Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Was that a reference 980 that was used? Didn't mention what it was. The 290 was mentioned to be reference clocks. If so, why compare a custom PCB with an OC vs a reference card?
I dunno about you guys, but I don't consider a 5% (at most) improvement over a GTX 980 almost a YEAR after the 980 launched much of an accomplishment. It's a great card, sure, but to me it's rather lackluster.
This is a price-point and performance refresh of old tech. old AMD tech matching old NVidia tech with a better price.
You want new tech? AMD has that too. Fury line.
Was that a reference 980 that was used? Didn't mention what it was. The 290 was mentioned to be reference clocks. If so, why compare a custom PCB with an OC vs a reference card?
Also, to answer the OPs question, time was a factor, meaning I did not have a lot of it to do extra testing. It was close enough getting the clock v. clock testing done, and I thought that would be more important.
But wouldn't you have saved time by just retesting the 390X with lower clocks? The way you've done it meant you had to retest both cards again, thus wasting time
I'm not sure what you are saying, I did only re-test the 390X with lower clocks.
I see [H] must be feeling good this e3 week to give out a silver award to this overclocked(slightly) two year old card.
I see [H] must be feeling good this e3 week to give out a silver award to this overclocked(slightly) two year old card.
It's based on a mature platform so the drivers are good ..
I see [H] must be feeling good this e3 week to give out a silver award to this overclocked(slightly) two year old card.
Except that hasn't been the case for Hawaii. Hawaii has simply gotten better since release. And with the 390/390X being based on Hawaii, 290/290X owners can most likely look forward to continued good support of their cards for quite some time to come. The same can't be said for Kepler.As an ATI/AMD user for the past decade before my last upgrade, platform maturity was never a factor in driver stability. Ask any 6970 owner, it got substantially worse 6 months post release.
It was said earlier that the 390X didn't get the Silver award, it was MSI for what they did with their card. There is a difference there.
The 390x seems a bit muddled. What's the point of sticking 8GB on there - with performance unaffected - only to boost the wattage and price?
Im disappointed, can't understand why AMD didn't use a cut down version of the Fury GPU
i think the big one he's referencing is the GTA V benchmarking.. the 980 had to run very high grass quality but could run high-def shadows at nearly the same frame rate and some how the 980 "is in a league of it's own".. personally to me neither option really seems all that important in GTA V so for me i consider it a wash. but i'm not the one reviewing it. thats the only notable difference i saw in the review.
Thanks for the review.
I do have to laugh at AMD's claims of the 390 being faster than the 980. AMD completely full of lies and bullshit over the past few months.
I don't know why but AMD is running 2 lines of graphics cards here.......
We all know that 390/380/370 are just rebrands..... All the new cores goes to Fury/Nano. Why AMD wants to do that, no idea.
Rebrand and double the VRAM, yay....good review though.
Are there any plans to maybe have a somewhat extensive look at Mantle performance across GPU generations (since we will have severla GCN iterations now) and game generations (with multiple Mantle game generations)?
I'm wondering what the pontential implication of moving to low level APIs are in terms of real world support. Also how much the importance of DirectX 11 fallback capabilities will be despite DX12 support.
HBM is only the in their newest GPU, Fiji.
If they simple wanted to rebrand, they could have launched these Radeon R9 380
Radeon R9 390, Radeon R9 390X last year and then released Radeon R9 Nano
Radeon R9 Fury, Radeon R9 Fury X this year
Did YOU read the same review I did? [H] used 5 games in their 390X review: Witcher 3, GTA 5, Dying Light, Far Cry 4, and Battlefield 4. This is the comparison of game settings between the 390X and 980 from what I read:
Witcher 3 - same settings for both cards
GTA 5 - 390X had higher grass setting, 980 had higher shadow setting, and enabled Advanced settings
Dying Light - same settings for both cards
Far Cry 4 - 390X used higher settings(better AO and fur)
Battlefield 4 - same settings for both cards
So please explain to me with specifics how the 390X had to turn DOWN settings in "most" games, when 3 of the 5 used identical settings, and in 1 of the 5 the 390X was the one with higher settings.
One post you are clueless,
"What is AMD doing? What about the implemenration of HBM that AMD promised? "
, now you want to plan and dictate when AMD release products that you admittedly know nothing about?
Child please
Not a bad showing considering 3 of the 5 games feature nVidia Gameworks.
Some websites are showing performance improvements that can't simply be attributed to clock speed increases. In addition, a "rebrand" is simply throwing a new sticker on the card without making any changes. The 390/390X not only have higher clock speeds, but more VRAM. Therefore the 390/390X are refreshes, not rebrands.My point is, 390X is not an architectural change, its simply a rebrand of 290X. Now AMD released these cards after a gap of almost 2 years. A simple rebrand, they could have launched when nVidia came up with GTX980.
When AMD delayed its next card, we all thought that there will be some major architectural change, that will shear the back of nVidia, but what came out was a rebrand
The review mentions that even though the 390x has twice the VRAM, it simply doesn't have the horsepower to push settings to the point where you would even break the 4GB envelope, let alone 8GB.
It's not what we wanted or rumored for 390X but.. You have to take your hat off to AMD as Hawaii was never built to take on Maxwell but yet here we are seeing it battle the 980GTX and i say it's pulled up even with it .. but it's just like the foul everyone is saying about Fury as it's one of Nvidia's best tricks to take your time to make sure the factory clocks are fast enough..
Now either AMD's architecture has a much longer life span or Nvidia's architecture is maxed out from the very day of release.. as it's one of the two..
What baffles me is the number of architectures flying around. I hope one of the first things Dr. Su does is get these under control. There's no good reason for Hawaii, Pitcairn, Tonga, and Fiji to exist side by side. Users who don't know what they're getting (which is most of them, sadly) will end up with much older tech.