videocardzFirst AMD Radeon R9 290X 1080p performance review

[Kenmitch]

No intentions of upgrading but would be nice to see some crossfire results. Mainly wondering how the bridgeless solution effects scaling, frame rates, etc.

 

[Slomo4shO]

Remember the ref Titan cooler costs 82$ in BOM costs directly to nvidia. When nvidia said they went ALL OUT on that cooler? They truly did - no expense was spared as that is by FAR the most expensive ref cooler ever made in the history of GPUs.

Yet non-reference coolers outperform this cooler and a fraction of the cost. Clearly, the investment in this eye candy was necessary to provide the Titan a premium feel since it serves no other practical purpose.

 

[blackened23]

Yet non-reference coolers outperform this cooler and a fraction of the cost. Clearly, the investment in this eye candy was necessary to provide the Titan a premium feel since it serves no other practical purpose.

I don't disagree with you. But that's only part of the story. There are valid reasons why one may want a reference cooler: If you're opting for a tri or quad GPU setup, reference is the *only* option. Trust me, I have tried dual GPU with some aftermarket designs and generally speaking, it impacts your overclocking ability severely and also raises the temps of the upper card by a HUGE margin. So it's a tricky balancing act when you're doing multi GPU.

If you're doing 3 or 4 GPUs? Reference is the only option. If there's a way to make aftermarket temperatures tenable as open air with 3-4 GPUs, I haven't figured it out.

Just saying. I prefer aftermarket myself just as you do, so I don't disagree with what you stated. But there are valid reasons for a good ref cooler to exist, although the Titan ref cooler is prohibitively expensive. For some folks with small form factor PCs, reference once again is the only option. So I can see valid uses for a reference cooler, despite my preference for aftermarket.

 

[Will Robinson]

Lol, Furmark actually being discussed in relation to power usage. The desperation is heavy.

jackiechanmeme.jpg

Hi everyone
I thought Furmark had been discredited as a power usage benchmark?
Don't NV cards have auto throttling with FM?

 

[texasti89]

I'm disappointed with perf/watt of the new GPUs. 290x power consumption is about 18% higher than Titan's. I hope this 'Mantle' API initiative changes the picture. We will see soon.

 

[Teizo]

Hi everyone
I thought Furmark had been discredited as a power usage benchmark?
Don't NV cards have auto throttling with FM?

Not sure, but I do remember AMD 'Enthusiast' given Nvidia crap over the Fermi 480. I doubt people will give AMD the same amount of flack, but the way the AMD nutters went about themselves does make it somewhat ironically funny to see the 290X in a similar position. Now the shoe is on their foot, but of course it prolly won't be a big deal to them now since the card is obviously fast enough to top Nvidia's top card atm.

 

[FalseChristian]

If the R9 290X is about as fast as a Titan and costs half as much would deal a serious blow to nVidia. They'd have to lower the price of the Titan drastically. I hope they do so I can buy 2 of them and have no need to upgrade the GPU ever again!

 

[bystander36]

The thing that concerns me is the GPU temps and power draw, at least compared to the 780 and Titan. It ran 12C hotter than Titan and ~160 Mhz higher.

The Titan Ultra should have no issues beating it based on that.

 

[lavaheadache]

If the R9 290X is about as fast as a Titan and costs half as much would deal a serious blow to nVidia. They'd have to lower the price of the Titan drastically. I hope they do so I can buy 2 of them and have no need to upgrade the GPU ever again![/QUOTE]

you can't be serious?

 

[Vesku]

Shame they used Furmark, Nvidia and AMD deal with capping that program differently.

 

[Sohaltang]

If the R9 290X is about as fast as a Titan and costs half as much would deal a serious blow to nVidia. They'd have to lower the price of the Titan drastically. I hope they do so I can buy 2 of them and have no need to upgrade the GPU ever again!

lol no. Then again your not even playing in 1080P. In 5 years your gonna laugh at that comment. Wait till we see 4K@ 120HZ

 

[Grooveriding]

I don't think the Titan will drop in price to compete against 290X. It's a huge drop it would need. I also don't see a Titan Ultra happening, another $1000 card is not going to do anything to compete against a $600 R9 290X. If there is a full unlocked GK110 core, I think it will come not as a Titan type card, but a 785, still doubt it is going to happen.

I think we'll see 780 drop in price and maybe a 785 using the same die found in Titan with 3GB of VRAM. That or just price drops with no new cards and nothing happens until 20nm and they just do price drops and game bundles against each other until Fall 2014.

 

[Silverforce11]

Shame they used Furmark, Nvidia and AMD deal with capping that program differently.

We'll see real figures soon enough when AT, H, TPU, Hardware.fr and Computerbase.de do proper reviews.

Reference cooler is just sad for overclocking though. That means we'll have to folk out extra for after market or water cooling etc.

The R290 (not X) result is interesting, very close in performance, and if they let AIBs do custom cooling, should be the card to get in terms of perf/$.

 

[Pariah]

Not sure, but I do remember AMD 'Enthusiast' given Nvidia crap over the Fermi 480. I doubt people will give AMD the same amount of flack, but the way the AMD nutters went about themselves does make it somewhat ironically funny to see the 290X in a similar position. Now the shoe is on their foot, but of course it prolly won't be a big deal to them now since the card is obviously fast enough to top Nvidia's top card atm.

Looking back at the Anandtech review of the 480, it was comically bad in power and noise. It used more power than the top dual GPU cards of both AMD and Nvidia at the time. In Crysis, it used 32% more system power than a 5870. It improved to just 28% worse in Furmark vs a 5870. By comparison, the 290x does look miserable vs the Titan, but is "only" 18.1% worse in Furmark.

In the noise department, Anandtech said the 480 was the loudest single GPU card they had ever tested to that point. Let's all hope the 290x does not duplicate that performance. If it does, then it deserves equal ridicule.

Temperature, Power, & Noise: Hot and Loud, but Not in the Good Way

 

[Pariah]

I don't think the Titan will drop in price to compete against 290X. It's a huge drop it would need. I also don't see a Titan Ultra happening, another $1000 card is not going to do anything to compete against a $600 R9 290X. If there is a full unlocked GK110 core, I think it will come not as a Titan type card, but a 785, still doubt it is going to happen.

I don't think we'll see a Titan price drop either. I do, however, think it is likely that we see a Titan Ultra to solidify Nvidia's performance crown which will in turn just replace the Titan at the $1000 price point and the standard Titan will be discontinued. If the 290x is basically equal to a Titan, the rumored Titan Ultra should have little difficulty claiming an undisputed performance lead. It won't be a value leader at $250-$350 more than a 290x, but that's not really relevant when we're talking about $650+ video cards.

 

[TidusZ]

$650 for a card that is 10% faster than the current $650 card, which should really cost no more than $400. I think the 680 in my system is gonna have to make due til the next round of cards. If they actually bring it out for like $500 I'd probably sell the 680 and get it though.

 

[Silverforce11]

Looking back at the Anandtech review of the 480, it was comically bad in power and noise. It used more power than the top dual GPU cards of both AMD and Nvidia at the time. In Crysis, it used 32% more system power than a 5870. It improved to just 28% worse in Furmark vs a 5870. By comparison, the 290x does look miserable vs the Titan, but is "only" 18.1% worse in Furmark.

In the noise department, Anandtech said the 480 was the loudest single GPU card they had ever tested to that point. Let's all hope the 290x does not duplicate that performance. If it does, then it deserves equal ridicule.

Temperature, Power, & Noise: Hot and Loud, but Not in the Good Way

There's no point in discussing Furmark result since its different due to throttling...

The 480 was again a different beast, it even consumed massive power in gaming benches not just Furmark.

 

[lavaheadache]

I don't think the Titan will drop in price to compete against 290X. It's a huge drop it would need. I also don't see a Titan Ultra happening, another $1000 card is not going to do anything to compete against a $600 R9 290X. If there is a full unlocked GK110 core, I think it will come not as a Titan type card, but a 785, still doubt it is going to happen.

I think we'll see 780 drop in price and maybe a 785 using the same die found in Titan with 3GB of VRAM. That or just price drops with no new cards and nothing happens until 20nm and they just do price drops and game bundles against each other until Fall 2014.

When was that NVidia announcement suppose to happen?

 

[Rvenger]

$650 for a card that is 10% faster than the current $650 card, which should really cost no more than $400. I think the 680 in my system is gonna have to make due til the next round of cards. If they actually bring it out for like $500 I'd probably sell the 680 and get it though.

Who said it was $650? Seriously need to quit believing anything unofficial.

 

[Pariah]

There's no point in discussing Furmark result since its different due to throttling...

The 480 was again a different beast, it even consumed massive power in gaming benches not just Furmark.

Last time I checked, Crysis, which I mentioned as well, was a game. Absolute consumption numbers produced by Furmark are of little real world use. However, what are the odds that a 290x is 18% worse than a Titan in Furmark, and then uses less power, or is even roughly equivalent to a Titan in games? Pretty darn slim.

 

[Grooveriding]

I don't think we'll see a Titan price drop either. I do, however, think it is likely that we see a Titan Ultra to solidify Nvidia's performance crown which will in turn just replace the Titan at the $1000 price point and the standard Titan will be discontinued. If the 290x is basically equal to a Titan, the rumored Titan Ultra should have little difficulty claiming an undisputed performance lead. It won't be a value leader at $250-$350 more than a 290x, but that's not really relevant when we're talking about $650+ video cards.

I don't think a Titan Ultra makes any sense. Titan is already slower than aftermarket 780s right out of the box with both cards stock. That extra 3GB VRAM and the TDP cap keep it from getting anywhere. I'm sure we'll see the odd review where they have comparisons of a 780 HOF or Classified against R290X where those custom cards are faster at their stock settings.

A 785 with a Titan core or full GK110 core will give them the crown back if they actually care to get it. A Titan Ultra won't imo, you'll just see it against aftermarket 290X cards losing again.

 

[bystander36]

I don't think a Titan Ultra makes any sense. Titan is already slower than aftermarket 780s right out of the box with both cards stock. That extra 3GB VRAM and the TDP cap keep it from getting anywhere. I'm sure we'll see the odd review where they have comparisons of a 780 HOF or Classified against R290X where those custom cards are faster at their stock settings.

A 785 with a Titan core or full GK110 core will give them the crown back if they actually care to get it. A Titan Ultra won't imo, you'll just see it against aftermarket 290X cards losing again.

Keep in mind, at the stock settings, the r290X is 160 Mhz higher clocked, and runs much hotter and draws much more power.

The Titan ultra just has to unlock the shaders to beat it, and add 160Mhz to the clocks to beat it soundly, and it still should not be any hotter or draw anymore power (the spec's have it drawing less than the Titan, of course these are rumors, not the end product).

Nvidia has already announced it'll be doing mass cuts soon, so this will allow for it to coexist with a Titan that is cheaper than today.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Perhaps Nvidia was too obsessed with making a super quiet reference cooler.. We've seen leaks lead to bios with increased clocks sent to reviewers just before a compeitor releases new products before... Ok well once, not that I think that would happen but both Titan and the 780 are super quiet at stock, Nvidia could easily enable a few more boost bins and increase noise some.

 

[Grooveriding]

Keep in mind, at the stock settings, the r290X is 160 Mhz higher clocked, and runs much hotter and draws much more power.

The Titan ultra just has to unlock the shaders to beat it, and add 160Mhz to the clocks to beat it soundly, and it still should not be any hotter or draw anymore power (the spec's have it drawing less than the Titan, of course these are rumors, not the end product).

Nvidia has already announced it'll be doing mass cuts soon, so this will allow for it to coexist with a Titan that is cheaper than today.

So add more shaders, increase clocks and no power or temp increase. At least think it through before posting it.

After what happened with Titan=$1000 then 780=$650.. another $1000 card will get laughed at

 

[BallaTheFeared]

So add more shaders, increase clocks and no power or temp increase. At least think it through before posting it.

After what happened with Titan=$1000 then 780=$650.. another $1000 card will get laughed at

More mature fab, pretty easy even without making minor changes which they could do. GF100 -> GF110 saw Nvidia cutting leaky transistors out of the design, decreasing transistor count, increasing SMX count, and noticeably increasing perf/w. Now it's not like GK110 suffers as GF100 had making changes yield sizable results... However they don't need sizable results in this case.

All they have to do to avoid competing with Titan is not enable 1/3 DP. GTX 780 already eclipsed Titan for gaming, and it's unlikely Nvidia feels this will threaten their Titan market (assuming there is even a market left).