R9 290 *Complete* review list

[GaiaHunter]

http://www.tsmc.com/english/dedicatedFoundry/technology/28nm.htm



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I'm pretty sure all desktop GPUs use the HP process.

 

[krumme]

I, for one am glad to see the improvement. I am also glad to see that attention is still on smoothness to keep everyone in check. I think once there is a case where frame times gets choppy again, people will notice and it will be corrected. No matter which company or what card it is. This is good for everyone, no?

Yepper. That why we need review that focus on real world testning. That means also subjective impressions after hours of testing in games instead of useless synthetic bm. I think H over the years have done the best work here from a user perspective, and continue to use the most realistic testing methology.

 

[ultimatebob]

Awesome card... I just hope that the 3rd party manufacturers come up with a better cooling solution! I thought that my Radeon 6870 was noisy at full speed, but this is insane!

Seriously, listen to this video on Tom's Hardware with the fan at 47%:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-review-benchmark,3659-18.html

Damn thing sounds like a hair dryer!

I hope that the third party video card manufacturers release a better cooler that doesn't suck so much (pun intended)

 

[itsmydamnation]

Crysis over like i posted in the other thread (before it turned to crud) toms hardware (.de) have now confirmed Fan RPM variance because of the method AMD is using to dynamically control fan RPM. The golden fan

to quote the translator.....lol

until the one higher power consumption that is caused by fluctuations in the chip quality, something at same fan speeds in approximately the same performance results! The actual differences are founded in the quality of the installed fan, whose speed variations but quite simply manually cancel each other out or adjust.

The main prize is therefore not a rogue Golden sample, but a golden fan.

 

[krumme]

Crysis over like i posted in the other thread (before it turned to crud) toms hardware (.de) have now confirmed Fan RPM variance because of the method AMD is using to dynamically control fan RPM. The golden fan

to quote the translator.....lol

Exactly as brent from H explained

 

[RussianSensation]

i still can't believe that just one generation after the failure of the gtx 480, we're talking about a card that uses more power, runs hotter and louder, being praised just because it is a good value. Have we learned nothing?

The comparison isn't even remotely valid. 780 and R9 290 are pretty close in power usage and performance, but R9 290 undercuts it by $100.

480 used nearly twice the power of the 5870 in games and 480 cost $140.

5870 = 143W vs. 480 = 272W (+90% more!)

780 = 222W vs. R9 290 = 245W (+10% more)

As far as noise and temperatures, everyone here knows AMD's reference cooler is junk, which is why a lot of people will just grab after-market R9 290s instead.

The thing is, AMD does not sell their products cheaper than NV(Intel) because it can, but because it HAS to.
You think they would mind having 4000 SP GPU and charging the arm and the leg?

Ok but a 4000 SP GPU would be 35-40% faster than 780. Of course AMD would charge more than the 780.

There is a fundamental difference between ATi/AMD and NV. When ATI/AMD are in the lead, they do not start overcharging by ridiculous amounts (9700Pro, 5870, 7970). When NV is in the lead, they do (8800GTX Ultra, GTX280, Titan).

If you look at NV's loyal supporters, they just keep buying NV, regardless of price. AMD's loyal supporters are not supporters of AMD, but of price/performance. That's the fundamental difference. If NV became a leader in price/performance, AMD users would switch in no time. For a long-time NV user, even if AMD undercuts NV and beats them, there is a high chance they still won't switch. Because of this, NV prices their cards however they want until the point where they prices just look ridiculous and they drop them to save face.

 

[GaiaHunter]

The comparison isn't even remotely valid. 780 and R9 290 are pretty close in power usage and performance, but R9 290 undercuts it by $100.

480 used nearly twice the power of the 5870 in games and 480 cost $140.

5870 = 143W vs. 480 = 272W (+90% more!)

780 = 222W vs. R9 290 = 245W (+10% more)

As far as noise and temperatures, everyone here knows AMD's reference cooler is junk, which is why a lot of people will just grab after-market R9 290s instead.

In fact the 5970 consumed less than the GTX 480.

 

[DiogoDX]

Look what I found on Guru3D

This was actually mentioned in an NVIDIA presentation and from there on some editors rightfully picked up on it.

This explains why pcper made a full article about this.:whiste:


Guru3D conclusion:

It's really not that bad it seems and some websites are blowing this way out of proportion. But hey, we don't judge. We just report what we can measure and see. This might be simply the tradeoff you have for a more silent preference. And if you don't care, in uber BIOS mode you'll get some more performance.

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/are_retail_samples_of_the_r9_290x_clocking_down_too_much.html

 

[Crap Daddy]

The comparison isn't even remotely valid. 780 and R9 290 are pretty close in power usage and performance, but R9 290 undercuts it by $100.

480 used nearly twice the power of the 5870 in games and 480 cost $140.

5870 = 143W vs. 480 = 272W (+90% more!)

780 = 222W vs. R9 290 = 245W (+10% more)

As far as noise and temperatures, everyone here knows AMD's reference cooler is junk, which is why a lot of people will just grab after-market R9 290s instead.

Do you think aftermarket 290 will still be $400?

 

[RussianSensation]

Actually when you equalize noise between R9 290 ref. and GTX 780 ref. (as Anandtech did in their review), the GTX 780 trounces the R9 290 in performance.

You keep being fixated on this whole idea of reference design. You know AIBs will make after-market cards soon, just like it happened with 4870, 5870, 6970, 7970. The points about noise and temperatures you keep making will become irrelevant. Unless you think there will never be after-market R9 290s?

Do you think aftermarket 290 will still be $400?

Yes, $400-450.

GTX670 reference = $399
GTX670 Windforce 3X = $399

R9 280X reference MSRP = $299
R9 280X Asus DCUII = $309

GTX780 reference = $499
GTX780 EVGA ACX = $499
GTX780 Windforce 3x = $510
GTX780 MSI Lightning = $515
GTX780 Asus DCUII = $520
GTX780 MSI Gaming = $520

This happens every generation. The premiums for after-market cards are $0-50 on average, with most of them falling in the $10-30 range. Why would R9 290 be different?

 

[dust]

Do you think aftermarket 290 will still be $400?

You're right! It will most probably be like 800

 

[ICDP]

Do you think aftermarket 290 will still be $400?

Even a decent custom cooled card will only add an extra ~$30-$40 to the cost.

Here is a snapshot of Newegg 7950 prices a few days after release on 02 Feb 2012. You can see that the cheapest reference design was $450 while the custom cooled versions were only $30-$40 more expensive.

http://web.archive.org/web/20120202...ATCH&N=-1&isNodeId=1&Description=7950&x=0&y=0
It may take a while to load as this is an archive snapshot.

 

[Crap Daddy]

You're right! It will most probably be like 800

Actually I was hoping for $750 but $800 is fine.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Do you think aftermarket 290 will still be $400?

There will be a small premium on most, I would assume. The MSRP on the R9 280X is $299. The cheapest non-reference I see on Newegg is $316 shipped. The highest priced one is $356 shipped (Sapphire Toxic). So I would expect similar prices depending on what you buy for the 290.

 

[Crap Daddy]

There will be a small premium on most, I would assume. The MSRP on the R9 280X is $299. The cheapest non-reference I see on Newegg is $316 shipped. The highest priced one is $356 shipped (Sapphire Toxic). So I would expect similar prices depending on what you buy for the 290.

Do we have some rumors as when to expect these cards to hit the market?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Do we have some rumors as when to expect these cards to hit the market?

I haven't heard any, maybe someone else has. But if I were to take a guess, I wouldn't be surprised if they launch around the same time as the 780Ti.

 

[ICDP]

Do we have some rumors as when to expect these cards to hit the market?

Mid to end Nov is the rumour. I would aim for end of Nov and hope to be pleasantly surprised

If 780Ti has a substantial lead (~10%+) over reference 290X I would expect AMD to get the OC custom cooled versions out ASAP to take some of the wind out of Nvidia's sails. Even a 1075 MHz OC edition R9 290X with Windforce or equivalent cooler could give a ~5%+ performance increase because the improved cooler can eliminate the throttling.

 

[RussianSensation]

They used a cooler from a 280X on a 290? Does that mean coolers built for the 280X, 7970, or 7950 should work on a 290/290X despite the 45 degree rotation of the die? If I could use my Accelero 7970 or the Twin Frozr off my 7950 on a 290, I'd be very tempted to order one now . . .

Maybe despite being rotated at 45*, it was still enough to create a decent amount of contact with the GPU?

The Accelero III Tom's used has a square plate.

 

[Stuka87]

Do you think aftermarket 290 will still be $400?

Of course not. It will be +20-30 dollars just like most cards with custom coolers.

But, it will still be cheaper than a 780, and it will be faster still because as tests with after market coolers have shown, the card never down clocks with a proper cooler.

 

[Skurge]

Aftermarket 290/X will be out in about 2 weeks.

 

[SolMiester]

That's golden. If I had room in my sig it would go there.

The constant garbage the nvidia fanclub puts out in this subforum is nothing short of astounding.

Considering this forum has more AMD fans, id say the the constant garbage is really just the AMD fans..



The thread crapping needs to stop now, both of you.

-Rvenger

 

[SolMiester]

Right, so you spend $100 more (25%) over the 290 to get the roughtly same performance as the 780Ti via overclocking the 780. With the 290 you're not overclocking, just trying to keep the boost speeds AMD says the card are made to run at (I think AT said 927MHz in their review). But you can then overclock the 290's, too...

But all of this is a moot point, AMD provided a reference card and a GPU for it's partners. The aftermarket cards will be here soon enough, and they will bring reduced noise, increased clocks, and likely reduced power use.

And for everyone saying that you don't need 4GB, can you explain the benefit of 2GB or 3GB on a GPU of this level? I can tell you the benefits of having more memory, but I'd like to hear how having less is better.

So you are now saying that the plain 290 is going to surpass its more expensive sibling and get Ti performance?...good on ya mate!

 

[SimianR]

Considering this forum has more AMD fans, id say the the constant garbage is really just the AMD fans..

It seems every time that someone posts something positive about the 290/290X it's as if an alarm goes off somewhere and someone has to rush in to quickly remind them how loud, hot and how much of a "joke" the 290 or 290X apparently is. There are equally emotional fans on both sides of course. I just wish people could discuss the pros and cons of products without having to go to such extremes on either side.

/end thread derail

Anyway, here's hoping we see after market cards sooner rather than later. The R290/290X look like they will scale incredibly well with adequate cooling - but without it they can also throttle down to performance bordering 770 levels.

 

[SolMiester]

The comparison isn't even remotely valid. 780 and R9 290 are pretty close in power usage and performance, but R9 290 undercuts it by $100.

480 used nearly twice the power of the 5870 in games and 480 cost $140.

5870 = 143W vs. 480 = 272W (+90% more!)

780 = 222W vs. R9 290 = 245W (+10% more)

As far as noise and temperatures, everyone here knows AMD's reference cooler is junk, which is why a lot of people will just grab after-market R9 290s instead.



Ok but a 4000 SP GPU would be 35-40% faster than 780. Of course AMD would charge more than the 780.

There is a fundamental difference between ATi/AMD and NV. When ATI/AMD are in the lead, they do not start overcharging by ridiculous amounts (9700Pro, 5870, 7970). When NV is in the lead, they do (8800GTX Ultra, GTX280, Titan).

If you look at NV's loyal supporters, they just keep buying NV, regardless of price. AMD's loyal supporters are not supporters of AMD, but of price/performance. That's the fundamental difference. If NV became a leader in price/performance, AMD users would switch in no time. For a long-time NV user, even if AMD undercuts NV and beats them, there is a high chance they still won't switch. Because of this, NV prices their cards however they want until the point where they prices just look ridiculous and they drop them to save face.

Are $ the only metric you know?, AMD need to undercut NV because NV is seen as a premium. Look how long it took for drivers to sort XF and the 7xxx XF is still borked. The power usage is no where near close unless you start clocking the 780. Your answer to the quote instead of tackling the heat and power etc, is to talk about pricing?..
If the the difference between the cards is $100 and aftermarket cooling is $75, do you really think people will baulk at the $25 difference to risk their card in a do it yourself?....I certainly wouldn't.
If AMD had any balls, they would of put a decent cooler on the card and gone head to head on performance with their improved drivers.

 

[PPB]

Are $ the only metric you know?, AMD need to undercut NV because NV is seen as a premium. Look how long it took for drivers to sort XF and the 7xxx XF is still borked. The power usage is no where near close unless you start clocking the 780. Your answer to the quote instead of tackling the heat and power etc, is to talk about pricing?..
If the the difference between the cards is $100 and aftermarket cooling is $75, do you really think people will baulk at the $25 difference to risk their card in a do it yourself?....I certainly wouldn't.
If AMD had any balls, they would of put a decent cooler on the card and gone head to head on performance with their improved drivers.

He talks about $ when you talk about power consumption because..... well..... power costs money. Calculate the time it would take to offset the huge pricing difference between those 2 cards with the added power consumption in the AMD one under normal scenarios. Hint: You are probably looking at a decade worth of time.