[RUMOR]Specs for possible R9-390X?

[Deleted]

Link to SiSoft Live Ranker.

Note the specs on these two results; 4096 stream processors with 64 Compute Units, 4GB VRAM clocked at 1.25GHz. But what's interesting is the fact that this is on the Crosshair IV Formula and it's still in the top 200 in the world on old architecture.

Now, Videocardz have recently posted a link to the Fiji PCB being shipped to Canada.

Now, given that AMD were looking to be implementing stacked DRAM in graphics cards between this year and next year, it's possible that this is the card that's going to showcase it.

So, I ask you, what are your thoughts on this admittely speculative information?

[Shinzai]

I'm pretty much just waiting and seeing what will happen next year at the moment. I ended up picking up a GTX 980, but the 390X does look very interesting.

The 390X looks great on paper, so I'm wondering if Stacked DRAM and the upgraded architecture will give it some wild results at 4K and other such resolutions. I'm really just waiting on that moment when a single card can drive 4K resolutions easily, then I'll probably upgrade again.

Regardless, it'll be entertaining to see who comes out on top between the inevitable 980Ti (or equivalent) and the 390X.

[Stormspark]

The problem here...if AMD doesn't make significant changes to their architecture, is POWER CONSUMPTION. The R9-290x has a 290W TDP. The GTX980 has a 165W TDP and significantly outperforms the 290X in all areas. Nvidia has set the bar really high with their low power consumption, just like Intel did with CPU's. AMD is going to get left behind in GPU's the way they were in CPU's if they do not change their methodology and get power consumption under control. The i7-4790k has an 88W TDP and nearly doubles the performance of the FX-9590 which has a 220W TDP.

Intel actually did this same thing at one point too. It was called the Pentium 4. They used something like 4x more power than equivalent Athlons, while the absolute fastest ones had about 1/2 of the performance of AMD's budget Duron chips (which used even less power).

If I see a 390X come out with a 250-300W TDP, I won't even look at it unless it is more than twice as powerful as the 980. AMD SERIOUSLY needs to do something about their power consumption if they want to remain relevant. As in, cutting power consumption in half from what it is now.

[moremana]

The problem here...if AMD doesn't make significant changes to their architecture, is POWER CONSUMPTION. The R9-290x has a 290W TDP. The GTX980 has a 165W TDP and significantly outperforms the 290X in all areas. Nvidia has set the bar really high with their low power consumption, just like Intel did with CPU's. AMD is going to get left behind in GPU's the way they were in CPU's if they do not change their methodology and get power consumption under control. The i7-4790k has an 88W TDP and nearly doubles the performance of the FX-9590 which has a 220W TDP.

Intel actually did this same thing at one point too. It was called the Pentium 4. They used something like 4x more power than equivalent Athlons, while the absolute fastest ones had about 1/2 of the performance of AMD's budget Duron chips (which used even less power).

If I see a 390X come out with a 250-300W TDP, I won't even look at it unless it is more than twice as powerful as the 980. AMD SERIOUSLY needs to do something about their power consumption if they want to remain relevant. As in, cutting power consumption in half from what it is now.

I concur completely.

AMD has alot of work ahead of them if they are going to compete. I have been a Radeon fan only because I think the colors look more vibrant, at least to me they do, and cost of course, but if the new cards don't come down in power consumption I will probably buy me a 960 or 970, I am waiting for the 960 to come out, I want to see how well it does.

[Vash The Stampede]

I don't like it cause it's just another product to out do the new 970's and 980's. Meanwhile their GCN architecture has been around since March 2012 and all they did was rebrand majority of their products.

[Stormspark]

I don't like it cause it's just another product to out do the new 970's and 980's. Meanwhile their GCN architecture has been around since March 2012 and all they did was rebrand majority of their products.

To be fair, Maxwell is Nvidia's newest architecture since 2012 too. Kepler came out around the same time as GCN (actually slightly before), and everything except the 780/780ti and the Titans were rebranded products (770 was rebranded 680, 760 was rebranded 670, etc).

[Vash The Stampede]

To be fair, Maxwell is Nvidia's newest architecture since 2012 too. Kepler came out around the same time as GCN (actually slightly before), and everything except the 780/780ti and the Titans were rebranded products (770 was rebranded 680, 760 was rebranded 670, etc).

Not saying Nvidia doesn't pull that some nonsense either.

[Stormspark]

Not saying Nvidia doesn't pull that some nonsense either.

They did it equally with the Rx 200 series and the GTX 700 series. ONLY the R9-290, 290x, and GTX780 and 780ti were new GPU's. The entire rest of the lineup for both of them was rebranded from the HD7000 series and the GTX 600 series.

[MMKing]

I'm personally waiting for the 300 series AMD. I currently use a 7970GHZ which is two generations behind Nvidias current 900 series (albeit not fully released), despite this my older card has superior memory over Nvidias newest. I have no idea why they opted for such a ridiculously narrow memory buss width but it's showing in the higher resolutions. Even in the newest call of duty, a series not exactly known for graphical fidelity the difference between the 580-620USD 980 and the 350-380USD 290x in 4K benchmarks is negligible and most certainly not worth the 200 dollars.

In more impressive looking games like Shadow of Mordor and Ryze: son of Rome the difference is swaying in favor of the much cheaper 290x as soon as you hit 1440p. The difference is much greater at 1080p, (in favor of the 980) but at those resolutions the 290x is already pulling 60fps. The difference is going to become more and more noticeable as developers stop releasing versions of their games for the old 256/512MB consoles.

Memory buss width is not everything, and the 980/970 has great cores. But the 256bit buss width is bottle necking hard at 1440p and above. I suspect Nvidia will up it with their ''ti'' and/or ''titan'' versions of the 900 series.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem here...if AMD doesn't make significant changes to their architecture, is POWER CONSUMPTION. The R9-290x has a 290W TDP. The GTX980 has a 165W TDP and significantly outperforms the 290X in all areas. Nvidia has set the bar really high with their low power consumption, just like Intel did with CPU's. AMD is going to get left behind in GPU's the way they were in CPU's if they do not change their methodology and get power consumption under control. The i7-4790k has an 88W TDP and nearly doubles the performance of the FX-9590 which has a 220W TDP.

Intel actually did this same thing at one point too. It was called the Pentium 4. They used something like 4x more power than equivalent Athlons, while the absolute fastest ones had about 1/2 of the performance of AMD's budget Duron chips (which used even less power).

If I see a 390X come out with a 250-300W TDP, I won't even look at it unless it is more than twice as powerful as the 980. AMD SERIOUSLY needs to do something about their power consumption if they want to remain relevant. As in, cutting power consumption in half from what it is now.

I think you're overstating the power consumption problem, and comparing the 290x to the 980 in a power consumption duel is an unfair one. The 780Ti, which is a closer match in terms of performance used only 24 Watts less according to Guru3d. Even compared to the 780 the 290x uses 55W more.

Demanding that the 390x is twice the power of a 980 if it has a TDP of 250-300W is also a strange suggestion. According to Guru3D, the 980 uses about 170 on stock settings and will go up to around 200W if you get a good card you can OC. Why the 390x should perform more than 100% at 250W, only using 47% more power is an idiotic suggestion.

The 390x may end up with a power hungry core, but if they deliver new memory technology as rumors would have use believe it will at least be more power efficient in that department.

[Deleted]

Well, it won't be on 20mm apparently

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/36...roken-for-gpus

[Deleted]

Dutch site I know, but you can use google translate I couldnt find an english site with a quick search

http://tweakers.net/nieuws/99696/sk-...t-8gbit-s.html

Basicly it says that SK hynix has started supplying its stacked Vram modules. So it could very well be that the 390X has stacked Vram. At least the tech is out there and available now

[Vash The Stampede]

Still say it's a showcase graphics card just to beat the 980's. Seems like both AMD and Nvidia believe that if they keep producing these Ferrari's and Porsche's of graphic cards then people are more likely to buy their products within the entire price range. Despite the Doom and gloom of AMD graphics, they still have a better offering in the mid to low end market compared to Nvidia.

It'll be interesting to see how things play out with the 390X. If they do something stupid like put two 290X's in one card then god help them. The TDP on the 290X is bad enough. But by now I expect them to have a new architecture that we should start seeing in their new APU's soon.

[TaintedOne]

If they do something stupid like put two 290X's in one card then god help them.

Ummm...Yeah.. That card came out 4/8/2014 295x2 ><



I'm just interested on seeing the price/performance on these new cards

GF's comp has my old 5870 and it has been showing signs of dying soon so I may be in the market for a new GPU soon.

[potis]

Once more /care.

Unless they fix a lot of things it wont matter but it will force nvidia to release 980 Ti so cant wait!

[Samfisher]

Once more /care.

Unless they fix a lot of things it wont matter but it will force nvidia to release 980 Ti so cant wait!

There won't be a 980 Ti.

[Vash The Stampede]

Ummm...Yeah.. That card came out 4/8/2014 295x2 ><

Maybe they'll quad 290 it. Yea I forgot about the 295x2.

[Deleted]

Once more /care.

Unless they fix a lot of things it wont matter but it will force nvidia to release 980 Ti so cant wait!

Fix what??

The 290X is a good contender for the 970 with the recent price drops. Performance wise they are pretty similar the 970 does pull ahead a bit at 1080p. The 970 does use less power for about the same performance, which I think is impressive.

But the moment you look at higher resolutions (4k, 3x 1080P) the differences between the 290x and 970 are gone. The 290X is actually a tad better at those resolutions. And you can get almost similar performance at those resolutions with a 290, which is still cheaper than both other cards.

All they have to do is reduce the power consumption and increase performance a bit and they are at the same level.

[potis]

Fix what??

The 290X is a good contender for the 970 with the recent price drops. Performance wise they are pretty similar the 970 does pull ahead a bit at 1080p. The 970 does use less power for about the same performance, which I think is impressive.

But the moment you look at higher resolutions (4k, 3x 1080P) the differences between the 290x and 970 are gone. The 290X is actually a tad better at those resolutions. And you can get almost similar performance at those resolutions with a 290, which is still cheaper than both other cards.

All they have to do is reduce the power consumption and increase performance a bit and they are at the same level.

Heat/Noise/TDP/Power Consumption.

And not talking about aftermarket stuff, just the default ones cause with the same logic, no 290X can touch 970 G1 and how it OC's or the MSI one.

There is (was) almost never a reason to actually choose AMD over Nvidia apart from "I do not have the extra money required for the nvidia counterpart".

Mantle tried to change that but there is barely any difference.

And i wont go into a stupid argument about nvidia vs amd i tell people to buy depending on their budget and whatever "Cheat" price i can find nearby as example:

http://xfxforce.com/en-us/products/a...n-r9-280x-tdbd

Had a friend buy that for 230E and thats a beast card still.

Every period is different to buy things and it always depends on money, last 30 days i had 4 people buy AMD cards cause 280/280X have dropped to 200-240E while the 760 still remains at ~230 while both AMD ones are a tad bit stronger/stronger for the very strong aftermarkets ones for the people that do not have 370E to buy a 970. (In my country at least).

It all depends on the buyer, but for overall performance/gain i would never ever suggest an AMD card over a Nvidia for the same money.

[Shinzai]

On a related note, looks like the 380X will actually be a rehashed 290X. http://videocardz.com/54065/amd-prep...ter-hawaii-gpu

We’ve been telling you about faster Hawaii ever since we learned about XTX variant.

XTX, XTL or XT2, no matter how it’s called, is supposedly a faster Hawaii variant that is being prepped for few months now. Today Fudzilla reports AMD may finally launch this processor early next year, right before flagship Fiji silicon.

The new Hawaii-based graphics card would probably fall into Radeon R9 300 series, otherwise it wouldn’t really make any sense. Hawaii XTX was previously planned as Radeon R9 295X (this was the actual codename), but right now Radeon R9 380X is what we expect to see.

NVIDIA has completed its roadmap for this year. There are no new graphics card planned for this and next month. Maxwell GM200 is not expected to launch before Fiji, and GeForce GTX 960 was never planned for November (that’s why we never posted the rumors).

That said we shall expect at least 5 graphics cards in first quarter of 2015: R9 390(X), R9 380(X) and GTX 960. As for GM200 (TITAN II) we are still waiting for solid information.

Note; this is rumour milling, but seems completely plausible to me.

There won't be a 980 Ti.

I see no reason to think that.

[Deleted]

Heat/Noise/TDP/Power Consumption.

And not talking about aftermarket stuff, just the default ones cause with the same logic, no 290X can touch 970 G1 and how it OC's or the MSI one.

TDP/power consumption/heat are all pretty much related to each other. Noise.... depends on the cooler you are using.
And I am not saying the reference cooler on the 290(x) was good, that was terrible. Nvidia does that better. But I dont see the problems with a 290(x) with aftermarket coolers.

And this is me personally, I would never ever get a reference design card be it AMD or Nvidia.

There is (was) almost never a reason to actually choose AMD over Nvidia apart from "I do not have the extra money required for the nvidia counterpart".

So, in the case of the 280x vs 770. I think the 280x is cheaper at the moment, but gives similar performance to a 770 with the added bonus of 3 GB Vram and 384 bit membus. You would still go for the 770?? If you would have the money for both cards.... That seems mental to me...
It has been like that for most generations I think.

Every period is different to buy things and it always depends on money, last 30 days i had 4 people buy AMD cards cause 280/280X have dropped to 200-240E while the 760 still remains at ~230 while both AMD ones are a tad bit stronger/stronger for the very strong aftermarkets ones for the people that do not have 370E to buy a 970. (In my country at least).

I would also consider a 290 in that bracket. It is costs around 275 at the moment over here.