Review: MSI Radeon R9 390X Gaming 8G OC

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jun 18, 2015.

  1. PNeV

    PNeV Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,070
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1070 Armor
    OcUK have this card for £350!!

    Id rather pay £260 for the 290 Vapor X if I was budgeting, or pay £30 more for a 980 if I had the money (heck a 980 JetStream is on offer at £360 at the minute). Going to be a tough sale at that price.

    Lets hope the REAL R9's are a bit better FPS/£.
     
  2. Shaz

    Shaz New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX 970
    Techpowerup says at 1080p its only slightly more powerful than the GTX 970 by 2% .WTF

    techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/30.html[/url]


    "The MSI R9 390X Gaming roughly matches GTX 980 performance in 4K and 1440p when averaged over all our benchmarks. At lower resolutions like 1080p though, it is only as fast as the GTX 970"

    The GTX 970 got as low at $300 at a time
     
  3. Isbre

    Isbre Member Guru

    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    290X Matrix H2O
    To be fair AMD has made it very clear that they have "created" this card for 4K gaming (we are in all fairness moved further into the future than 290x), and this is especially true when you combine two cards which you probably will need anyway as an enthusiast too get the desired frame rates. I wish for their own sake they would have priced lower though, but prices will likely fall soon to levels people will be more comfortable with.

    If they do this these cards will be fairly future proof if you buy two and the issues surrounding multi-GPU might be far less existing with the moving over to D3D12.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2015
  4. Texter

    Texter Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,036
    Likes Received:
    170
    GPU:
    Club3d GF6800GT 256MB AGP
    All you have to do is look at the Project CARS or Wolfenstein: NO results and conclude AMD have some serious performance issues here and there that skew the average result.

     

  5. Isbre

    Isbre Member Guru

    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    290X Matrix H2O
    hmm curious to why there is so much difference in power consumption on different review sites.

    Some show the promised improved power consumption in typical gaming while others show 50W more!
     
  6. sverek

    sverek Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,584
    Likes Received:
    2,441
    GPU:
    NOVIDIA -0.5GB
    Could be rig whole power consumption or GPU only.
     
  7. eclap

    eclap Banned

    Messages:
    31,497
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Palit GR 1080 2000/11000
    Yeah, but if you do play those games (and I have both) then you're in for a world of pain. Certain engines will run terribly on AMD, I'm afraid. IdTech is one of them. pCARS is a nvidia advert, they used nvidia physx that can't be done on AMD gpu so you'll always see AMD struggle there, nothing you can do.
     
  8. IcE

    IcE Don Snow Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,693
    Likes Received:
    73
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX 1070 Mini
    AMD has always had abysmal OpenGL support. This is going back like a decade now. I remember struggling to run Nexuiz on a 4850. My previous 8600GT got better frames in that game at higher settings.

    I'm not sure why it's never been a priority for them to fix it, but I guess they just said "eh, most games aren't OpenGL anyway" and never got around to it. Same thing with Linux support.
     
  9. snip3r_3

    snip3r_3 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,985
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    1070
    This is normal for all cards due to silicon quality, binning, which affects the voltage applied (similar to CPUs).
     
  10. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,939
    Likes Received:
    2,292
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    Just did your homework, next time do it yourself before posting.

    You linked percentage. They have it wrong as I went through all their benches and here are only those where it is at 970 level.
    CoD:AW - 137fps vs 135fps for gtx970
    GTA5 - 63fps
    Project CARS - 64 fps vs 89fps for gtx970 (this is what affects that average result)
    Witcher 3 - 58fps vs 58fps for gtx970 (considering friendliness of gameworks it is good result)
    Wolfenstein: NO - 65 vs 97fps for gtx970 (this is what affects that average result)
    WoW: 135fps vs 174fps - (this is what affects that average result)

    Conclusion:
    Test has 22 games, in most of them it performs around 980 level, in some it is in middle of 970/980
    Then you have few games where it performs at gtx970 level, but those run at around 140fps+ anyway.
    And then entire result gets skewed by 3 games from which 2 are borked by nVidia, and one simply runs flawlessly on both r9-390x/gtx970 and stronger (WoW).

    So unless you play only Project CARS and Wolf: NO, then r9-390x will be close match to gtx980. (but 980 may prove to be cheaper card in few years of use)
     

  11. lordofthering

    lordofthering Banned

    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    2600XT
    Yes, OGL is badly supported, not to mention Linux drivers (fglrx), but that is not priority (obviously), it works, it is better, but...

    Oh, and look at those 1080p performance, ofc it is irrelevant when GPU does 150 FPS, but it's not like magically nvidia cards become faster at that point, it is in fact "CPU limitation", because of driver code is too heavy, and it hinders performance on lower resolution where GPU can push much more.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2015
  12. bucknuts21

    bucknuts21 Active Member

    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    AMD RX580 8GB
    One thing AMD does fairly well is dropping prices quickly so in a few months you will probably be able to get a 390X for $350 or less and even though I really need a new GPU right now I can wait a bit longer. Haven't had a Nvidia card in a desktop sine my 570's but no problem going back if AMD doesn't do a good price slash.
     
  13. Anarion

    Anarion Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    13,573
    Likes Received:
    337
    GPU:
    GeForce GTX 1070
    I must say that I'm a bit surprised about the power consumption test. In every other MSI R9 390X the power usage has been much larger than reference 290X. Both Techpowerup and Hardocp got way higher numbers. What would explain the large difference?

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    By the way Hilbert, if you could save a lot of bandwidth by using PNGOut to optimise those png charts.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2015
  14. eclap

    eclap Banned

    Messages:
    31,497
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Palit GR 1080 2000/11000
    were those TPU and Hardocp power draw numbers with an overclocked cards? 290X? Those cards' power draw can skyrocket when overclocked.
     
  15. Anarion

    Anarion Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    13,573
    Likes Received:
    337
    GPU:
    GeForce GTX 1070
    Same cards. I don't know what modes (silent/gaming/oc) they used though.
     

  16. Evildead666

    Evildead666 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,281
    Likes Received:
    265
    GPU:
    Vega64/EKWB/Noctua
    The cards may not have been cooled properly (low fan setting, or Auto), or it may have been tested inside a case, or with warmer ambient temps.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2015
  17. eclap

    eclap Banned

    Messages:
    31,497
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Palit GR 1080 2000/11000
    HardOCP is showing total system power draw, not 390x power draw. TPU power draw seems off though, almost 100w more than a 290x, doesn't seem right. Maybe it's a typo, maybe they made a mistake measuring it or they just got a really power hungry sample and overclocked it and upped the voltage and that's what they're showing?
     
  18. AMDFreeSync

    AMDFreeSync Master Guru

    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI Radeon R9 390 8GB

    344w wow :eek:c:
    I was going to buy a R9 390 but i change my plans, better getting R9 Nano due to low power 175w. i had a 970 GPU & it ran cool & it use low power & it ran on 500w PSU :).
     
  19. snip3r_3

    snip3r_3 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,985
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    1070
    What is more worrisome is the multi-monitor usage and the Blu-ray one... Using this for a multi screen setup will actually raise your power bills by ALOT even if you let it idle alot. I wonder if there is a BIOS/driver fix planned. It shouldn't be consuming this much for simply being hooked up to another monitor at idle (vs the 290X too).
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2015
  20. Anarion

    Anarion Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    13,573
    Likes Received:
    337
    GPU:
    GeForce GTX 1070
    They noticed that the stock voltage was higher than on 290X. It could be that Hilbert got really good sample. If I remember correctly Techreport (edit: was another site; Hardocp and Techpowerup at least) noticed same high power usage like Hardocp and Techpowerup. Hardocp did the power testing at least twice because they couldn't believe the results.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2015

Share This Page