| Forum Index > Tech Support |
When using this resource, please read the opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
![[image loading]](http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/GPU/R9-290X-R/R9-290X-R-55.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/GPU/R9-290X-R/R9-290X-R-54.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/GPU/R9-290X-R/R9-290X-R-56.jpg) Considering they're benchmarking against stock reference 780's/titans, i don't have much faith for them. If they can't maintain 1000mhz on an open test bench @22c ambients and >60db of fan noise due to throttling to maintain 94c, then obviously the reference card can't come close to competing against an OC'd 780, which can consistently and easily get an OC of >25% the clocks they are testing at. Are there any reviews that are not testing stock reference 780 vs stock reference 290x? | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
On October 24 2013 13:17 iTzSnypah wrote: It's because they have tons of useless filler. Seriously all they need is 3/4 game graphs, power temp and noise, and OC potential. That would take maybe 300-500 words, yet they insist on 2k+. Really? I usually skip the graphs except for maybe one performance graph and then power/temp/noise. The parts on architecture, new features, etc. are what's significant, except unless you need to check back later to see performance for a specific game. Looks like everybody has articles short on content, probably from getting the cards relatively late for review. Anyway, what was the last AT review that was unfinished that wasn't on an AMD product? Looks like AMD's marketing team is getting these out late rather than any real change of policy or procedure from the reviewers. Or did I totally forget about some other review? That said, can't you write stuff while running benchmarks? Guess not. edit: well, some things require some testing like PowerTune and so on, and the writing does take longer than running these benchmarks | ||
|
mav451
United States1596 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
On October 24 2013 13:29 mav451 wrote: Cyro- I've been updating my earlier post with reviews that at least use the 780SC ACX or MSI Lightning :p 1020mhz is your oc'd 780 ahahaha so cute these things will do 1350 24/7 if you have balls, 1300 if you dont and 1200 if you have no idea what you're doing - on air. Reviews just showed what i was already saying, reference card seems to suck. The cooler is noisy and doesn't do very well at all, it wins slightly stock reference vs stock reference but that card is clearly not at all capable of competing with a non-reference 780, and i don't think anyone can dispute that. I've only read two reviews though, reading more now. | ||
|
mav451
United States1596 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
| ||
|
iTzSnypah
United States1738 Posts
How long till you think we see quad-slot coolers? 350w TDPs? Gigantic chips (>500mm^2)? Gah from Tom's review I think once aftermarket coolers keep the 290X cool we are going to have ridiculous performance. E: oh gawd, think what will happen once they put them on water. | ||
|
Mysticesper
United States1183 Posts
On October 24 2013 13:42 Cyro wrote: If i had to pick one for free; from 20 mins of glancing over reviews i'd probably take a reference 780 over a reference 290x, with an obvious preference to a nonreference card for a flagship gpu, but no data on those on amd side Didn't we have to wait until November for OEMs to manufacture their non-reference 290s? | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
 EDIT: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Qin4nEj.png) | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
On October 24 2013 14:07 Mysticesper wrote: Didn't we have to wait until November for OEMs to manufacture their non-reference 290s? I've not heard of non-reference cooling being available for 290x's, but i don't think they can be competitive with OC without them or water | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
Thing is it's mostly gibberish to me q_q. My impression is that Hawaii's new architecture is better than Tahiti, but still not as good as Nvidia's GK110, at least in terms of raw amount of transistors and the size of the die. That's litterally all I could garner from that page (though I have no time to do in depth reading or anything). Thoughts on Hawaii from more tech-savy people? | ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
@Cyro You seem disappointed with the 290x performance. Yet if you're spending $550-1100 on GPUs, I kind of expect a gamer to be running multi-monitor or be eyeing 4k at the very least. Assuming that eyefinity resolutions see the same kind of performance advantage 4k resolutions have, 290x may well be the card to beat for the high-end. And that potential advantage may increase with water cooling, depending on how problematic the 1k clock speed cap is. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
when all of the reviews that people have been quoting for weeks show it at a performance level that would get trashed by oc'd gk110. It needs non-reference or water, and we have no info on that so it's not very helpful for me. I think there's a market for high end cards for targetting performance-level framerates on 1920x1080, or strong FPS on 2560x1440, before you break into 3x monitor surround or 4k | ||
|
iTzSnypah
United States1738 Posts
On a side note I really hate this 'up to' bullshit. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290x-hawaii-review,3650-4.html ![[image loading]](http://media.bestofmicro.com/S/5/406661/original/clock-rate.png) From my estimation you have ~25seconds of 1Ghz then after 1minute you have 750-850Mhz. Yeah... 15-25% performance regression no thank you. | ||
|
mav451
United States1596 Posts
On October 24 2013 14:38 MisterFred wrote: Reading the HardOCP review, I tended to be swayed by their analysis on two fronts. First their point that the 290x is at least in the same ballpark as the 780/titan for ordinary resolutions at a cheaper price, which is pretty nice. Second, the 290x has some sort of 4k magic, scoring better than the titan. @Cyro You seem disappointed with the 290x performance. Yet if you're spending $550-1100 on GPUs, I kind of expect a gamer to be running multi-monitor or be eyeing 4k at the very least. Assuming that eyefinity resolutions see the same kind of performance advantage 4k resolutions have, 290x may well be the card to beat for the high-end. And that potential advantage may increase with water cooling, depending on how problematic the 1k clock speed cap is. Yeah the 4K/CF results are certainly compelling, but at lower mainstream resolutions (1400P or 1600P), I don't believe the 512-bit bus is really being taken advantage of. So while there is value here for someone spending 1.1K or so for dual 290Xs, if you are budget conscious, I feel like most users are going to be staying on a single GPU for single monitor gaming. I can certainly see why nVidia would release a Ti model, just for head to head SKU comparisons. There's just no easy way to explain to layman that 780's inherently have a ton of headroom for overclocking. There are only a handful of reviews that have the 780 running above stock, e.g at 967 (SC ACX) or 1033 (MSI Lightnings). I expect with the next few days/weeks we should be seeing more OCed vs OCed comparisons, and that's where most of the discussion will probably focus on. *Also side note - saw this little nugget in the TPU review: Proliferation of DirectX 11.2 doesn't just have lack of adoption by NVIDIA as a roadblock, there's also the OS limitation. DirectX 11.2 is not supported on Windows 7 and requires Windows 8.1, yet Windows 8 and its successor, Windows 8.1, are incredibly unpopular with PC gamers (at least our forum members) due to the idiotic user-interface that insults our intelligence. To say my view of the TPU author W1zzard has diminished, would be an understatement :p | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
On October 24 2013 15:04 iTzSnypah wrote: I was expecting non-reference coolers at least. Using the 'silent' mode we have Tom's reporting 700-800MHz (depending on game) average with a single card and 727Mhz in CF at 94c. Way to go AMD that's some expert marketing; 'up to' 1Ghz. On a side note I really hate this 'up to' bullshit. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290x-hawaii-review,3650-4.html From my estimation you have ~25seconds of 1Ghz then after 1minute you have 750-850Mhz. Yeah... 15-25% performance regression no thank you. That's quiet mode, which prevents fan ramping up past 45%, uber lets it ramp up more (like in above video) but you're still hitting 94c and dipping a bit below 1000mhz in some cases | ||
|
iTzSnypah
United States1738 Posts
I seriously hope non-reference cards have a reprogrammed Powertune because the current implementation is garbage. E: This is how the Powertune works on the R9 290X: Run full steam ahead at minimum fan speed until you hit 95C -> Start raising fan speed to reach equilibrium -> if equilibrium is not reached with maximum allowable fan speed, cut clocks. Therefore even if you have a cooler like Gigabytes 3x windforce 450w the R9 290X wants to run full steam at 95c at 25% fan (made up %) rather than 75-80c (also made up) at 50% fan (also also made up). E2: You can manually adjust the target temperature but that is not the correct solution. The correct solution is that it needs to be set automatically (non-reference coolers) and I'm afraid that that isn't going to happen and the majority of R9 290X owners will have their cards roasting. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290x-hawaii-review,3650-5.html ![[image loading]](http://media.bestofmicro.com/2/P/405745/original/CCC-default.jpg) | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
E2: You can manually adjust the target temperature but that is not the correct solution. The correct solution is that it needs to be set automatically (non-reference coolers) and I'm afraid that that isn't going to happen and the majority of R9 290X owners will have their cards roasting. AMD cares more about people perceiving their cards as loud than they do about the cards dieing faster than they have to, they really need it considering how far they are behind in the noise game | ||
|
DropTester
Australia608 Posts
On October 23 2013 12:06 Myrmidon wrote: RAM has to meet certain standards for interoperability, so even mixing and matching is usually fine (unless one set has slower timings than another and you need to run things at the slower rates). But if you're getting two sticks packaged together as opposed to the same brand's identical model single stick x2, you're getting the same product either way. It's the same, just different packaging. thanks again, you guys are really a lot of help!  | ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
On October 24 2013 17:26 Cyro wrote: AMD cares more about people perceiving their cards as loud than they do about the cards dieing faster than they have to, they really need it considering how far they are behind in the noise game Even before the 290x came out, I remember being told that 95c was the upper limit of safe temperatures - but still within safe. I always perceived the problem is that you don't want to run a card at 95c on a regular basis because you might slip up, something could go wrong, and the card will edge above 95c because you weren't being careful. With the way this new card will automatically down-throttle, the risk of accidentally going above 95c because you weren't paying attention seems to be gone. So there shouldn't be a problem running at 95c. The main drawback (one little oops and you're at 100-105c or above) is gone. Now I could see someone worrying that having a big 'ole 95c GPU near their OTHER components will cause temp problems in the case in general. | ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Mixu vs TBD
Spirit vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
Patches Events
OSC
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs Shuttle
BeSt vs Rush
WardiTV Weekly
Monday Night Weeklies
Afreeca Starleague
Leta vs ggaemo
Jaedong vs Queen
GSL
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
