:thumbsup:
76C in Furmark isn't bad at all and neither is 63C in games, which shows that the chip isn't the cause of the high temps; it's all due to the crappy reference cooler. I can't wait to see aftermarket reviews, especially to see if the lower temperatures produce lower power draw as well. Again, just more proof that aftermarket cards need to drop ASAP if AMD wants to cement in their bang/buck advantage.
We already saw that lower temps does lower power draw, refer to TPU's charts.
It was the same story with the 7970Ghz or 7950 Boost, reference card sucked a LOT of power and was noisy, but aftermarket ones were quiet and shaved off a lot on power use. My PCS+ has a default vcore of 1.087 compared to the reference model of 1.25vcore. AMD reference cards are just plain stupid to buy unless you go water cooling, period.
the more i think about it, the more it seems like amd's competitiveness sort of ruined this card. They really wanted performance on par with the gtx 780 for some reason, but if they set a more reasonable goal with less aggressive clock speeds, they would have had good tdp and could have used a normal fan profile. And they could have probably made the card even cheaper then. It looks like they just got greedy and pushed the 290 too hard.
the more i think about it, the more it seems like amd's competitiveness sort of ruined this reference card.
AMD reference cards are just plain stupid to buy unless you go water cooling, period.
AMD dominates this round. Congrats to them. I think the 290 noise levels are way too loud, but wait for aftermarket models and have fun.
EDIT: After reading more reviews, e.g. [H] doesn't even think it's that loud. Wonder what AT did differently.
This is what I like. I'm going back to air on my next build, so I want some beefy coolers on there. I like reference for watercooling but I'm going to see what the AIB's roll out this time around.2.5 slot after-market cards in CF? No problem in a modern case.
That's the big question. AMD blew a hole right through a market segment with this.What fraction of the total market fits into this vs. what fraction of PC gamers want to spend $399 for a card that offers performance similar to a $650 card just weeks ago?
Dominates?, they have clocked the GPU to get the performance which you can also get with NV, without the ear plugs required.....
Dominates?, they have clocked the GPU to get the performance which you can also get with NV, without the ear plugs required.....
Dominates?, they have clocked the GPU to get the performance which you can also get with NV, without the ear plugs required.....
For an extra $100, with 1GB less memory. No thanks. GTX780 performance at $500 is nice, for $400 its great. I can see many GTX670/GTX680/HD7970 owners buying an aftermaket R9 290 (or even reference model) instead of a GTX780 now.
the more i think about it, the more it seems like amd's competitiveness sort of ruined this card. They really wanted performance on par with the gtx 780 for some reason, but if they set a more reasonable goal with less aggressive clock speeds, they would have had good tdp and could have used a normal fan profile. And they could have probably made the card even cheaper then. It looks like they just got greedy and pushed the 290 too hard.
Yes, but since pretty much everyone looks only at FPS, this forces Nvidia to react more decisively.
It's good for almost everyone, well except Nvidia.
AMD decided to do what they do the best - spitting out raw fps(no offense meant, thats what gfx card do) for great perf/$ and in this they succeed.
But GK110 is simply more powerful GPU, and all NV has to do is tap into its TDP reserves and/or enable more cuda cores.
So NVIDIA probably gets to keep both crown and the engineering ego, but margins WILL suffer horribly horribly
Still... I wouldn't expect Nvidia to fight AMD tooth and nail on perf/$.
These price cuts are painful as it is. And unlike GK104 vs Tahiti, this time they have better product in just about every way.
Props to AMD for making it affordable :thumbsup:
Not sure how you keeps their engineering ego when they are going to likely trade blows with the 290x at stock speeds and the 290x is like 100mm2 smaller. I think that feat is more impressive.
Not sure how you keeps their engineering ego when they are going to likely trade blows with the 290x at stock speeds and the 290x is like 100mm2 smaller. I think that feat is more impressive.
But... but... do you know how many ear plugs a person can buy with the money saved over Nvidia?
Dominates?, they have clocked the GPU to get the performance which you can also get with NV, without the ear plugs required.....
You have to remember a lot of the real estate for GK110 is for their HPC stuff. R9 doesn't have the same sort of baggage.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290x-hawaii-review,3650.htmlThe math adds up to 2816 aggregate shaders and 176 texture units. Operating at up to 1 GHz (this becomes an important distinction later), that’s 5.63 TFLOPS of floating-point performance. We've also come to learn that AMD changed the double-precision rate from 1/4 to 1/8 on the R9 290X, yielding a maximum .7 TFLOPS. The FirePro version of this configuration will support full-speed (1/2 rate) DP compute, giving professional users an incentive to spring for Hawaii's professional implementation.
100mm2 deficiency (lead whatever) is exactly why Hawaii can NOT fight GK110. On perf, perf/W, total heat, or heat dissipation.
Versus unleashed GK110 all they will have is price. I thought that was almost self evident. And it's not like NV hasn't got used to fighting AMD with big cores.
Now we're talking.
What a beast card, R9 290x is already dead, it brings nothing over R9 290. Kinda puzzles me why amd released two cards with same perfs.
Also, Anandtech should really do something about their power consumption bench, R9 290 consumes 35W less than R9 290x on tomshardware.
So there is no difference between the 290 and 290x except higher clock speeds? Have they been confirmed? Last I checked it was around 727mhz for the lowest.
No:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290x-hawaii-review,3650.html
Radeon have disabled DP performance. Unlocked professional card will use 4 times more shaders yielding 2.8 TFLOPS DP performance (If clocks are the same). Fully enabled gk110 die (quadro k6000) have 1.73 TFLOPS DP of processing power. Hawaii have more than 50% DP performance over kepler.
Theoreticals, so not even sustained DP, are just that. Hardly much of a selling point in CUDA dominated scientific community.
Furthermore, Hawaii can barely utilize even SP without burning 300W, let alone 1/2 DP,
and those professors, you can call them crazy, but they are proly not too keen on setting fire to their labs and will likely insist on sub 250W solution.
So in conclusion: the imaginary card will have to be clocked at 300Hz or something like that. So you can forget about that 50% DP over K6000.
Yes I am exaggerating, but not much
Not sure how you keeps their engineering ego when they are going to likely trade blows with the 290x at stock speeds and the 290x is like 100mm2 smaller. I think that feat is more impressive.
And price and price/performance are 2 of of the top metrics a lot of people look for
I can't remember the last time anyone cared about compute in video games. I'm confused right now. Do you need some kind of CUDA related "Nvidia wins!" point?