AMD Radeon R9 285 Announced

Terry Olaes

Terry Olaes

I Used to be the [H] News Guy
2FA
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
4,646
Today AMD announced their R9 285 graphics card. You can see the specs below. Release date is September 2.
  • Process: 28nm
  • StreamProcessors: 1792
  • Engine Clock: Up to 918 MHz
  • Compute Performance: 3.29 TFLOPS
  • Texture Units: 112
  • Texture Fill-Rate: Up to 102.8 GT/s
  • ROPs: 32
  • Pixel Fill-Rate: Up to 29.8 GP/s
  • Z/Stencil: 32
  • Memory Configuration: 2GB GDDR5
  • Memory Interface: 256-bit
  • Memory Speed: 5.5 Gbps
  • Power Connectors: 2 x 6-pin
  • Typical Board Power: 190W
  • PCI-E Standard: PCI-E 3.0
  • DirectX Support: DirectX 12
  • Mantle Support: Yes
  • AMD TrueAudio Technology Support: Yes
Thoughts?
 
I dunno ....... there are a TON of 290's all over for $250 - $300. Personally, I don't have a use / need for it, not with what's out there.
 
Look at the typical wattage usage. Is this lower than the previous generation? I'm just tired of Video cards that suck more power than anything in your house. (You know what I mean)
 
dceremuga said:
Look at the typical wattage usage. Is this lower than the previous generation? I'm just tired of Video cards that suck more power than anything in your house. (You know what I mean)
Click to expand...

It's lower, but not by much. Nowhere near Maxwell (750 Ti) efficiency.

Not a very exciting card really.
 
Not impressed, honestly with any of the new cards coming out except the 750ti and subsequent 870/880 as it's on the same architecture. They are now driving down power cost (sure it's great) without increasing performance by a ton, so really we are getting nothing of note. You don't stare at your power bill and break down how much you've saved each month because you bought a new card do you? No, you watch your frame count and run benchmarks. It's real world performance we care about and they are steadily trickling it to us to maximize profits, yes I get that but it sure can be frustrating. The 750Ti was a step in the right direction, good 1080p performance off of 75w. Now, what excited me was being able to drop the TDP in HALF for say a 780; theoretically, in my little mind that meant you could push it up to the same TDP of 250w at double the performance. There is no way they are going to do that though, if they could then they would have to work way harder to release the next card that would achieve the same boost, and we are running out of ways to do that on this silicon. So, we get 10-15% max each generation and some marketing features we probably won't use. Plus...where are our new CPUs! AMD has forgotten about the gamers in their CPU division =(
 
So, less shaders, slower clock and slower RAM than a Radeon 280x? I can't imagine why they'd release this unless it's a lot cheaper to put together than a Radeon 280x or 290.
 
mi7chy said:
750Ti performance is comparable to R7 260X.
Click to expand...

I wasn't comparing the performance. I'm guessing if Nvidia came out with a Maxwell part in line with the performance of the R9 285, it'd be a lot more efficient, based on the 750 Ti.
 
The 280x is rated at 4.1 TFLOPS, this is at 3.29... Why would they make the R9 285 slower than the 280x. I though their whole goal with "R" was to make an easier naming scheming, and to me having a 'higher' part be slower than a lesser completely contradicts that. Maybe it's faster in the end, idk.
 
Quix said:
So, less shaders, slower clock and slower RAM than a Radeon 280x? I can't imagine why they'd release this unless it's a lot cheaper to put together than a Radeon 280x or 290.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing its to test the waters for a whole generation of re-branded GPUs. GCN is impressive and great for compute tasks (farming genericoins) but is not as good as Nvidia's range for most uses.

R stands for re-branding. :D
 
I would imagine that would be the R9 285x. As someone who is looking at the middle of the road this seems like a good offering. Hopefully it will have a bit more go than the 280 while actually having all the features the rest of the 2xx series launched with. The fact that the 280/280x was only UVD 3 and was missing True Audio really made saving up for the 290 my only option (Sucks to be missing features day 1 when you plan on keeping the hardware a few years.)

It will be interesting to see where it fits in performance/power wise when the reviews come out. Looking forward to replacing the ancient 6770 I run.

Edit: If anything, wouldn't this be the un-rebranded 280? :p
 
King Icewind said:
The 280x is rated at 4.1 TFLOPS, this is at 3.29... Why would they make the R9 285 slower than the 280x.
Click to expand...
Reading part numbers correctly means 285 is clearly, without a doubt, slower than the 280X.
Changing the "0" to a "5" just means it's a refresh within the same performance tier.

The 280X is still a tier higher, but a refresh behind.
The 285X will be its successor.

The only thing faster would be changing the "8" to a "9" (performance tier) or the "2" to a "3" (card generation).
It's not a number it's an ID badge. I feel like anybody who has been around here long enough would pick up on it immediately.

See also Nvidia's GTX 280 --> 285, 275, etc.

If the R9 285 was faster than the 280X, we'd have a clusterfuck on our hands.
 
Last edited:
TaintedSquirrel said:
Reading part numbers correctly means 285 is clearly, without a doubt, slower than the 280X.
Changing the "0" to a "5" just means it's a refresh within the same performance tier.

The 280X is still a tier higher, but a refresh behind.
The 285X will be its successor.

The only thing faster would be changing the "8" to a "9" (performance tier) or the "2" to a "3" (card generation).
It's not a number it's an ID badge. I feel like anybody who has been around here long enough would pick up on it immediately.

See also Nvidia's GTX 280 --> 285, 275, etc.

If the 285 was faster than the 280X, we'd have a clusterfuck on our hands.
Click to expand...

How is having 280 > 280x > 285 > 290 > 290x a cluster fuck? 280 > 285 > 280x > 290 > 290x is less of a cluster fuck? How is having a refresh faster when the 285x will be faster as well?

I mean it's going to be fine when the 285x comes out, but in the mean time it can be confusing.
 
Price will be critical.

I'm in the market for an upper-midrange card for an HTPC/gaming rig at 1080p. I know: not [H]ard. Sigh.

I've been looking at the 280x or the 290. (Leaning towards the 290.) HTPC and a small case (Grandia GD09 or 10; still choosing which), means efficiency and coolness will be important.

So, specs will be important. If it's a dog, it's out. If it's good, then the price has to be right.

I hope they get done the way I'm hoping. (The specs don't scream it, though, do they?)

Time will tell.
 
Terry Olaes said:
Today AMD announced their R9 285 graphics card. You can see the specs below. Release date is September 2.
  • Process: 28nm
  • StreamProcessors: 1792
  • Engine Clock: Up to 918 MHz
  • Compute Performance: 3.29 TFLOPS
  • Texture Units: 112
  • Texture Fill-Rate: Up to 102.8 GT/s
  • ROPs: 32
  • Pixel Fill-Rate: Up to 29.8 GP/s
  • Z/Stencil: 32
  • Memory Configuration: 2GB GDDR5
  • Memory Interface: 256-bit
  • Memory Speed: 5.5 Gbps
  • Power Connectors: 2 x 6-pin
  • Typical Board Power: 190W
  • PCI-E Standard: PCI-E 3.0
  • DirectX Support: DirectX 12
  • Mantle Support: Yes
  • AMD TrueAudio Technology Support: Yes
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I got no thoughts, they were sitting on tons of chips that were too good for 270's but not as good as 280x's, so, took the middle route

Why sell chips you could make a bigger profit on for less? People are complaining about something I don't think you could feasibly complain about
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Reading part numbers correctly means 285 is clearly, without a doubt, slower than the 280X.
Changing the "0" to a "5" just means it's a refresh within the same performance tier.

The 280X is still a tier higher, but a refresh behind.
The 285X will be its successor.

The only thing faster would be changing the "8" to a "9" (performance tier) or the "2" to a "3" (card generation).
It's not a number it's an ID badge. I feel like anybody who has been around here long enough would pick up on it immediately.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense at all.
 
If you watched the power point slide well they had it listed as..

260x/265/270/270x/285/280x/290/290x as they dropped the 280 all together.

and I heard them say 980mhz clock speed and 2Gb and 4Gb models as it may not be as fast as the 280x but it may be able to do more eye candy ..$249 is not a bad price if the AIB's don't bump it.
 
dmonkey said:
Why not, the X is more powerful than a half-increment.
Click to expand...

No, it is not! Neither logically nor in the existing lineup, e.g. 260->260X->265->270




fanboy said:
If you watched the power point slide well they had it listed as..

260x/265/270/270x/285/280x/290/290x as they dropped the 280 all together.

and I heard them say 980mhz clock speed and 2Gb and 4Gb models as it may not be as fast as the 280x but it may be able to do more eye candy ..$249 is not a bad price if the AIB's don't bump it.
Click to expand...

If they really did this, they contradict themselves. It would be a new level of stupid for them.

No additional memory will help it beat 280X in eye candy if it is slower.
 
Last edited:
ShamisOMally said:
I got no thoughts, they were sitting on tons of chips that were too good for 270's but not as good as 280x's, so, took the middle route

Why sell chips you could make a bigger profit on for less? People are complaining about something I don't think you could feasibly complain about
Click to expand...

ummm,,,,

tonga is new silicon.

they werent "sitting" on anything.
 
I don't quite understand the point of this card. It seems slightly less powerful than the 7950/R9 280 (less memory bandwidth and less VRAM), for about the same price that I paid for my 7950 Boost over a year ago (and more expensive than the 280 is now at retail). Would probably be more appropriately called the 275x or something.
 
Last edited:
Joga said:
I don't quite understand the point of this card. It's less powerful than the 7950/R9 280 (less memory bandwidth and less VRAM), for about the same price that I paid for my 7950 Boost over a year ago (and more expensive than the 280 is now at retail). Would probably be more appropriately called the 275x or something.
Click to expand...
It's faster...
 
Yeah another sidegrade from AMD, Nvidia will probably follow suit.
A generation of sidegrades following a previous generation of sidegrades.

When did the hardware industry get so boring?
I feel bad for reviewers at this point. It must be such a drag testing the same garbage for the last 2-3 years.
 
It has a new front end that can handle tessellation better then the 280 or 280x.. Heaven 4.0 will be the one to watch on reviews
 
what a very uninteresting card. Everything about it is just bad. You can pick up 280's right now for $250ish, hell even seen some 280x's for $250.

Talk about a poopy launch
 
Urraca said:
So should this push the price of a 760 GTX down?
Click to expand...

Unlikely. You can find 760s for a little less than this ($240), and Nvidia always has a price premium compared to AMD. Don't see them budging on the price.
 
between tessellation power, trueaudio, GCN 1.1 silicon, freesync, etc it basically a 7950/280 pro replacement.

seems like a decent product to me.
 
I would rather them have HINTED at a 290x successor than try to make the mid-range refresh a headliner.

Seriously... AMD was looking SO good for a brief period, now they've regressed to full retard yet again.

Serves me right for having high hopes..
 
AMD 2011: 3GB memory, 384-bit bus

AMD 2014: 2GB memory, 256-bit bus

Uhh... I don't understand why this card even exists to be honest.
 
fanboy said:
2Gb and 4Gb models as it may not be as fast as the 280x but it may be able to do more eye candy
Click to expand...

It's one or the other...but you should just stop.

In any case it is a bad naming scheme. They should just have kept the 280(nonX) around. In the end one slip up by marketing or whoever thought up this cluster:eek: ain't no thang. Just don't keep it up AMD. They're not going "full retard" yet so relax people.

I also don't see room in the lineup for an R9 285X that will actually fall in line in performance between 280x & 290(x). Imo that is too fine a line to tread. They're just going to over saturate the market. Unless the card is stopgap to combat GTX 8xx series...
 
KazeoHin said:
I would rather them have HINTED at a 290x successor than try to make the mid-range refresh a headliner.

Seriously... AMD was looking SO good for a brief period, now they've regressed to full retard yet again.

Serves me right for having high hopes..
Click to expand...
Why would they comment on something that is still at least a quarter away?
There is something in the works but GM204 seems to have free reign for a bit.

Rizen said:
AMD 2011: 3GB memory, 384-bit bus

AMD 2014: 2GB memory, 256-bit bus

Uhh... I don't understand why this card even exists to be honest.
Click to expand...
This is typically how it works, things slide down a spot.
Similar performance, smaller die, less power/heat, more features and cheaper to make.
 
Quix said:
So, less shaders, slower clock and slower RAM than a Radeon 280x? I can't imagine why they'd release this unless it's a lot cheaper to put together than a Radeon 280x or 290.
Click to expand...

It is also possible that this graphics card is a product of the binning process with regards to viable pieces of silicon.
 
yet again, its new silicon...

there is no binning here, as its a new chip...
 
The Mac said:
between tessellation power, trueaudio, GCN 1.1 silicon, freesync, etc it basically a 7950/280 pro replacement.

seems like a decent product to me.
Click to expand...

I read that this is actually Pitcairn replacement (R9 270(X)). If we had 20nm this was likely going to be the R9 370 and be ~$200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top