So what's the verdict on R9 290X ?

[Nomanor]

Is it a great success?

 

[ocre]

I think it made the high end much more interesting. Cant wait till there is stock and aftermarket options. Its not a perfect card but amd priced it right. The top end needed a push and i think this will get the ball rolling for sure. Its only gonna get more exciting from here on out and because of that i think the 290x is a success

 

[Granseth]

I think it's an exciting card with a terrible cooling solution.
I also think people got the temperature wrong, you set the desired temperature an the software will adjust the RPM of the fan accordingly. Problem is that you set a max % of RPM on the fan, and when that isn't enough the card throttles down.
So for me it's exciting, but not an option before we get custom solutions, looking forward to those and think we will see some insane OC results.

 

[schmuckley]

Needs water or aftermarket sink.

 

[Gikaseixas]

A great achievement from the red camp. Non reference cards will be awesome IMO

 

[f1sherman]

Is it a great success?

It is. For us consumers.
But the GPU needs to sell in pro market in order to be a success.
And that will be an issue with some of the worst perf/W in 28nm, TDP breaking 250W barrier and Double precision cut to 1/8.

OTOH perf/$ is rather good for high-end (at this point in time anyway), which will make consumers happy, but not so much AMD.
Or Nvidia for that matter, whose free reign on high end has ended.

 

[imaheadcase]

Depends on how many they had to sell the first day, seeing they sold out in less the a hour, and how many they plan on bringing back to market fast enough..

If they can't keep up with demand, gamer will turn towards next best thing.

 

[imaheadcase]

It is. For us consumers.
But the GPU needs to sell in pro market in order to be a success.
And that will be an issue with some of the worst perf/W in 28nm, TDP breaking 250W barrier and Double precision cut to 1/8.

OTOH perf/$ is rather good for high-end (at this point in time anyway), which will make consumers happy, but not so much AMD.
Or Nvidia for that matter, whose free reign on high end has ended.

No one cares about that stuff with high end cards..sheesh people stop talking about it.

 

[rainy]

But the GPU needs to sell in pro market in order to be a success.
Double precision cut to 1/8.

It's not true:

We've also come to learn that AMD changed the double-precision rate from 1/4 to 1/8 on the R9 290X, yielding a maximum .7 TFLOPS. The FirePro version of this configuration will support full-speed (1/2 rate) DP compute, giving professional users an incentive to spring for Hawaii's professional implementation.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290x-hawaii-review,3650.html

 

[NTMBK]

It is. For us consumers.
But the GPU needs to sell in pro market in order to be a success.
And that will be an issue with some of the worst perf/W in 28nm, TDP breaking 250W barrier and Double precision cut to 1/8.

OTOH perf/$ is rather good for high-end (at this point in time anyway), which will make consumers happy, but not so much AMD.
Or Nvidia for that matter, whose free reign on high end has ended.

Pros will buy the Firepro version of the GPU. The clue is in the name. Firepros don't have crippled DP performance, same way that Quadros don't.

Performance/W looks acceptable- nothing to write home about, but certainly not going to put off someone purchasing it.

 

[tviceman]

Is it a great success?

The price is great. The thermals and stock cooling is awful. If AIB-specific coolers adequately cool the chip AND allow for decent overclocking without breaking the power bank, then yes it will be good. If the gtx780 gets a $100 price cut (and it should) then it's a success simply because you'll have more options in that price range.

Ultimately, in my personal opinion, if the gtx780 ends up being priced the same in a few weeks, then whichever card gets the best performance on average after OC within a similar power envelope. If the R290x can beat an OC'd gtx780 by 10% but it takes 200 more watts to do it, then I consider it only viable for those people who want the absolute best performance no matter what and also have water cooling capabilities.

 

[Grooveriding]

It is the fastest overall card you can buy. Another card matches it, but costs twice as much.

I think the R9 290 non x is going to be the real big success though. It is usually the more affordable card that is close to the more expensive one's performance that is more popular. A $450 card that matches the $650 gtx780 is sure to shake everything up.

780 is going take at least a $150 price cut if the plain 290 is $450.

 

[Tempered81]

Needs water

^ Yup.


Needs water & custom bios. Great chip, great board. Runs hot, huge power, huge potential. Isn't going anywhere on the 7970 cooler.

 

[Tempered81]

The main reason people think a 290 matches the X is because of the severe throttling.
Half the time the 290x is running at 720-800mhz. 290 vs. 290X both on water at 1000mhz without throttling or vdroop, the difference is larger, and the 290X extends its lead.

 

[Silverforce11]

The main reason people think a 290 matches the X is because of the severe throttling.
Half the time the 290x is running at 720-800mhz. 290 vs. 290X both on water at 1000mhz without throttling or vdroop, the difference is larger, and the 290X extends its lead.

You are probably right, this current setup is not bottlenecked by ROP/TMUs, so the extra shader on the X will scale much better than previous gen top vs 2nd tier.

It's an awesome GPU for people on water now. The rest, wait for AIB models.

OC vs OC should be interesting versus the 780, both become massive power hogs once you crank up the voltage, dont think its going to be relevant, it all comes down to performance. At higher resolution, R290X absolutely crushes NV's Gk110, and its currently running crippled at that!

Myself? I'll go for the R290 non X, custom cooled, hopefully for around the $399 to $449 range.

 

[Teizo]

Even though it just came out and I would normally be hesitant to call something a success under such a short timeframe, the fact that it is $549 makes it more likely to succeed. AMD put a card out that at stock competes with a card twice it's price. Nvidia needed an overclock (though you can argue a factory overclock is 'stock') to do that and charged customers $100 more from the outset at $649.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

You are probably right, this current setup is not bottlenecked by ROP/TMUs, so the extra shader on the X will scale much better than previous gen top vs 2nd tier.

It's an awesome GPU for people on water now. The rest, wait for AIB models.

OC vs OC should be interesting versus the 780, both become massive power hogs once you crank up the voltage, dont think its going to be relevant, it all comes down to performance. At higher resolution, R290X absolutely crushes NV's Gk110, and its currently running crippled at that!

Myself? I'll go for the R290 non X, custom cooled, hopefully for around the $399 to $449 range.

Definitely interested in the aftermarket 290 myself. Going to wait until it's$399 with a copy of bf4. I'm a very picky buyer.

 

[lavaheadache]

Definitely interested in the aftermarket 290 myself. Going to wait until it's$399 with a copy of bf4. I'm a very picky buyer.

it's ok to splurge once in a while...... That was me telling you to get a Titan

 

[Zanovar]

needs water..not sure about that,custom stuff in the next month will tame it.

 

[tviceman]

It is the fastest overall card you can buy. Another card matches it, but costs twice as much.

I think the R9 290 non x is going to be the real big success though. It is usually the more affordable card that is close to the more expensive one's performance that is more popular. A $450 card that matches the $650 gtx780 is sure to shake everything up.

780 is going take at least a $150 price cut if the plain 290 is $450.

If 780's end up matching R290x's when both are overclocked, then it only needs a $100 price cut according to the same logic of everyone who bought 7970's on here. Equal performance when OC'd, but the 780's have quieter operation, lower thermals, 150-200 watts less power use, and the same cost w/ $100 price cut. Even if OC'd 780's are 5% slower on average vs. OC'd r290x's, the intangibles still make it worthwhile trade off to many people at equal prices.

But yes, the 780 needs a price cut.

 

[brandonmatic]

If 780's end up matching R290x's when both are overclocked, then it only needs a $100 price cut according to the same logic of everyone who bought 7970's on here. Equal performance when OC'd, but the 780's have quieter operation, lower thermals, 150-200 watts less power use, and the same cost w/ $100 price cut. Even if OC'd 780's are 5% slower on average vs. OC'd r290x's, the intangibles still make it worthwhile trade off to many people at equal prices.

I agree with this. If an OC 780 is only slightly slower than an OC 290X then nVidia can justify charging the same price as AMD because of its greater brand good will. But it remains to be seen how fast the OC 290X will be with custom coolers. It might outpace the 780 by quite a bit.

 

[raghu78]

the R9 290X is a good product with a weak cooler. R9 290 even in the quiet mode comes ahead of GTX 780 and on par with Titan. in uber mode its faster than titan but at a noise tradeoff. the stock cooler is overwhelmed when trying to push for 1.1+ Ghz speeds unless you are willing to run at 100% fan speed. at those fan speeds the noise is an embarassment and a joke.

but for the current GTX 780 price of USD 650 you can get a R9 290X with a custom cooler like prolimatech mk-26 or arctic accelero hybrid or arctic accelero extreme iii and still be around USD 650. so the GTX 780 needs a price cut to USD 500.

by late Nov or early Dec the custom R9 290X versions should start coming out. thats where the real power of R9 290X will be unlocked. these cards will be priced at USD 600 with better cooling and also have much lower fan noise. some will also be entire custom PCB like sapphire toxic, asus matrix, msi lightning.

 

[spat55]

I like the look of it but it does need a better cooling solution looking at benchmarks. I think it will soon be sorted out cooling wise though but with the GTX 780ti around the corner and if Nvidia price it perfectly would be the better choice, however I don't see Nvidia putting it at the same price as the R9 290x.

 

[UaVaj]

THE GOOD (before throttling)

crisis 3 @ 2560x1440 - 53.8fps vs 52.2fps
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/12

bf3 @ 2560x1440 - 67.1fps vs 59.2fps
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/11

metro lt @ 2560x1440 - 58.5fps vs 49.5fps
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/8

hitman @ 2560x1440 - 76.5fps vs 65.7fps
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/15



THE BAD

30% loss of performance from thorttling
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290X/33.html

780 runs cooler - 81c vs 93c (load crysis3)
780 runs quieter - 47.5db vs 58.9db (load crysis3)
780 uses less power - 327w vs 425w (single gpu load crysis3) / 536w vs 727w (dual gpu load crysis3)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review/19

780 faster at tesselation - 106.6fps vs 91.1fps (heaven)
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...-4K-Preview-Testing/3DMark-and-Unigine-Heaven

780 sli offer better frame pacing.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...-CrossFire-and-4K-Preview-Testing/Battlefield-
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...90X-CrossFire-and-4K-Preview-Testing/Crysis-3
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r9_290x_crossfire_vs_sli_review_benchmarks,8.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r9_290x_crossfire_vs_sli_review_benchmarks,9.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r9_290x_crossfire_vs_sli_review_benchmarks,10.html



THE UGLY

single gpu - it is a toss up.

multi gpu - still nVidia.
by the time amd (1) goes underwater to control the throttling and the noise, (2) a larger psu to feed the added current draw, (3) the lesser performance in tesselation, (4) the lesser multi-gpu frame pacing.
nvidia simply wins by default.



-----



if success is almost catching up to nVidia - then yes.

 

[Pariah]

I like the look of it but it does need a better cooling solution looking at benchmarks. I think it will soon be sorted out cooling wise though but with the GTX 780ti around the corner and if Nvidia price it perfectly would be the better choice, however I don't see Nvidia putting it at the same price as the R9 290x.

Nvidia won't have to. They will have the better product with the more reliable name. Intel doesn't drop their prices to match AMD for the same reason. Aftermarket coolers may tame the 290x somewhat, but don't look for any major improvement from the ones that cost $20 more. The cards with the real highend coolers are going to cost $50-100+ more. A non-crippled 290x at $600 is a far better value than the mess that is the OEM design at $550. With a 290x at $600, a 780ti would be an equal value at $650. I wouldn't pay $700 for a video card, but the state of the market would make even $700 a justifiable price for a 780ti.

To answer the original question, the 290x is currently in beta mode. I wouldn't pay for a beta product. Once the aftermarket fixes the bugs and delivers a usable product we will reevaluate it.