Supposed Picture of 390X watercooled Ed.

Not sure where I'm going to put that rad. I assume its 120mm...

Air version may be for me then.
 
Question: It used to be that overclocking memory also increase frame rates. However, with the bandwidth being 3x GDDR5, and it's likely that it's more than enough for 4K, would overclocking the memory still achieve increased frame rates, the same way overclocking the cores?
 
Cyph said:
Question: It used to be that overclocking memory also increase frame rates. However, with the bandwidth being 3x GDDR5, and it's likely that it's more than enough for 4K, would overclocking the memory still achieve increased frame rates, the same way overclocking the cores?
Click to expand...

Overclcoking memory has never had more than a marginal effect on performance for the last few generations.

I dont see that changing with HBM
 
Last edited:
TaintedSquirrel said:
Chiphell's pic matches WCCFTech's btw.
Click to expand...

Not really, look at the placement of the radeon text, the original pic from last night with the weird angle has the radeon text much closer to the retaining bracket. The side on view is obviously something that someone has mocked up based on the first pic.
 
Last edited:
The Mac said:
Overclcoking memory has never had more than a marginal effect on performance for the last few generations.

I dont see that changing with HBM
Click to expand...

Even on 4K? If bandwidth makes no difference, then why the jump to HBM for extra bandwidth?
 
Chris_B said:
Not really, look at the placement of the radeon text, the original pic form last night with the weird angle has the radeon text much closer to the retaining bracket. The side on view is obviously something that someone has mocked up based on the first pic.
Click to expand...
Well WCCF's image is obviously a render, not sure about this new one since the image is too small.
The fact that they both look so similar while coming from 2 different sources is very convincing.
 
Cyph said:
Even on 4K? If bandwidth makes no difference, then why the jump to HBM for extra bandwidth?
Click to expand...

Overclocking memory does not give that much extra bandwidth hense marginal gains.

Its wasted on lower rez, and at 4k it isnt enough to make much of a difference.

I suppose everyone deffinition of marginal might be different, and at 4K any little bit helps.
 
Cyph said:
Even on 4K? If bandwidth makes no difference, then why the jump to HBM for extra bandwidth?
Click to expand...
Because most end-users don't understand that just because it is newer and faster than GDDR5 that it won't necessarily be faster in real-world use. They just see 'OMFG it has HBM, that makes it better!'.

It will also alleviate any future bottlenecks that could occur from RAM bandwidth, so fixing a problem before it becomes one. No one knows when it will become one, but it is better to move forward when you can. :)
 
Cyph said:
Even on 4K? If bandwidth makes no difference, then why the jump to HBM for extra bandwidth?
Click to expand...

The cards are designed and tested for optimal specs. You typically don't design a highend card that is bandwidth starved where increasing the memory clock has significant impacts on performance.
 
Overclocking memory: things you learn from mining.

As you raise the clock speed, like desktop memory, the timings need to be adjusted, and so the card automatically has certain timings for clock speed rates of the memory, so for example

1500 mhz with tighter timing vs 1550 mhz with looser timing ,might yield the same or worse performance as latency increases.

so it really depends on the card, the memory, and the current bandwidth requirements, increasing the memory speed, also reduces latency, if you don't change the timing, so it might also yield some benefit, just not as much or as noticeable as overclocking the GPU(Unless you're bandwidth starved)
 
If it doesn't come with a min of 6GB it's also DOA IMHO. $700 for a 4GB card? I'd rather spend an extra $300 for a 12GB Titan X. AMD's big problem is going to be the rumored 980 ti, if it has 6GB and is on par with the 390x that only has 4GB and a similar price, they aren't going to sell many 390x cards. Only the AMD current owners/fans will buy it and AMD will essentially have gone no where. They need this card to kick so much ass that it gets converts from Nvidia users to increase their user base. The 970 fiasco gave them this opportunity I am just hoping they don't squander it. If they released a Titan X card equivalent with 4GB for the current 980 price ($550) they'd wipe the floor with Nvidia then add a couple of price points for more memory (6GB $650, 8GB $850). AMD needs something on that level of aggressiveness to really take a large chunk of buyers away from Nvidia.

The only real thing for certain is IF AMD releases a $700 4GB card the 980 ti will be about $50 less with 2GB more RAM and AMD is done in terms of getting any significant number of current Nvidia owners to move over. AMD needs a bigger user base just as much as it needs money from the users buying their products. The price of their 4GB low end 390x card is going to determine that. I don't think Nvidia can or even wants to put out a 980ti that is under $600 so a $550 price point for a 4GB AMD card would definitely cause Nvidia some distress.
 
Both 4 and 8 GB models seems most likely, with the shortage and costliness of HBM it makes sense for AMD to give people options.
 
Would be cool if it were made modular, so you can choose whether to buy it with a radiator like the one pictured, or to hook it up to a custom loop. Would cut back on the need to purchase expensive custom full cover blocks, especially since it already ships with a water block...
 
Anyone looking for a pair of gently used Sapphire TRI-X OC 290x?
 
If it's under 10", I'm going to be kicking myself for getting rid of my m-itx case. A 390x in a shoebox m-itx case would be aces.
 
From what I have been trying to find on this card so far, and all the rummored performance of the HMB ram, this thing should destroy a TitanX right? Especially in 4K situtations.. according to their slides.

Well as always, I hope AMD brings out big guns and also includes better driver support.

Competition is ALWAYS good. I'd like to by the best, but if i have to consider drivers issues... I just like Nvidia software better....
 
I'd also like to add, lets hope AMDs HMB ram is CHEAP, cuz its new and different and that usually means expensive.
 
Last edited:
Mazgazine1 said:
From what I have been trying to find on this card so far, and all the rummored performance of the HMB ram, this thing should destroy a TitanX right? Especially in 4K situtations.. according to their slides.

Well as always, I hope AMD brings out big guns and also includes better driver support.

Competition is ALWAYS good. I'd like to by the best, but if i have to consider drivers issues... I just like Nvidia software better....
Click to expand...

According to some older "leaked" internal slides, the performance should be under Titan X, but ahead of 980.

http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2015/03/AMD-Radeon-R9-390X-vs-290X-performance.jpg
 
Mazgazine1 said:
From what I have been trying to find on this card so far, and all the rummored performance of the HMB ram, this thing should destroy a TitanX right? Especially in 4K situtations.. according to their slides.

Well as always, I hope AMD brings out big guns and also includes better driver support.

Competition is ALWAYS good. I'd like to by the best, but if i have to consider drivers issues... I just like Nvidia software better....
Click to expand...

Rumor I am seeing is the 390x is going to be faster than the 295x2 - which, where multi-gpu scales correctly, is faster than the Titan X.
 
Amd has been very healthy for the gaming industry recently. We should support both sides when they bring something new to the table.
 
deasnutz said:
Amd has been very healthy for the gaming industry recently. We should support both sides when they bring something new to the table.
Click to expand...


Really? Can you explain this? Because its not even close to true. If they were "healthy" for gaming they wouldn't be in such disarray and stock price under $3 a share. They put yesteryear hardware in "next gen" consoles and didn't account for UHD taking hold on the market fast which has both MS and Sony developing consoles sooner than before. They did not revamp their whole product line, no instead the 360, 370, and R9 380 are again rebadged yesteryear hardware.

Yet Nvidia releases Maxwell across all price levels from 750Ti/960 to Titan X which is truly new hardware, not rebadge across the line. Losing money across the board while owning a 3 big console players is not "healthy" for gaming.

This is not the sign of a "thriving" or reborn company. Without new hardware from the bottom to the top, they are just in the death throws of a failing company. The last 9 months has been a joke to watch Roy@amd with his "coming soon" posts on twitter. ;)
 
They put yesteryear hardware in "next gen" consoles
Click to expand...
They put into the consoles what Sony and Microsoft paid for.
Trying to pin the PS4's and XBO's failures on AMD makes you sound petty.

UHD taking hold on the market fast which has both MS and Sony developing consoles sooner than befor
Click to expand...
On the topic of UHD, Nvidia chose to release a 3.5 GB card advertised as 4 GB. I'm sure that works great at 4K+. And the 390X is being marketed specifically as a 4K/VR card.

They did not revamp their whole product line, no instead the 360, 370, and R9 380 are again rebadged yesteryear hardware.
Click to expand...
Again, referencing OEM cards, which Nvidia also rebrands... And AMD has rebranded many times in the past. When you take things so far out of context, they almost become flat-out lies.

Yet Nvidia releases Maxwell across all price levels from 750Ti/960 to Titan X which is truly new hardware, not rebadge across the line
Click to expand...
The 750 Ti which is destroyed by the 265 for a lower price?
The 960 which is destroyed by not one, but 3 cards: The 280, 285, and 280X? All of which are either cheaper or the same price as the 960?
Nvidia has nothing in their favor except power consumption.

I agree with everything else, though. AMD is in a bad spot and its entirely their own doing.
But for the majority of your post: Please don't waste our time with talking point FUD nonsense. Keep that garbage on WCCFTech.
 
TDSlam720 said:
According to some older "leaked" internal slides, the performance should be under Titan X, but ahead of 980.

http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2015/03/AMD-Radeon-R9-390X-vs-290X-performance.jpg
Click to expand...
That is where 980TI will come in with 6gb of gddr5 ram and could be priced to undercut the 390x and rest of line gets a price drop.

SilverSliver said:
Rumor I am seeing is the 390x is going to be faster than the 295x2 - which, where multi-gpu scales correctly, is faster than the Titan X.
Click to expand...

I bet that "faster" then 295x2 is subjective based on game in question. Some games are crap when it comes to CF/SLI scaling so.

TaintedSquirrel said:
The 750 Ti which is destroyed by the 265 for a lower price?
The 960 which is destroyed by not one, but 3 cards: The 280, 285, and 280X? All of which are either cheaper or the same price as the 960?
Nvidia has nothing in their favor except power consumption.

I agree with everything else, though. AMD is in a bad spot and its entirely their own doing.
But for the majority of your post: Please don't waste our time with talking point FUD nonsense. This is not WCCFTech, you are wasting our time and insulting our intelligence with that nonsense.
Click to expand...

Rebabding is fine for 1 generation but when there has been massive shake up of new tech's coming in to play old gpu's that get relabeled is a bad idea. One of more recent graph's posted on hardocp of 300 series. R9 370 card doesn't even support Freesync. I mean really?
 
Arbit3r said:
R9 370 card doesn't even support Freesync. I mean really?
Click to expand...
Do people typically buy Dell PC's with the intention of gaming on them, paired with a FreeSync monitor? Does Dell even sell FreeSync monitors? Does Dell even sell gaming PC's?
So many questions. I don't know shit about the OEM market, I doubt anyone here is in a position to criticize it, either.

AMD could skip releasing OEM cards altogether and nobody here or elsewhere would even care. So why does it matter if they're rebrands or support FreeSync?
 
SnowBeast said:
Really? Can you explain this? Because its not even close to true. If they were "healthy" for gaming they wouldn't be in such disarray and stock price under $3 a share. They put yesteryear hardware in "next gen" consoles and didn't account for UHD taking hold on the market fast which has both MS and Sony developing consoles sooner than before. They did not revamp their whole product line, no instead the 360, 370, and R9 380 are again rebadged yesteryear hardware.

Yet Nvidia releases Maxwell across all price levels from 750Ti/960 to Titan X which is truly new hardware, not rebadge across the line. Losing money across the board while owning a 3 big console players is not "healthy" for gaming.

This is not the sign of a "thriving" or reborn company. Without new hardware from the bottom to the top, they are just in the death throws of a failing company. The last 9 months has been a joke to watch Roy@amd with his "coming soon" posts on twitter. ;)
Click to expand...

AMD has been healthy for gaming in many ways. First off they made Mantle which encouraged Microsoft to make DX12. They are poised to release new competitive cards this June, (390/390x) and that is very good for gaming, And, finally AMD is working on bettering APU's which is great for about everyone as it has forced Intel into making better integrated graphics. All of these things seem like very good things for gaming in general.

You do have a point in saying that the company is no where near thriving though, but relating this to stock price is not necessarily accurate. I mean AMD could have a reverse split tomorrow and their stock could be worth $20 a share, then they would have a share price close to Intel, LOL. In any case the next few years will spell the failure or success, how ever small it may be, of AMD as a company.
 
Arbit3r said:
That is where 980TI will come in with 6gb of gddr5 ram and could be priced to undercut the 390x and rest of line gets a price drop.?
Click to expand...

This is what I'm thinking. Have a hard time believing 390X will have 295x performance. If it does then it should be a winner at any price point. If not then it's going to have to be 500-600 to do well. 980TI should have very similar performance to the Titan X, and Nvidia will probably wait for the 390X release, then swoop in for the undercut.


Edit: This probably against the rules but just saw this on AnAnd forums. Prob not legit at all, but I'm starving for rumors/gossip.



"Originally Posted by Cloudfire777 View Post
People, remember that 360/370/380 are OEM chips. Keep your eyes open for 370X, 380X and 390/390X.

Here are the latest price ive heard from Korea (rumor per moderators request):

R9 370X - $229
R9 380X - $349
R9 390 - $429
R9 390X 4GB - $549
R9 390X 8GB -$599

You may notice that R9 380X cost $100 more than R9 290X.
Lets just say GTX 980 will get some serious competition.

Its a reason why AMD only announced and listed the non-X chips"
 
Last edited:
I guess if we had to make an educated guess then the specs make it look like - going by execution width increase and expecting a similar balance of related resources - the 390X may be ~%45 faster than the 290X.

Now just a matter of grabbing some benchmark charts and adding that up for a rough guess, have fun.
 
TDSlam720 said:
"Originally Posted by Cloudfire777 View Post
People, remember that 360/370/380 are OEM chips. Keep your eyes open for 370X, 380X and 390/390X.

Here are the latest price ive heard from Korea (rumor per moderators request):

R9 370X - $229
R9 380X - $349
R9 390 - $429
R9 390X 4GB - $549
R9 390X 8GB -$599

You may notice that R9 380X cost $100 more than R9 290X.
Lets just say GTX 980 will get some serious competition.

Its a reason why AMD only announced and listed the non-X chips"
Click to expand...
Please be true... But there's no way it's true.
 
Wierdo said:
I guess if we had to make an educated guess then the specs make it look like - going by execution width increase and expecting a similar balance of related resources - the 390X may be ~%45 faster than the 290X.

Now just a matter of grabbing some benchmark charts and adding that up for a rough guess, have fun.
Click to expand...


That's been my thoughts as well. 40-60% faster, which puts it above 980, below Titan. Hence why it needs to be 500-600 to sell. I suppose there could be some unexpected unknown factor, or maybe they designed it specifically with DX12/HMB in mind which would give it a huge edge over NV in DX12 enabled games.

Home run stealing huge market share would be if the 295x2 performance is true and it comes at a 600-800 dollar price point.
 
Before anyone else sees this and falls victim. Chiphell has the pic from tccf, a pic of the cooler and the radiator (hopefully legit as it looks awesome), and then a card with no head sink. The naked card looks like it could be a 390x but it is not. The url to the pic reveals it's a sapphire 285.

http://www.chiphell.com/thread-1287686-1-1.html
 
The only time WCCFTech has ever called something "fake" and it happens to be a leaked 390X image competing with their own leaked image.
Classy.
 
Sounds like they made another space heater card based on them immediately jumping to water cooling. I'd be more impressed if like nVidia, they could make cards that perform well while running cool and quiet on air.
 
Cmdrmonkey said:
Sounds like they made another space heater card based on them immediately jumping to water cooling. I'd be more impressed if like nVidia, they could make cards that perform well while running cool and quiet on air.
Click to expand...

With literally nothing concrete you assume there's going to be a WCE and there's going to be no air-cooled version?

Get a tighter grip on your horses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top