Don't know that. I thought the range is bigger than that. But with 4K can go up to 60Hz only anyway.

I saw BenQ freesync monitor 27" around RM2999.

You and me both, S4PH! Also since you asked "standard", that is 1080p freesync monitor. I don't want to spent that much for monitor. Currently thinking getting 4 1080p cheap monitor (below RM700) for eyefinity.

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 10 2015, 12:54 AM

Well, in many benchmarks, all I see is Titan X, Titan X, Titan X, Titan X, Titan X, Titan X, Titan X, Titan X, Titan X, Titan X, holding the top ranking. Where 980 Ti? I see 980 & 290X more than 980 Ti.

Unpossible! I think it'll price above 2K though.

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 12 2015, 03:01 PM

4GB is enough for 4K gaming. Stuttering in this case basically after effect when VRAM maxed out. If we use GTA V as an example, I have never max out the settings including the advanced graphics setting but based on the info I found & assuming fury can max out GTA V, 4GB may not enough. Higher resolution also consume VRAM, so need to take that into account too. You can always turn down graphics settings to lower VRAM usage. Basically you can game at 4K with 4GB card.

I don't know about the rules but usually most powerful card will be crown to single gpu card.

CFX performance is very good nowadays. No more micro stutters. It's old news. Nowadays the problem is whether the games support CFX or not. That's all. Usually AMD will release driver update to support CFX for certain games. Only problem it may take time.

Please keep in mind, with drivers getting update, old news may not remain true anymore.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost....postcount=11056
Sorry about the text formatting. I just copied-paste this from the above site.


AMD Catalyst 15.15 modded for 290's & lower.
http://forum.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=400078&page=2

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 18 2015, 02:19 AM

With 290/290X, overclocking memory doesn't boost performance much. It already have huge bandwidth anyway. The core clock will give you boost in performance. I reckon the same thing with Fiji.

FYI, you can get boost in performance in some games that love high speed memory (system RAM), e.g. BF4. So, I would make sure that covered.

Why embarrassed, running medium at 5K with single card? I think you missing the point there. It's just to show what the single Fury X can do at 5K with Dragon Age game, not claiming any title.

"The first thing that probably slapped you in the face is the close to 6GB VRAM usage at 4K while our VRAM test cards the R9-290s in Crossfire only have 4GB (mirrored) . This is probably due to a bug on the driver side, so it should be taken with a grain of salt."

Read more at HardwarePal: Dragon Age Inquisition Benchmark Mantle Vs DirectX http://www.hardwarepal.com/?p=7793

Take with a grain of salt. The reviewer doesn't mentioned stuttering (which is what would you get when the card out of VRAM) when testing at 4K with 290 or 970. The graph meaningless to me since the reviewer didn't go into details on it. For 290, they should have two graphs for DX11 & Mantle. Like they mentioned in the article, take with grain of salt.

It's not even a review. It's only one page with 3 screenshots. Everything shown there, 5K @30Hz & like you said, he/she basically said "It was liquid smooth to my eyes, with the graphics being set to 'Medium' at 5K. It felt like 60FPS+". Sorry, I don't see why you need to fuss about this though. And no one going to run 5K or 4K even, with single GPU. I also checked other reviews on Dragon Age Inquisition, they also doesn't mentioned stuttering when playing the games at 4K @High or Ultra with either 295X2 or 980 SLI.

"AMD user here", yeah, nice trolling. If you can't discuss nicely here without inflaming people here, why bother posting here. According to anandtech review, 290X is only a couple FPS behind 980 in DA: Inquisition @4K @high & ultra settings. If 980 can run @60FPS with medium settings @4K, 290X will be able too. Well, your argument is faulty since you're testing @4K, not 5K.

That's the problem right there. Unseen already in his first post saying it's DA: Inquisition. On the (little) title is wrongly said it's Witcher 3, yes but if you really read the short article, it specifically mentioned DA: Inquisition. Anyone would be able to know there's typo there in the title. It's not really an issue.

Like I said, it's not a review or even an article to be honest. He/she basically written based on what he sees or feels on what he/she witness at the AMD event. There is no biased article/review here. No one in their right mind going to take this short news too seriously but it's worth to share it here or anywhere else. So, there is no reason to fuss about this really.

If the game is really is maxing out 4GB RAM, then 980 SLI won't be able to run DA: Inquisition @70FPS or 54FPS at high & ultra respectively @4K. No way.

Again, you failed to read & understand properly. Seriously. I came to the conclusion you're trolling based on what you wrote, not because you have Nvidia rig.

"It's probably astonishing to AMD users here since neither of their previous flagship cards are able to do so before the arrival of Fury. But it has been that way with its competitor's card, so nothing really much to shout about really. *shrugs*"

You're basically inflaming people right there. I have no problem with your previous posts but when you start to degenerate the discussion with the above line, it's a problem.

I can take constructive criticism. Inflaming in the other hand is not constructive. That is trolling.


"I post on experience. Experience of using an AMD R9 290X, and unable to satisfactorily run 4K without serious repercussion on its lifespan and/or power requirement/heat generation from the rig."

Yeah, we weren't talking about that but performance.

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 23 2015, 03:05 AM

I'm calm. BTW, forum doesn't convey tones properly. If you think I'm not calm then you're seriously misunderstand there. Like I said, read & understand properly.

About the swapping textures & graphics when VRAM maxed out, the card won't be able to do it smoothly, hence the stuttering. Then again it depends on the games codes but generally, it's not smooth.

Again, please read carefully. Let me try this again. "It's probably astonishing to AMD users here ..." <-- This basically inflaming people. If you worded differently, only contains "since neither of their previous flagship cards are able to do so before the arrival of Fury", I wouldn't call you troll.

Please keep in topic. If you look back, we're talking about DA: Inquisition, not any other games. We're not talking about your experience with other games.

Ahh! I'm done. It's time for me to prepare sahur for my family.

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 23 2015, 03:26 AM

Nah, I don't make assumption. All of my reply to your posts based on the words & sentences you used, not tones. No ego involved either. I'm also not fanboy. If I do, I probably get in fight with a lot of people that doesn't pro AMD here. I have been back and forth between nvidia & ati before. The fact that I have one over the other in my rig doesn't mean I'm pro to any camp.

No need to overly defensive. Probably your ego that got bruised? I don't know, never thought about it before you post this reply. I don't buy cards based on ego & pride. Posting inflammatory post like this will not get warm welcome from anyone.

This discussion started from that news about that guy attending AMD event showing Fury X running DA: Inquisition @5K @medium settings. Anyone read the news would understand it was based on what that guy witnessed in the event. Basically the words used in the news was chose carefully. Basically that guy saw the games running smoothly to his eyes which described as "liquid smooth to my eyes" & "It felt like 60FPS+, which was absolutely astounding to see in person...". The real FPS can be lower or higher but that is what that guy witnessed in the event. Base on how that guy explaining it in the news show that someone else was running the games & that guy is only a spectator or that guy probably got a chance playing the games but can't get accurate information like what FPS the games was running at, hence the description "It felt like 60FPS+".

Anyone in their right minds would know the news was written based on what that one guy witnessed in the event & would take with a grain of salt. Anyone here, including me will not take this news too seriously but "liquid smooth" @5K do sound interesting. It sound interesting but anyone in their right minds will not hastily decided to buy this card without details review from trusted reviewer.

When you said & I quote "The point to take here, it is normal to get 30-60fps at 4K and above running DA:I on Medium on flagship cards. It's probably astonishing to AMD users here since neither of their previous flagship cards are able to do so before the arrival of Fury. But it has been that way with its competitor's card, so nothing really much to shout about really. *shrugs*" From the very beginning I tried to highlight "AMD users here" but you always missed that. I don't mind if you're saying previous flagships cards before Fury unable to play DA: Inquisition at "felt like 60FPS" compare to their competitor cards from nvidia. Not really bother at all with that claim. If AMD that bad, no argument from me. What bother me is "AMD users here". If you read the sentences, it feels like you're accusing all AMD users here don't know any better. That is to me is inflammatory message hence why I accused you being a troll. Even after a couple of times trying to explained why I accused you trolling, you still failed to get it. I hope you understand now. Probably next time tone down any kind of inflammatory message?

Many people I know going to keep their 290/290X & not going to upgrade to 390/390X. As for the Fury, many people still on the fence right now. Few people that confirmed getting this cards mostly benchers which likely to sell it once they finished playing with it. Reading reviews one thing, feels it yourself is another thing & mostly satisfying to these people.

Regarding DA: Inquisition, from the information I gather, single 980 can play the games at almost 40FPS average @High settings @4K. Single 290X a couple FPS behind it. If the 980 can run at 60FPS @Medium settings @4K, then the 290X can run almost there too, probably a couple FPS less. If 290X can do that, I reckon Fury X could do better @High settings @4K. We'll see.

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 23 2015, 06:32 AM

Well, I can understand if it was about frustration on AMD products in general. I'm not pro to any team. I recalled a couple of times in the past where the users (in the other forum) having nothing but problem with the AMD cards & was contemplating whether trying to fixed it or just change to 970/980, & I was basically told them to just jump ship. I wasn't even bother to tell them to try this & that because when you have nothing but problem, there's no use to waste your time trying to fixed it, just go with what the best for you. However it's not the case with the discussion last night/earlier this morning. All my reply last night/earlier this morning is specifically around the news & what that guy (the one who wrote the news) witnessed the Fury performance in DA: Inquisition @5K. That's all, nothing more & nothing less. The gist is that there nothing we can get from that news though. It's all based on what that guy witnessed, so I like to hold my judgement on the Fury X performance until someone make a detailed review on it & also cover other popular games too, not just one game. I'm not even trying to defend AMD but we can't really make conclusion based on that news though. If you asked me, based on what we know so far about Fury, I can tell you that I have mixed feelings about it & so far I kinda disappointed with AMD if I'm honest.

I don't mind constructive criticism or even heated debate/discussion. I actually did involved in heated discussion few times in forums. When one of the party degenerate it to personal attack, then it's not cool anymore. I have never degenerate any kind of discussion that I have involved to personal attack or make any kind of bad assumption of the other party, ever. I just want to mention that majority, I think 99% of the heated debate/discussion that I have involved, I can proudly say none of them was never degenerated to personal attack by the all the parties involved.

Yeah, about the 3.5GB + 0.5GB "issue" with 970, I was kinda surprise that before anyone know about it, no one really complaining about the performance & everything was about how this card can beat 290X but once it widely known, suddenly many people having performance problem. Well, "many" probably not accurate because only few guys very vocal about it which can look like many. Actually the way I saw it, there was panic among 970 users but once they learned what is really going on, many people acceptes it & what left is just few guys keep vocal about it. (Forgot to say that this was what happened to 970 thread at OCN. I didn't follow 970/Nvidia thread at lowyat, so I don't know what happened here.)

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 23 2015, 03:06 PM

If anyone was thinking trying 390/390X BIOS on 290/290X, just FYI there seems to be incompatibility issue. A couple of people tried it & even though they got nice score in 3dmark at stock clock, however overclock is not stable especially when gaming. Also memory overclock also can not go high like it used to with 290/290X BIOS.


Congrats! Like others said, please do some review on it.

Do you mean the dynamic frame rate control? Did you try the 390/390X drivers (modded to support 290/290X & lower cards)?

Installed just now. No problem that I can see here. Do you have pic showing the option tabs missing?

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 23 2015, 10:19 PM

Eh...Steam show we can already add to cart. Did it means you can buy it but can only download it in the next 7 hours?

That actually running at stock clock. Not overclock yet.

Better overclock that fx8350. IMO, don't need to change to i5 or i7. Mine can run 1100 at stock voltage but I didn't thoroughly tested it in many games.

This post has been edited by kizwan: Jun 24 2015, 01:50 PM

Usually if their office near your place, you will get faster delivery. At my place, Skynet & Pos Laju are pretty bad while GDEX & Nationwide support next day delivery.

Where can I buy DVD version of this game? Original of course. My connection fast but limited quota.