for now. 290x on air is no difference than 780. do note. this is open bench with a mild 22c ambient. inside a case in with moderate ambient. only gonna worsen.
http://www.nordichardware.se/Grafik...er-pa-grund-av-ineffektiv-kylare.html#content
Dude. I'm going to have to grill you for a second. I apologize in advance but I feel this is warranted:
No better no worse? FFS, Please read the reviews and translate them before you cite them as evidence. That nordic review shows the 290X 11% faster at 1080p and it is of course faster at higher resolutions. It also had 10% higher scaling after being overclocked, so that's 10% higher than Titan with that in consideration. You're focusing on the clockspeed over time graph. "DO NOTE". Like your phrase there. DO NOTE. That the performance is consistently higher over the lifetime of that graph, so your statement "no difference" is incorrect. The first two runs are faster, and then the graph stabilizes.
They also manually used the low fan mode - uber mode fixes this. This does not excuse the pathetic cooler on the 290X. I've said a million times I think that cooler is terrible. It's a rather easy fix by setting it to uber or upping the fan speed. Again, that doesn't excuse the state of the cooler. I'm with you on that.
This was their conclusion from the review :
Radeon R9 290X is in the right work environment is the most powerful single-GPU graphics card on the market. An impressive feat, we actually did not think AMD was able to in the current situation. The icing on the cake is launching its new flagship to utter wreck price. According to AMD, we will be able to find the Radeon R9 290X for a price tag of around 4,800 kronor in Swedish stores. Although Geforce GTX Titan may be seen as a more complete graphics costs just over 3000 dollars more, and become extremely difficult to justify because of this. Radeon R9 290X is also cheaper than most GTX 780 cards, a model that can easily leave behind in almost all tests. Price question, however delicate and confusion of dealer has been great, while Nvidia said load with both new launches and price cuts.
I get it.
The cooler on the 290X sucks. I don't disagree. You know what bugs me though? Crap like this. Citing evidence which really isn't evidence, evidence that directly contradicts what you're saying. Nordichardware allows all of their hardware to "warm up" during their benchmarking tests and they do lonog benchmarking loops - despite this , the 290X is more or less even with the Titan. Not "even or wose" like you state. For Frick sake read the review that you cite as evidence, this is pretty pathetic.
Like I said, I agree fully that the cooler on the 290X sucks. I also think the 780 is a better "balanced" GPU ignoring the cost. Hell, if they were the same price, the 780OC is outright better because of the intangible benefits such as noise and efficiency. If you want to say that, i'm right there with you. But once you start spreading garbage like this, that's where it gets annoying. This clockspeed over time BS you're talking about, along with solmeister, doesn't really have a basis in reality. The performance is still relatively even with Titan even after long periods and after the warm up, which is what nordic hardware does in their review suite. The throttling over time graph? If you look at it, the performance is stable for the duration of the graph, with the first two runs being faster - this was also using a manual low fan speed. As said, uber mode should fix this, although it will be noisier because the cooler sucks. They do loops 10-20 times for each benchmarks, it isn't a 30 second type of thing - and still, the reviews show it even with Titan more or less. Come on man. Don't be ridiculous. If you want to trash the 290X, just come out and say it. If you want to trash AMD just come out and say "I PREFER NVIDIA AND DO NOT LIKE AMD blah blah blah blah". Heck, i'll trash the cooler with you.
I think it sucks. But don't cite evidence that isn't evidence and don't spread misinformation.
Facebook
Twitter