Watercooled 290x

[BallaTheFeared]

rubbish. the GTX 780 requires 200 mhz higher clocks to match a R9 290X in games, leave alone beat it. especially one which is not throttling. 70 - 75% fan speed is a necessity on R9 290X if you want to keep 1100 - 1150 mhz constant. at those speeds you need a GTX 780 at 1300 - 1350 mhz to keep up with the R9 290X.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=djvZaHHU4I8#t=519

R290X = 1050Mhz

780 = 1110Mhz

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...Ftby1jNTFvaTF2UHhaMzdMQ0FNM2c&usp=sharing

OCN thread shows Titan and 780 beating the water cooled R290X in every test but one. I'm sure they'll do more tests with actual games coming soon.

Either way I'm confident you're completely wrong.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

even better is the min fps on R9 290X at 1440p in BF4. its significantly higher than GTX 780 (25%)

Here the R290X is locked to 1GHz and the "Uber" 780 is locked to 980MHz.

That's good for a shade over 9% faster with a 20MHz clock advantage for the R290X.

Where are you getting 200MHz? You're saying to make up a 9% performance deficit the 780 needs a 23% clock speed increase?

 

[raghu78]

Here the R290X is locked to 1GHz and the "Uber" 780 is locked to 980MHz.

That's good for a shade over 9% faster with a 20MHz clock advantage for the R290X.

Where are you getting 200MHz? You're saying to make up a 9% performance deficit the 780 needs a 23% clock speed increase?

http://www.sweclockers.com/artikel/17810-prestandaanalys-battlefield-4/3#pagehead

2560 x 1440 Ultra 4x MSAA

R9 290X - 59
GTX 780 - 52

thats a 13.5% performance improvement . btw even at uber the R9 290X throttles and is running at 950 mhz in the most demanding games.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ws/63742-amd-radeon-r9-290x-4gb-review-5.html

clock for clock the gap is closer to 15 - 20% depending on game. btw nothing scales linearly 100% with clock. for a clock increase of 200 mhz you get roughly 15% more performance.
R9 290X and Titan are similar in clock for clock performance. the GTX 780 needs 150 - 200 mhz higher clocks. you are just in denial mode.

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...r9-290x-im-test/5/#rating-2560-1600-4xaa16xaf

look at the average R9 290X uber against GTX 780 uber at 1440p. thats an average across many games. you need a lot more than 100 mhz to catch up with a R9 290X. :biggrin:

http://translate.googleusercontent....s.html&usg=ALkJrhhV5gZ32T_83IiB8WPO6PZ-ssvDQA

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Problem is you have no idea what the actual clock speeds are for each review (and for all the cards, 290/Titan/780) and are simply cherry picking to get the results that favor your wishful thinking.

All I'm seeing is a 64 db card playing late to the party against a 50 db card.

 

[raghu78]

Problem is you have no idea what the actual clock speeds are for each review (and for all the cards, 290/Titan/780) and are simply cherry picking to get the results that favor your wishful thinking.

All I'm seeing is a 64 db card playing late to the party against a 50 db card.

yeah the last straw for you to grasp is the noise. that did not stop the R9 290X CF mauling the GTX 780 SLI

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/11/01/amd_radeon_r9_290x_crossfire_video_card_review/3

 

[BallaTheFeared]

yeah the last straw for you to grasp is the noise. that did not stop the R9 290X CF mauling the GTX 780 SLI

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/11/01/amd_radeon_r9_290x_crossfire_video_card_review/3

Nice counter, perhaps you missed the context with the big black bezels blocking your view.

I already did 3 screens, try passing that off on someone who cares.

 

[raghu78]

Nice counter, perhaps you missed the context with the big black bezels blocking your view.

I already did 3 screens, try passing that off on someone who cares.

nice try. but the GTX 780 is just not in the same class as R9 290X With Mantle this is going to get even worse for Nvidia. have fun defending Nvidia. its not going to get any easier. :biggrin:

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Defending Nvidia?

I'm not defending a company, I'm discussing products. Perhaps that is why you're doing it wrong. Trying to toss in irrelevant data and then attempting to use Mantle as if you had any clue what kind of performance benefits it will offer even after DICE themselves stated they still had no idea.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Both of you should stop because neither will give in. It makes no sense arguing about clock speeds here and there.
Fact is R290x is ahead of GTX780 in every review out there

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Except the one review so far that overclocked either :|

 

[raghu78]

Defending Nvidia?

I'm not defending a company, I'm discussing products. Perhaps that is why you're doing it wrong. Trying to toss in irrelevant data and then attempting to use Mantle as if you had any clue what kind of performance benefits it will offer even after DICE themselves stated they still had no idea.

DICE knows but will obviously not state anything about Mantle performance improvements without AMD's approval. Johan's keynote is at APU 2013 summit on nov 11 - 14. but AMD might want to keep performance a secret till dec. why give nvidia any clue.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I think we need more than ONE review to really come to a conclusion. You cannot hold to this (one) review. Would you have the same opinion if R290x came out on top?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Oh so now DICE is publicly lying, gotcha. http://forums.anandtech.com/member.php?u=137854

 

[wand3r3r]

Both of you should stop because neither will give in. It makes no sense arguing about clock speeds here and there.
Fact is R290x is ahead of GTX780 in every review out there

No doubt.

Can't change that fact, so change to theoretical what if's to try demonstrate the superiority.

Please get back on topic, the red/green bias is blinding and annoying.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I think we need more than ONE review to really come to a conclusion. You cannot hold to this (one) review. Would you have the same opinion if R290x came out on top?

I'm going off about 2.5 (2 legit reviews, and a fair amount of user submitted info) at this point. Kind of sad we only have one review so far that even attempting to overclock.

How could I have the opinion that 780 >= 290x OC vs OC if it is proven to not be the case?

Anything involving overclocking backs my stance so far, until there is more data presented which you pointed out is seriously lacking what more is there to say except having to argue constantly with people like raghu78. Which amounts in posts with stock results without even knowing clock speeds while attempting to play off Mantle.

I'd like to think on a hardware forum we can have discussions on hardware from both camps without it having to be routed in bias. However it seems the most bias among us to do not believe that is possible and frown upon any actual discussion that includes verses.

What do I care either way, 7950 CF beats both right? :awe:

 

[Gikaseixas]

How could I have the opinion that 780 >= 290x OC vs OC if it is proven to not be the case?

How can you draw a conclusion with only one review. You said it a few posts back. You're shifting scenarios just to support your stance, that won't hold dude, get real and accept that R290x is the faster card.

 

[Majcric]

I'd really like to see max oc on the 290x vs max oc GTX 780. Or better yet a good aftermarket 290x (when available)vs a GTX 780 classfied. All air, no water.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

How can you draw a conclusion with only one review. You said it a few posts back. You're shifting scenarios just to support your stance, that won't hold dude, get real and accept that R290x is the faster card.

One review overclocked, one review with locked clocks, and many user submitted results. More data for than against, that would be how I guess.

What are you talking about shifting scenarios? My scenario can't possibly change, and neither has my stance.

There is no question at stock the R290X is faster, have I ever said otherwise?

I guess we should just accept the 680 is faster than the 7970, or can we overclock and see what is really going on? Because that is what I'm looking at, no argument from me on which is faster at stock.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Except the one review so far that overclocked either :|

this is what you said. One review is all you needed to know to believe 780 > R290x once overclocked

One review overclocked, one review with locked clocks, and many user submitted results. More data for than against, that would be how I guess.

What are you talking about shifting scenarios? My scenario can't possibly change, and neither has my stance.

Now you saying one review plus many submitted results.

LOL

 

[BallaTheFeared]

this is what you said. One review is all you needed to know to believe 780 > R290x once overclocked



Now you saying one review plus many submitted results.

LOL

That is one more review than shows different isn't it?

The other review shows clock scaling, need me to explain how I use that?

The user submitted is the most important to me, since it comes from highly tuned systems like mine from people who care, like me.

Didn't you just tell me and raghu78 to stop arguing, why so you could jump in with your opinion?

I've been saying the same thing since I started saying what I've been saying, the Linus review, the user submitted water results (1250 not enough, sound familiar?), and the hw.fr review which actually talks about locking in the 780 at 980 in Uber mode and what they were actually getting from the 290x in uber 990-1000 with 278w draw.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I guess we should just accept the 680 is faster than the 7970

I fully accept that overall GTX680 is faster, it takes the Ghz edition to beat GTX680.
We all know that 7970 is faster once overclocked BUT we don't have enough data to say 780 is faster than R290X when both are pushed. Wait for a few more official tests, let's get a better picture and then declare a winner.

 

[Gikaseixas]

The user submitted is the most important to me, since it comes from highly tuned systems like mine from people who care, like me.

Official reviews are less relevant to you when they don't show the results you'd expect, i see :biggrin:

 

[wand3r3r]

I guess we should just accept the 680 is faster than the 7970, or can we overclock and see what is really going on? Because that is what I'm looking at, no argument from me on which is faster at stock.

Is everything green vs. red? (and yes 680 at release was faster than vanilla 7970, so what?) It's sounding like the dethroning of the beloved 780 is hard to take.

You just mentioned in another post that it's too early to judge the 290x OC and yet you continue to perpetuate your opinionated myth (780 oc vs 290x oc) based on one or two selective sources. Again, why not wait until we have some oc models to compare. The reference card is clearly limited.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I fully accept that overall GTX680 is faster, it takes the Ghz edition to beat GTX680.
We all know that 7970 is faster once overclocked BUT we don't have enough data to say 780 is faster than R290X when both are pushed. Wait for a few more official tests, let's get a better picture and then declare a winner.

lol then we have nothing more to talk about.

I'm not declaring anything, I'm stating what I think based on what I've seen. There is a huge fundamental difference.

 

[Gikaseixas]

lol then we have nothing more to talk about.

I'm not declaring anything, I'm stating what I think based on what I've seen. There is a huge fundamental difference.

No no, don't run away cuz this is a discussion about 780, not 680 and R290 beats the crap out of your beloved 780 LOL