 290X. So Fury Nano is the same performance as 290X? lol Fury Nano might have 700-800Mhz core clock, that'll make it about the speed of 290X while dropping alot power consumption. Also most probably a cut down of Fiji XT with fewer stream processors. With cooler that small, i guess the TDP is <150w? Or AMD is pulling 95c again? I hope the performance is better than 290x though. |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 10:59 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(cstkl1 @ Jun 17 2015, 02:32 AM) Fiji nano I think its 28xx sp with hbm. Exact spec as 290x with 4gb hbm but gcn 1.2 28xx SP, seem like a huge cutdown from Fiji. QUOTE(S4PH @ Jun 17 2015, 10:00 AM) If you want the absolute latest, use 15.200.1040.0 June 8 driver, i'm currently using this one. http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=399956 |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 11:01 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(cstkl1 @ Jun 17 2015, 10:57 AM) Lol hwlabs.. Wilbert didny deny yet confirm. Those are hwlabs nemesis gts rads. AMD spared no expense on quality this time. Fark it. I am buying either the quantum or Fury X. What about their softwares? |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 11:16 AM
|
|
|
Fiji XT x2  QUOTE(cstkl1 @ Jun 17 2015, 11:09 AM) Lets face it. Single gpu 290x was good until it face tessalation issues with new games. Amd blames gameworks. The revamp tonga showed they cam correct that tesselation flaw. Seeing theres a indication of a new gcn on fiiji.. If fury x solved it. With that 8.6 teraflops of single compute. Hwlabs rads.. That logo color thingy.. This card is gonna sell. I am expecting it to dominate 980ti So the question now is on vram compression tech. Over tessellated gameworks. Tonga tessellation was an improvement but it's only on par/slightly lower with Kepler tessellation anyway. Did they announced what GCN revision Fiji is on? My stream was extremely laggy last night. This post has been edited by Acid_RuleZz: Jun 17 2015, 11:18 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 11:25 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(cstkl1 @ Jun 17 2015, 11:22 AM) No. No info of a new gcn. Dude tesselation is tessalation. Dont buy into that excuse. Its like we race a drag race n then ure blaming me for winning because of insane amount of torque. My question will be.. Dude we are drag racing so expected.. So dx11 tesselation is a feature. Amd screwed up. Realism is created using that. DSR/VSR is a feature, why not use all review at 4K? |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 03:10 PM
|
|
|
Enough with gameworks guys, it's all AMD, Nvidia and developers fault. Yeah FC4 4k benchmark looks good but i take it with a grain of salt because it's not from trusted reviewers.  This post has been edited by Acid_RuleZz: Jun 17 2015, 03:10 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
TSAcid_RuleZz
|
Jun 17 2015, 03:25 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(stringfellow @ Jun 17 2015, 03:12 PM) I know you said enough with GameWorks, but ......that figure with or without GameWorks on? And I guess the question of VRAM is answered: 4GB HBM only. Unless they figure out a way to compress texture or flush the texture data fast enough to compensate for that frame buffer size, expect the all-too-familiar-symtoms of running out of video RAM at 4K to happen. After all, this is targeted at 4K users right? -snip- No idea, that's why i'll wait for trusted reviewers. Can't you? 290x vs Fury X  |
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0230sec
0.44
7 queries
GZIP Disabled