AMD Radeon 7990 reviews thread

[Lonbjerg]

Just found this little gem:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...lta-Gets-Frame-Rated/AMD-Frame-Pacing-Prototy

With our early testing of the Catalyst prototype driver showing positive results though, there is yet hope for CrossFire to be fixed in this generation, at least for single monitor users!

So they can fix it...but not for multi-monitor setups?

Now I know AMD again LOL

 

[cmdrdredd]

Just found this little gem:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...lta-Gets-Frame-Rated/AMD-Frame-Pacing-Prototy



So they can fix it...but not for multi-monitor setups?

Now I know AMD again LOL

They are referring to the picture about Crysis 3 at 3840x2160. It's not playable at max settings

 

[Cloudfire777]

1 year too late AMD :biggrin:

 

[Lonbjerg]

They are referring to the picture about Crysis 3 at 3840x2160. It's not playable at max settings

Really?
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...lta-Gets-Frame-Rated/AMD-Frame-Pacing-Prototy

But we can't really assume that today... So how does it compare to the GTX 690 or the GTX Titan? Honestly if you are going to spend $999 on a graphics cards you should really be deciding between the GTX 690 and the GTX Titan. I would go the route of the Titan and its single GPU + 6GB frame buffer for multi-monitor setups and the GTX 690 for single, high resolution monitor users.



Final Thoughts

I knew this review was going to turn out like this after publishing our faux-HD 7990 performance results last month. With its performance completely dependent on CrossFire technology, the HD 7990 as a $1000 graphics card has a very hard time justifying its price. With our early testing of the Catalyst prototype driver showing positive results though, there is yet hope for CrossFire to be fixed in this generation, at least for single monitor users! But until that driver is perfected, is bug free and is presented to buyers as a made-for-primetime solution, I just cannot recommend an investment this large on the Radeon HD 7990.

Combined with this:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-AMD-Improves-CrossFire-Prototype-Driver

One thing to note: this fix does not yet address Eyefinity + CrossFire problems. The prototype and the current implementation of the fix are only going to address single monitor configurations due to the differences in how the multiple rendered images are composited. Resolutions up to 2560x1600 are handled by a hardware compositor while the 5760x1080 and above Eyefinity resolution use a software implementation that is apparently much more complex (and causes quite a few graphical issues we'll dive into later).

Makes me think you are making up excuses now...

 

[Lonbjerg]

LOL
http://hardocp.com/article/2013/04/24/amd_radeon_hd_7990_video_card_review/3#.UXhijbW-18E

*Note* We had some issues with enabling TressFX in the game. In our run-through, there is a particular area where the camera swoops around Lara's head at extremely close range. With TressFX enabled the game would crash at this scene, each and every time. Therefore, we are not able to bring you performance with TressFX enabled today. We have sent our experiences to AMD, and hopefully there will be a fix in the future and then we can bring you TressFX performance under Eyefinity and CrossFire.

I need to read more reviews...this is pure comedy gold ^^

Interestingly, in AMD's press presentation briefing we found this slide. It says: "It can also play Tomb Raider in 3840x2160 with TressFX hair and max settings." AMD is claiming playable performance in Tomb Raider with TressFX enabled at a resolution of 3840x2160. We wanted to test this ourselves, and found where Tomb Raider stores its graphics settings in the registry. We attempted to force 3840x2160, unfortunately the game would not start at this resolution. It would error out and left us at the desktop. Therefore, we are not able to directly test this resolution and scenario as the slide depicts. However, we can make an educated guess based on our experiences at 5760x1200.

If we calculate the pixels tested at our resolution of 5760x1200 we come to a total pixel count of 6,912,000. That is roughly 6.9 million pixels. Now, we found that at 5760x1200 that we had to disable TressFX to make the game playable. With TressFX enabled, there were scenes that were in the lower 30's and even in the upper 20's at 5760x1200. If we were to change the resolution to 3840x2160 that would be a total pixel count of 8,294,400. That is roughly 8.2 million pixels, 19% more pixels than we had at 5760x1200. That means that resolution is going to be even more demanding than our tested 5760x1200. Given the fact that TressFX isn't even playable at 5760x1200, it isn't going to be playable with 1,382,400 more pixels.

Therefore, we find it highly unlikely that AMD's claim is valid.

 

[crashtech]

I just got an email that says Catalyst 13.4 has been released. Maybe 13.5 is not as far behind as assumed?

 

[BrentJ]

LOL
http://hardocp.com/article/2013/04/24/amd_radeon_hd_7990_video_card_review/3#.UXhijbW-18E



I need to read more reviews...this is pure comedy gold ^^

It's really quite simple. In one area of our run-through the game locked up with TressFX enabled, so we couldn't get a full run-through to show you. However, there were plenty of other areas in the game, pretty much all areas, where TressFX worked just fine. So we were able to look at performance with TressFX enabled at 5760x1200 and found it unplayable. We weren't able to bring you our run-through though because in one part it locks up each and every time and crashes with TressFX enabled.

 

[Elfear]

It's really quite simple. In one area of our run-through the game locked up with TressFX enabled, so we couldn't get a full run-through to show you. However, there were plenty of other areas in the game, pretty much all areas, where TressFX worked just fine. So we were able to look at performance with TressFX enabled at 5760x1200 and found it unplayable. We weren't able to bring you our run-through though because in one part it locks up each and every time and crashes with TressFX enabled.

Brent, I think Lonbjerg is saying that AMD in a bad light is comedy gold, not your review. He has this thing for AMD.

 

[Lonbjerg]

It's really quite simple. In one area of our run-through the game locked up with TressFX enabled, so we couldn't get a full run-through to show you. However, there were plenty of other areas in the game, pretty much all areas, where TressFX worked just fine. So we were able to look at performance with TressFX enabled at 5760x1200 and found it unplayable. We weren't able to bring you our run-through though because in one part it locks up each and every time and crashes with TressFX enabled.

Brent, I think Lonbjerg is saying that AMD in a bad light is comedy gold, not your review. He has this thing for AMD.

Yup, I am laughing at AMD's TressFX "Works for all"...fails on AMD hardware ^^

I am done with your review...much more USEFULL than AT's "single FPS number BS...something"...on to the next review...and more AMD comedy

 

[badb0y]

Yup, I am laughing at AMD's TressFX "Works for all"...fails on AMD hardware ^^

I am done with your review...much more USEFULL than AT's "single FPS number BS...something"...on to the next review...and more AMD comedy

Haha! AMD fails again lololol.

8 games bundle? Because they know no one will buy their crappy card without them Haha! nVidia wins again, nVidia is the best company in the whole wide world. HAHA!

 

[crashtech]

All praise to competition, which enables us to have faster paced advancements at lower cost than a monopoly would bring.

Pause and reflect, fanboys and girls.

 

[Lonyo]

Yup, I am laughing at AMD's TressFX "Works for all"...fails on AMD hardware ^^

I am done with your review...much more USEFULL than AT's "single FPS number BS...something"...on to the next review...and more AMD comedy

First revealed last month, the Frame Capture and Analysis tool (FCAT) has significantly altered how we go about measuring the smoothness of video game rendering. By marking frames with a color strip and then analyzing recordings of the resulting output, we can tell just how far apart frames are when being displayed, and how much of a frame has been displayed.

Our goal with FCAT was to run an in-depth article about it shortly before the launch of the 7990 as a preparatory article for today’s launch. However like most ambitious goals, that hasn’t panned out. AMD of course is dropping new drivers for the 7990 – Catalyst 13.5b2 – but NVIDIA also dropped their new 320.00 drivers at the end of last week. As a result we’ve effectively had to rebuild our benchmark results in the last week, and throw out much of the old FCAT data we had already collected. Coupled with driver problems and a later problem with FCAT capture (which has since been resolved), and we’ve been left with plenty to do and not enough time to do it.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6915/amd-radeon-hd-7990-review-7990-gets-official/3

I guess actually reading the AT review would be too much effort though.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Really?
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...lta-Gets-Frame-Rated/AMD-Frame-Pacing-Prototy



Combined with this:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-AMD-Improves-CrossFire-Prototype-Driver


Makes me think you are making up excuses now...

I think you are simply full of crap and are doing absolutely nothing anymore in this thread. You made a point that I somewhat agreed with before, now you're just trolling for the hell of it without even attempting to be rational and reasonable any longer.

 

[chimaxi83]

Lonbjerg gets so mad at anything AMD does, and pollutes every thread he can. Pitiful. I nominate him for Nvidia MVP. You make no sense Lonbjerg, but cry more fallacious red herrings, bro.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Anyways...

 

[blackened23]

Really?
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...lta-Gets-Frame-Rated/AMD-Frame-Pacing-Prototy



Combined with this:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-AMD-Improves-CrossFire-Prototype-Driver


Makes me think you are making up excuses now...

You know, I think most people here agree the card is a disappointment. The card just isn't as good as the 690 no matter how you look at it. But here's the real question. How sad of a person does one have to be to get their enjoyment from trolling nonstop? Are you having fun? Is this how you get your kicks?

 

[DarkKnightDude]

I think we can all agree the card is overpriced as hell. if this was like 800-850 USD I could easily see this being a winner in a way.

 

[Souv]

BTW here is the 13.5B2 driver link. So many trolls on this thread.

http://www2.ati.com/drivers/beta/amd_catalyst_13.5_beta2.exe

Discussion -----> http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2315933

Do I need to install 13.4cap1 after installing 13.5B2 driver?

btw here is the release notes for 13.5b2-

http://techreport.com/news/24712/amd-releases-catalyst-13-5-beta-13-4-whql-graphics-drivers

http://blogs.amd.com/play/2013/04/24/new-134-135-catalyst-drivers/

• Far Cry 3: Improves performance up to 4% with Anti-Aliasing enabled
• Shogun II: Improves performance up to 20% with 8x Anti-Aliasing enabled
• Tomb Raider: Improves performance up to 6%
• Bioshock Infinite: Improves performance up to 6%
• Borderlands 2: Improves performance up to 17%
• Corruption is no longer seen on the AMD Radeon HD 7790 when TressFX is enabled in Tomb Raider

 

[Lonbjerg]

I think you are simply full of crap and are doing absolutely nothing anymore in this thread. You made a point that I somewhat agreed with before, now you're just trolling for the hell of it without even attempting to be rational and reasonable any longer.

Care to show me WERE they say this is for Crysis.
It would be a lot better, than jwhat you ar edoing now.

You said....now you prove it!

 

[Lonbjerg]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6915/amd-radeon-hd-7990-review-7990-gets-official/3

I guess actually reading the AT review would be too much effort though.

Dosn't alter the fact the the "review"...is useless ^^

 

[Lonbjerg]

Lonbjerg gets so mad at anything AMD does, and pollutes every thread he can. Pitiful. I nominate him for Nvidia MVP. You make no sense Lonbjerg, but cry more fallacious red herrings, bro.

Reported

 

[Final8ty]

Too steep, £700 max.

I see comments about it not being faster than cf 7970, Dual card is not about being faster, its about space.

 

[Ibra]

Reported

Don't bother. AMD lunatics have immunity.

 

[KompuKare]

Both my 7970's can run 1000mhz @ 1.0v

EDIT: Disregard my sig, I haven't updated it. I run both at 1100 1.1v now.

Two of my 7970s will do 1000@1.0V or 1050@1.05V. The other two require more volts.

7990 doesn't really bring much to the table IMO. It really should be closer to the $850-900 mark.

Ah not having paid that much attention to what a 7970 is able to do when winning the silicon lottery, I was only guessing. But it seems that with proper binning 1.0V to 1.05V should have been possible. And since it took them this long to come up with an official 7990 they had plenty of time to find those golden samples.

The next question would be what is the power, heat and noise difference between running at 1GHz @ 1.2V and 1.0V? Not that many recent 7970 reviews out there but I found this from hardware.fr:

(SOURCE: http://www.hardware.fr/articles/853-20/consommation.html
Transliterated: http://translate.googleusercontent....x.html&usg=ALkJrhjZ_A6bwNIlafMAbo4gdRAbK78-Dg)

So it seems 20W or more from each core should have been easily possible. A really poor launch then and expensive too: more expensive than the already overpriced 690.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Don't bother. AMD lunatics have immunity.

Not true...while it does very little in the aspect of chaing the red defense team behaviour...but it does result in infractions, so please...use report as much as possible.