AMD unofficially confirms Radeon Flagship - R9 390X - Launches at Computex

Yes I was aware of that, also seen in it practice, but that wasn't my point..

My point was only towards GM200 being 6.9Tflops and with OC it could be possible to match 390X Tflops number - 8.1Tflops. Then he started calling bs on my comment and how I said what I didn't say at all, typical bate from him..

Anyway back on 390X topic :nerd:

 

You should more compare with the 780TI / Titan / 700 series. There you compare 2 different generations.

But you are right, pure Tflops dont said all, outside for computing stuff.

Lets be honest, Firepro series will be just monstruous on paper specially if they have conserve 1/2 rate for FP64.

 

Not out till the second half of the year? Man I'm glad I picked me up a new 295x2 for less than $600. At first I was gonna wait but this time frame keeps gettin worse. Even if the 390x is all that it will likely be it still won't be beating the 295x2 and for what you can get gem for now it's a no brainer for most.

 

Nvidia cards are nice cards and I realize that many here love them. But From what I have seen from all the tech review sites. they are all pretty much saying if the specs turn out to be correct the 390X will be the top performer.

I'm also sure there is a reason it needs to be water cooled. But who really cares except those who don't have bigger case. One thing I do know is HBM memory is up to 9x faster then DDR5 and its bandwidth will allow much more stable 4k gaming @60hz

 

" Apparently, AMD considers second half of this year as a time when it will try to regain lost market share from Nvidia.
“We are confident that as we get into the second half of 2015 with the launch of that [new graphics] product, we will gain back the market share which is low from my standpoint and historically,” said Devinder Kumar, chief financial officer of AMD. “We need to be significantly higher than where we are right now.”
Source

 

I did some math :nerd: with Guru3d GTX 980 reviews power consumption part and it would be 16€ more per year to use R9 290x vs gtx 980.(5d 4h max stress)
GTX 980 is the next gen compared to 290 series anyway. R9 290x is competition to Titan and those tdp are in 35w reach of each other. And comparing 1000€ titan and r9 290x 500€ u can use r9 loong time before u waste 500€ on the electric bill. (Not relevant atm I know)
I personally arent affected by tdp at all except in laptops when its very importand how much power u can pull with the same watts.(battery/lack of cooling)Having lower tdp isnt bad "Duh" but I think its overrated at pc.
I think why amd cards doesn`t sell is the company image. Inferior drivers, bad stock cooling and not having as many proprietary softwares as Nvids. I havent build cheapo pc after 900 series but before it amd cards were cheaper and better in price/perf.
I did build last year a 300€ apu pc and bought 80€ r9 270 DiretcuII oc *new for one of 1080p casual pc. For me when price is factor amd has come top.

 

Did you even read his whole post before asking ridiculous questions? On paper the 290x should wreck the 980. In practice, it doesn't. At all.
AMD always had the numbers and this has attracted many consumers. Don't be so quick to assume that the 390x will trash the titan x.

I don't know why this hasn't been brought up more in this topic. This sounds like the card will have horrendous TDP.
If this will be the case, it seems like AMD didn't learn their lesson with their CPUs. Having inefficient hardware WILL bang your face against the thermal wall sooner or later. Really damn hard. This has already happened with their FX line of CPUs. And Intel has already done this with Netburst. They have definitely learned their lesson, why aren't AMD following suit?

Asuming all the above is true, I'm honestly worried. Not for this generation, but for the one after it. 16nm is going to give Nvidia another chance to make an efficient architecture. If AMD keeps rolling 'MOAR CORES'-style, it's going to bite them in the ass. And we know what ludicrous pricing Nvidia is capable of.

 

Looking at some tests at 4k R9 290x even beat the 980 in terms of fps so the power is there the optimisation might be the whole other story. Also isnt nvidia one that try`s to get ppl with white paper GTX 970 4GB with 224 GB/sec?



http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/twea...-sli-vs-radeon-r9-290x-8gb-4k-amd-fx-9590.png

 

Why do these types of threads always turn into flame wars.

I had a Nvidia GTX 8800 Ultra Leviathan years ago... THAT WAS A WATER COOLED BEAST.

 

From what I've gathered they are just playing it safe with the cooler this time around 290 and 290x had ****tiest coolers you could get that made the cards throttle alot. Never seen a good reference cooler on amd apart from the hybrid that was used on 295x2 that uses almost double the power that 390x is supposed to use tdp rating of million. If 390x has similar tdp to 290x it is rather huge improvement on efficiency it is close to maxwell level improvement on the whole.

What AMD sucks at is driver overhead. If they had as small overhead as nvidia they would be easily competing vs 980 with 290x. AMD is supposedly moving towards 14nm with samsung/glofo. I would guess around the sametime as nvidia to 16nm with tsmc.

 

Because you know fanboy things. Yeah.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/13

I'm not sure why you're posting sli results in the first place, they can be skewed by anything from the scaling itself to the cpu.

I honestly hope you're right, it would be horrendous to think what Nvidia could do to the high-end market without competition.
The point is I just don't see AMD as a serious competitor in the efficiency race. It's probably because their line of CPU has left a bitter taste in my mouth. Nvidia is actively working on this, hell, the whole Maxwell architecture was built with efficiency in mind. We'll see. I really can't wait.

 

AMD totally dropped the ball on their CPU line that is true they are lagging behind a lot even tho their 32nm parts are efficient vs what intel had, intel is soon moving from 22nm to 14nm and it seems that AMD is gonna do a bigger jump from their 28nm apus to 14nm to catch up, I guess with Zen only time will tell. I do have hope for the gpus tho since 285 already had some efficiency improvements.

 

Actually they did not drop ball, they are shifting game. Once done, HSA will show why there is no need for massive FP performance in CPU.
But there are things AMD could do much better with CPUs, like number of cycles it takes to move data from ram to process them and back.
Or memory controller which was kind of behind of intel, but again, it is quite different and shifted for HSA purposes.

Carrizo will bring quite some changes, I just hope they'll translate to 14nm process, because even on 28nm they'll prove to be competitive.

 

I guess we'll see 390X with 8GB sooner than we think. Or maybe it's saved for 490X. It's possible.

 

Dropped the ball I kind of meant how Bulldozer didn't live up to what it was supposed to be really. The APUs they are making now are brilliant on the other hand they improved a lot. And it is pretty amazing they are keeping competitive albeit on the lower end sector with 28nm.

I really want to see how Carrizo does.

 

Zen architecture should appear in 2016, effectively before that, we should not expect anything from AMD on server / desktop performance side. This will be the first new architecture since Bulldozer and wil aim before all for HPC server market ( then derivated for desktop use ).

.. this said they will be made on 14nm ( FF+ or pure ? ) at minimum. it sure intel will maybe be on lower process on this time ( and non FF )... but only on this aspect, this will be big leap due to process change.

Ofc, till this architecture is not out and we dont have much information about it, i dont want to speculate about what performance they will have. Will need to wait.

 

There are afew reasons why the 290x is slower then the 980.. One is its memory is super slow, and two its only clocked at ~1050 some mhz. It'll be its faster then the 980 if you would downclock the memory and core to the same speeds.. After thinkin about this, I really would like to see this tested.... reference amd vs reference nvidia 980 clocked at the same speed for core and ram... Anyone willing to test this? Hilbert maybe if your bored or drunk some night. :nerd:

 

r9 do not clock very well at all would be sort of unfair.
I will wait till this card is in the bargain bin by then it might work.

 

Lots of people in this thread evidently aren't old/experienced enough to understand that these two IHVs have been trading the leading spots in terms of units shipped back & forth for years...it started in 2002 with the R300 from ATi, and it took nVidia nearly three years (kicking and screaming the whole way) to catch up... Ever since, every time one of them ships a new card their market share rises in proportion to the other guy's until *he* ships the "new" card and then it reverses...it goes back & forth just like a see-saw. Anyone who thinks nVidia at the moment has any kind of permanent lead is delusional...

Also, generally speaking, people interested primarily in performance are primarily uninterested in "power saving"--I mean, come on...is a power consumption difference equivalent to a single 100W light bulb *per month* going to make a material dent in your power bill? Keep dreaming... Sometimes I think people who talk about "power saving" with high-performance 3d technology would be a lot better off with a laptop where *everything* is primarily about power saving at the expense of raw performance...