Yep. AMD made their bed with crappy Bulldozer and it took the whole company down along with their terrible business and marketing decisions in both divisions.
You read hardware forums way too much and it shows. The average consumer buys nvidia because that's what EVERYONE has anyway and amd is seen as second rate. If Nvidia released a 400w monster tomorrow it would still sell like hotcakes. Marketing and public perception means far more than anything you've stated in your post.
You read hardware forums way too much and it shows. The average consumer buys nvidia because that's what EVERYONE has anyway and amd is seen as second rate. If Nvidia released a 400w monster tomorrow it would still sell like hotcakes. Marketing and public perception means far more than anything you've stated in your post.
Yep. AMD made their bed with crappy Bulldozer and it took the whole company down along with their terrible business and marketing decisions in both divisions.
it makes sense to wait. 20% more performance than 980 and about the same perf/w. that works for me. but same price or lower is a pipe dream. maybe 6+ months from release date you will get that. I already have a 290. if the new cards are only 30% faster, I see no point in upgrading at all. money saved I guess.I've been looking into getting a new graphics card since Witcher release as my 660ti is not cutting it at all in 1440p. I narrowed my choices down to 970 and 290(X or non-X). I've decided to wait on what new AMD series brings but now I'm not so sure whether I should wait or just get 290 and play games instead of reading some forums rumors. If 390X is just more efficient 290 is be okay with a wait but only if price is same or lower than 290 currently.
great news for people who have waited if true. bad news for me who is looking forward to 50%+ performance increase. and no way am I paying 800-1000 for a gpu that does.
http://www.chiphell.com/thread-1182382-1-1.html
Its from November last year. 20% faster GPU than GTX980 while using 8% more power.
Nothing about memory count, memory type, anything. However. Later leaks on WCCF, and FUDzilla suggested that R9 390X will not be faster than Titan X, but only up to 20% faster than GTX980.
Is it based on Hawaii? Core count of the card can suggest that, but the technology inside the card can be completely different.
So far, leaks from ChipHell look incredibly legit. Extremely spot on.
If R9 390X is really respin of Hawaii, the photo of XFX 390 can suggest that card need smaller cooling system, more compact in height. And that indicates smaller power consumption as well.
Also, the guys from there were suggesting in November of last year that R9 380X could comparable to full Tonga. Coincidence?
The average GPU buyer DOES NOT CARE what the TDP is. Hell most don't even know what TDP is. Acting like AMD wont see any cards *IF* the TDP is 290W is laughable. A lower TDP is nice, but certainly not required.
The average gpu buyer will find out what TDP is when the 290 watt spaceheater blows their Dell psu up.
Please only comment if you have something positive to add
great news for people who have waited if true. bad news for me who is looking forward to 50%+ performance increase. and no way am I paying 800-1000 for a gpu that does.
Guys, this is not a doom and gloom thread. Stay on topic.
-Rvenger
So I have to say only positive things about the 390x?
I responded directly to another posters comments about the 390x, on topic.
I suggest you read the forum rules, and stop trying to be a moderator.
The top of the line Radeon card would not have 2x8 power connectors and also be 197 watts, unless you're saying that the WCE will be dual GPUs.
This Captain Jack simple, if true, has to a lower tier card.
See the above. You just made a general comment that AMD is a complete failure after a mod directed comments away from doom and gloom. I'm not playing mod, I am following the rules.
So now what possible could you have to say about anything? We get it man, you think AMD stinks. This thread is to speculate about technical specs of the upcoming card!
Yep. AMD made their bed with crappy Bulldozer and it took the whole company down along with their terrible business and marketing decisions in both divisions.
great news for people who have waited if true. bad news for me who is looking forward to 50%+ performance increase. and no way am I paying 800-1000 for a gpu that does.
I believe the mod was referring to this off topic post above his.
And Ive owned many of AMD cards,and have no problem with some of their products.
Just have a problem with a 290 watt card (Nvidia or AMD) in this day and age of computer efficiency.
Edit: as per the rules "Discuss the topic, not what you think of a member for having an opinion."
That's a good point, but that's assuming that the charts are authentically displaying a card that is real. Also, performance that dwarfs the fastest Geforce card on the planet isn't exactly a lower tier card, despite whatever power draw may be shown.
Why does a card that hits 300 watts matter to you guys
If they are using an interposer to connect two 4gb stacked memory chips together to have a gfx card with 8gb of video ram, could they theoretically use interposer tech to connect three 4gb stacks and have 12gb of video ram? Is it theoretically possible? As far as I can tell have said so far is that HBM 1 is limited to 4gb a stack, what if they were to use 3 stacks?
Its not just the energy its the heat! My computer room has its own window AC unit.
If I ran 2 r390x 's in my room and played some games not only does the computer give off 600 watts of heat not including the cpu and big screen TV but it also makes the air conditioner run full blast. The AC unit is 550 watts also, see where i'm coming from? An overclocked computer with AC unit = blown breaker.
See my system below? It now in the basement with my parents.
edit: and who is "you guys"?
You are not paying for electricity?! Then why do you even care