[TR] Retail Radeon 290x cards may be slower than press samples - 11/7 AMD SAYS FIXED

[OCGuy]

There are two different issues on the table here, currently being muddied together.

Issue 1.) Speed variances between the same models of video card. Potentially because of electricayl and mechanical differences inherent to different boards. Current fan control point is by PWM, new control point will be by RPM, and this will be fixed in a driver update. Should stabilize performance between same brand of video card.

Issue 2.) 290X throttling it's clock speed below 1GHz in default. This one is normal, this is correct, the card will throttle it's performance below 1GHz while running in Quiet Mode at 40% fan. This data is everywhere to show this. Users should know that this will happen. The card is operating normally, this is its intended operation. One way to combat this is to set to Uber Mode, or set CCC manually to 100% so that there is no fan cap. This should help stabilize the clock speed closer to 1GHz. Everyone is hoping custom cards will fix this issue completely.

At what point should someone RMA, since there is no advertised base clock? How does an average user know if they have a defective card?

These two issues are very much related. Both are due to a deviation from the standard metric for stability: Does my new card run stable at least at the advertised base clock and stock voltage?

You can praise the insane price/performance but at the same time show concern for this tactic. The reviews that either ignored this issue or glossed over it like it was normal.....are not complete.

Making the fan speed the point of reference is ludicrous. My performance shouldn't change during summer.

The Core speed should be the constant, witth the fan adjusting around it. Just like every other card.

 

[ShintaiDK]

This throttle nonsense is pretty funny to watch. Why can't games just run at a fixed clock?

Because cards like the 290X would never be a 1Ghz card then.

The bigger the delta between boost and baseclock, the bigger the cheat possible so to say. I dont like that the 280X got a much lower baseclock than the HD7970 for example. Because it simply opens the door for big variance in performance where its "working as intended" and the ability to sell poor chips that couldnt make it as a HD7970. Same applies for nVidia for that matter. Even the Titan cant keep it boost clock for more than 5 minutes.

The only cards that can actually deliver what they are supposed to in any situation is the Tesla cards. And they dont have boost.

 

[GaiaHunter]

At what point should someone RMA, since there is no advertised base clock? How does an average user know if they have a defective card?

These two issues are very much related. Both are due to a deviation from the standard metric for stability: Does my new card run stable at least at the advertised base clock and stock voltage?

You can praise the insane price/performance but at the same time show concern for this tactic. The reviewers that either ignored this issue or glossed over it like it was normal.....

If the uber mode can keep the speed at ~1 GHz it is fine.

 

[Nomanor]

You get what you pay for.

Warning issued for thread crapping.
-- stahlhart

 

[ShintaiDK]

If the uber mode can keep the speed at ~1 GHz it is fine.

You cant RMA the card for that reason in legal terms. Even if it runs at 800Mhz with 100% fanspeed. Simply because there is no officially listed baseclock. Its a free get out of jail card. Just like with the FX CPUs.

 

[Granseth]

Why does it need to be a limit to boost clock when you have a limit to TDP, temperature and fan speed?

 

[3DVagabond]

You cant RMA the card for that reason in legal terms. Even if it runs at 800Mhz with 100% fanspeed. Simply because there is no officially listed baseclock. Its a free get out of jail card. Just like with the FX CPUs.

Source? Show me where AMD's board partners say you can't RMA if the card only runs at 800MHz with 100% fan because there's no official baseclock. You're just making stuff up. I can't believe you post FUD like this as fact.

 

[Jaydip]

I believe both NV and AMD made mistake by trying to copy Intel.None of them have the engineering prowess of Intel and it really wasn't needed.They should advertise just a base clock and leave the rest to overclockers.We are dealing with too much nonsense since boost came to gpu.

 

[OCGuy]

Why does it need to be a limit to boost clock when you have a limit to TDP, temperature and fan speed?

There needs to be a base clock, because the things you mentioned change based on case, ambient temp, etc. Everyone should expect the same performance out of the box, except for any boost, which is a lottery.

 

[MeldarthX]

I finding this interesting; there's one guy that's reporting this. Another on this forums; but found he was linked to vsink *very well the others as could be* Guys over at OC forum are having a blast with their cards and none of this is showing up.

Lots of them are flashing their bios with the asus bios to get fastest clocks out of theirs; this is with the stock fan....

It is very interesting - the title is seriously misleading and should be fixed; but I doubt it will...

 

[wand3r3r]

I believe both NV and AMD made mistake by trying to copy Intel.None of them have the engineering prowess of Intel and it really wasn't needed.They should advertise just a base clock and leave the rest to overclockers.We are dealing with too much nonsense since boost came to gpu.

:thumbsup: Seconded.

 

[GaiaHunter]

You cant RMA the card for that reason in legal terms. Even if it runs at 800Mhz with 100% fanspeed. Simply because there is no officially listed baseclock. Its a free get out of jail card. Just like with the FX CPUs.

Yes you can.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31999L0044:en:HTML

2. Consumer goods are presumed to be in conformity with the contract if they:
(a) comply with the description given by the seller and possess the qualities of the goods which the seller has held out to the consumer as a sample or model;
(b) are fit for any particular purpose for which the consumer requires them and which he made known to the seller at the time of conclusion of the contract and which the seller has accepted;
(c) are fit for the purposes for which goods of the same type are normally used;
(d) show the quality and performance which are normal in goods of the same type and which the consumer can reasonably expect, given the nature of the goods and taking into account any public statements on the specific characteristics of the goods made about them by the seller, the producer or his representative, particularly in advertising or on labelling.

Article 3
Rights of the consumer
1. The seller shall be liable to the consumer for any lack of conformity which exists at the time the goods were delivered.

We've seen AMD PR slides and the cards say up to 1GHz. 800 MHz is only 80% of that value.


Every country that are part of the EU is required to have its national laws in conformity with this directive.

 

[OCGuy]

I finding this interesting; there's one guy that's reporting this. Another on this forums; but found he was linked to vsink *very well the others as could be* Guys over at OC forum are having a blast with their cards and none of this is showing up.

Lots of them are flashing their bios with the asus bios to get fastest clocks out of theirs; this is with the stock fan....

It is very interesting - the title is seriously misleading and should be fixed; but I doubt it will...

This is about out of the box performance, not water cooled or BIOS flashed.

The thread title is the article title.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Source? Show me where AMD's board partners say you can't RMA if the card only runs at 800MHz with 100% fan because there's no official baseclock. You're just making stuff up. I can't believe you post FUD like this as fact.

Boost clock says up to. Meaning its not garanteed. So please, show me AMDs officially garanteed baseclock for the 290X. Thats the only clock you can RMA on legally. While partners might RMA it anyway, they are not legally bound to do so. Meaning you as a consumer, is purely is the mercy of companies.

 

[OCGuy]

Same on NVIDIA GPUs with GPU Boost... just sayin. This is the nature of dynamic clocks based on power/temp/etc.... environment, temperature, power, voltage, all of it affects the clock speed, on both GPUs. There can be a variance between NV GPUs of the same brand, or different brand, affected by environment or power or temp. Card A can run at 1215MHz, Card B might run at 1180MHz. Hopefully fixing the control point by which the fan is set on 290 series will reduce the variance. I like the fact that a simple driver update can fix such an issue, rather than having to do a BIOS flash or something.

I would never pretend to have more hands on experience or knowledge than you, so I have to assume you can see the difference between having a base and a max boost clock and not always hitting the boost, and having a max boost clock only.

For the record I don't like either. I compare the nv approach to ISPs using speedburst to fudge up speedtest.net results. 25 down for 30 seconds? Woohoo! However, nv does give you a minimum.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Yes you can.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31999L0044:en:HTML

We've seen AMD PR slides and the cards say up to 1GHz. 800 MHz is only 80% of that value.


Every country that are part of the EU is required to have its national laws in conformity with this directive.

No you cant. Its an up to boost clock, not a baseclock. The same reasons why ISPs cant sell you 20Mbit DSL, but only up to 20Mbit since it cant be garanteed. Or how CPUs work for that matter.

The up to is how you avoid being legally commited arcording to EU laws.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I believe both NV and AMD made mistake by trying to copy Intel.None of them have the engineering prowess of Intel and it really wasn't needed.They should advertise just a base clock and leave the rest to overclockers.We are dealing with too much nonsense since boost came to gpu.

Fully agree, But even Intel is having minor problems with boost clocks. With GPUs its just become an utter joke. The boost on the Titan is benchmark only boost as well.

One of the worst examples might be if you start to bitcoin mine on a 290X, then you drop down to 280X performance.

 

[GaiaHunter]

No you cant. Its an up to boost clock, not a baseclock. The same reasons why ISPs cant sell you 20Mbit DSL, but only up to 20Mbit since it cant be garanteed. Or how CPUs work for that matter.

The up to is how you avoid being legally commited arcording to EU laws.

And you can rescind the contract with the ISP if the service is only 10 Mbit.

I've done that with wireless ISP service - they say up to 7 Mbits, I got 2 Mbits, I've rescinded the contract claiming the service wasn't good enough for my needs. No fuss, no problems.

Of course you will have to do this in a reasonable time frame.

 

[3DVagabond]

Boost clock says up to. Meaning its not garanteed. So please, show me AMDs officially garanteed baseclock for the 290X. Thats the only clock you can RMA on legally. While partners might RMA it anyway, they are not legally bound to do so. Meaning you as a consumer, is purely is the mercy of companies.

Complete made up FUD. You are the one making the claim as fact. You need to back it up. AMD already told Tom's to RMA the card they bought from Newegg. Now, you show one instance of a Hawaii based card being refused RMA, or any partner saying they won't accept an RMA for a card that runs 800MHz @100% fan speed. That was what you claimed as fact. Back it up, or stop posting made up FUD.

 

[iiiankiii]

I believe both NV and AMD made mistake by trying to copy Intel.None of them have the engineering prowess of Intel and it really wasn't needed.They should advertise just a base clock and leave the rest to overclockers.We are dealing with too much nonsense since boost came to gpu.

I agree. I hate boost. It introduced another variable that makes comparing GPUs that much harder. Reviewers should have results with base clock and another with this boost shenanigans; since boost isnt guaranteed.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Complete made up FUD. You are the one making the claim as fact. You need to back it up. AMD already told Tom's to RMA the card they bought from Newegg. Now, you show one instance of a Hawaii based card being refused RMA, or any partner saying they won't accept an RMA for a card that runs 800MHz @100% fan speed. That was what you claimed as fact. Back it up, or stop posting made up FUD.

AMD wanted the cards, and to cover PR. If it was average joe they wouldnt give a crap. Its you being overprotective for a company that simply made sure there was so little specs as possible to avoid RMAs. Its no different than 140W+ FX8350 CPUs you cant RMA due to the lack of specifications from AMD. The delta boost clock is exactly the same. They are only obligated to garantee baseclock. Else you could also RMA every single 290X card out there on reference cooler.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I agree. I hate boost. It introduced another variable that makes comparing GPUs that much harder. Reviewers should have results with base clock and another with this boost shenanigans; since boost isnt guaranteed.

Another problem, as we already seen, is the golden sample issue with boost clocks. While golden samples could be isolated to overclocking. Its now a misleading guide on regular out of the box product performance. Its simply manipulation and cheating the enduser.

 

[Erenhardt]

Funny that boost was a good feature of kepler cards as long as AMD didn't have it
Now AMD introduced more aggressive boost feature and all matter of objections appear, like pre-heating cards, noise equalizations, etc.

Spread it thick!

 

[iiiankiii]

Funny that boost was a good feature of kepler cards as long as AMD didn't have it
Now AMD introduced more aggressive boost feature and all matter of objections appear, like pre-heating cards, noise equalizations, etc.

Spread it thick!

That's true. Lol. The moment nvidia introduced this boost shenanigans, I hated the idea right away because I knew it would lead down this road. Boost isn't a good feature for those that oc their own cards.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Funny that boost was a good feature of kepler cards as long as AMD didn't have it
Now AMD introduced more aggressive boost feature and all matter of objections appear, like pre-heating cards, noise equalizations, etc.

Spread it thick!

I dont know who loved boost. Because I have always been against it. And I showed the problems on nVidia cards before the 290/290X launches. Even on CPUs thats much higher quality than GPUs it cant be trusted.