Logically it should be slower, yeah the review must be biased.
Review payed for by nvidia jk
Not sure what to say to HardwareCanucks, it looks bad though.
Logically it should be slower, yeah the review must be biased.
Yeah, this is looking screwy. I normally like these guys, but either something is horribly wrong, they got a golden card, there are new NVidia drivers, or the card was cherry-picked.
Titan Z is a beast!
Just put it underwater and it will be the fastest 4K kid out there...
Remember the 295X2 cant hold its boost clock either. Even with its dual air and water cooling, AC in room and without the constrains of a chassis.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_295_X2/29.html
Seems its all about quickly testing cards today from both vendors, so they can cool down again before throttle
Remember the 295X2 cant hold its boost clock either. Even with its dual air and water cooling, AC in room and without the constrains of a chassis.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_295_X2/29.html
Seems its all about quickly testing cards today from both vendors, so they can cool down again before throttle
not furmark, but something that mimics the peak load of the most demanding games
Why so secretive about what he uses to load the card? When asked directly, this is what he said.
So it was with a synthetic load. Might explain why nobody else suffered throttling while testing with games.
I heard all those excuses before. If your test is short enough they dont throttle. Or using something like 18C ambient that nVidia and AMD prefers to be tested in. The 290/290X for example was first "fixed" with custom designs.
Its just the new black from both companies. To demo their cards in situations the enduser as such cant use for anything. But again, with shinking sales and slow progress, deperation starts to kick in.
lol, falsified data, that's ridiculous.
In other reviews the 295x2 is what, on average 7% faster on 1440p? The hardwarecanucks card boosts 100 MHz higher than average, which explains the results completely. It's just a good card or good ventilation.
Hardware Canucks review also used 14.6 drivers.PCPER and Guru3D used 14.6 drivers for the R9 295X2 and the Hardware Canucks review used 14.4 drivers.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...6869-nvidia-titan-z-performance-review-4.htmlDrivers:
AMD 14.6 Beta
NVIDIA 337.88 Beta
*Please note that a previous version of this page erroneously listed AMD's 14.4 driver. All testing on AMD hardware was conducted with the 14.6 beta driver.
We're still working on our comprehensive list of shill sites, right? So hardwarecanucks paid by NV, while hardOCP is paid fully AMD (but were paid by nvidia during the 600 series), and then you have "AMD zone/center" anandtech, PCPer who goes back and forth depending on the day of the week - I think they're paid by nvidia monday through wednesday but AMD pays them for reviews on Thursdays and Fridays. I think TPU is paid every on even months by NV, and odd months by AMD.
Still working on the comprehensive list here.
On a related note, did anyone read the conclusion of the hardwarecanucks review? Seems that their recommendation was to get the 295X2 instead of the Titan Z. That's a hell of a conclusion to make in a review that was paid for by nvidia! LOL
I heard all those excuses before. If your test is short enough they dont throttle. Or using something like 18C ambient that nVidia and AMD prefers to be tested in. The 290/290X for example was first "fixed" with custom designs. Even the regular Titan throttles, tho less than the 780ti.
Its just the new black from both companies. To demo their cards in situations the enduser as such cant use for anything. But again, with shinking sales and slow progress, deperation starts to kick in.
With the exception of our strategy games, both of which throttle at certain points due to power restrictions on both the R9 295X2 and R9 290X, AMDs latest dual-GPU card is able to maintain 1018MHz on all of our games.
With the 295X2′s implementation of hybrid liquid and air cooling, thats a thing of the past. This time around AMD promised up to a 1018MHz GPU clock, and AMD delivered a constant 1018MHz GPU clock with no dips in performance. Whether its a few minutes or a few hours, youre getting 1018MHz. I tested this using a 2 hour Furmark stress test as well as an overnight session of Unigines Heaven. That clock speed was unwavering.
In our testing we found that the cooling mechanisms all work well and keep the GPU temps under 70c. More importantly, it allows the GPUs to keep a consistent 1018MHz clock speed while gaming.
The Asetek closed-loop liquid cooler does a fairly good job, though it's only equipped with a 120 mm radiator. A peak GPU temperature of 65 °C is admirable, particularly considering that we couldn't push a single Radeon R9 290X below 50 °C in our aftermarket cooling project.
Other reviews from the the R9 295 thread don't mention such issues.
Anandtech says the R9 295 barely throttles.
Forbes.
HardOCP
Tom's
I didn't see throttling specifically mentioned one way or the other, but they do mention the temps never went above 65C, so I doubt it throttled to any significant degree.
I'd be surprised if throttling was an issue for the R9 295.
I have updated the review actually. It was a typo on that page.
Drivers:
AMD 14.6 Beta
NVIDIA 337.88 Beta
*Please note that a previous version of this page erroneously listed AMD's 14.4 driver. All testing on AMD hardware was conducted with the 14.6 beta driver.
Other reviews from the the R9 295 thread don't mention such issues.
Anandtech says the R9 295 barely throttles.
Forbes.
HardOCP
Tom's
I didn't see throttling specifically mentioned one way or the other, but they do mention the temps never went above 65C, so I doubt it throttled to any significant degree.
I'd be surprised if throttling was an issue for the R9 295.
On a related note, did anyone read the conclusion of the hardwarecanucks review? Seems that their recommendation was to get the 295X2 instead of the Titan Z. That's a hell of a conclusion to make in a review that was paid for by nvidia! LOL
Its funny that for example that forbes "review" and anandtech completely contradicts one another. But again, maybe easy to miss when you want a predefined outcome. Lets just be honest about it, both companies clock their cards higher than they in reality can handle in prolonged gaming to get better benchmark results.
I couldn't tell you much beyond that, and certainly nothing on personal experience, but most review sites seem to suggest little to no throttling. But of course every case and it's airflow and environment will be different.
And golden samples, special press cards with special BIOS etc.
Its just a area with little trust left.
HWC sample is special then, it outperforms GTX 780ti SLI :sneaky:
And yet people defend this D: