This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Titan faster than 290X (Benchmark inside)

#71Xeeh_Bitz(Topic Creator)Posted 10/17/2013 3:49:31 PM
Snuckie7 posted...
Xeeh_Bitz posted...
How do you know the 290X doesn't throttle? You own one?

The 290X doesn't throttle like the Titan does.
I think AMD would have announced dynamic clock boosting/throttling if they had it. As for what we've seen so far, AMD's boost works exactly like it used to.

You could buy a GK110 over 7 months ago, pay more than you wished but the same GPU was available to purchase.

But not for gaming.

I'm just saying, AMDs R9 is really not impressive at all for it's price and how late it's releasing. If it released earlier, it would be different but it's really so close to Nvidia's new lineup it's just not worth the purchase, hell it's not worth a purchase of any high end gpu at the moment due to that fact alone. Overclockers care about power and temps, if its using an incredible amount already it leaves less room for OCing due to limitations and failures.

Nvidia's new lineup is either not very close, or not very impressive. 20nm isn't close to mass production for GPUs yet.

And no, a ~60W difference in peak power consumption is not really significant to an overclocker.


25% more power is not significant?
---
Best Windows ever, Windows 8!
#72Snuckie7Posted 10/17/2013 3:51:40 PM
Xeeh_Bitz posted...
Snuckie7 posted...
hitokiri13 posted...
This is dumb. Technology suppose to go forward. It's sad people forget about it. Say oh at least it cheaper.

I would love to see 290X a next generation GPU at low price beat a high price Titan by 2-4 folds. Not just because it was offered at $650 for titan like performance. You realize it's still a one year old technology.


Is this the first GPU release you've seen or something?


Well, mostly all Graphic cards released are faster than the competitors current flagship.. not in this case. It's around the same, which is disappointing.

and I agree with the previous statement until we move to 20nm the upgrades will not be much compared to the current 28.

I'm just eager to upgrade again as I enjoy having new things, just nothing worth owning at the moment.


If you read his post, he was wanting 2-4x the performance of the competitor's flagship for 65% of the price. A jump like that has literally never happened in somewhat recent history.
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | MSI 7950 Twin Frozr III | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W
#73Snuckie7Posted 10/17/2013 3:53:34 PM
Xeeh_Bitz posted...
25% more power is not significant?


Why would it be?
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | MSI 7950 Twin Frozr III | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W
#74DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/17/2013 5:04:51 PM
godplaysSNES posted...
The big performance increases remain absent because both AMD and Nvidia can't move onto 20nm yet.

It was the same deal when the Geforce 500 and HD 6000 series were released, they had to remain at 40nm, just like the 400 and 5000 had used, and there were no big leaps being done.


The 6000 series had a pretty significant improvement, and the 500 series showed improved performance per watt in spite of still using Fermi.

That said, that there's not much significant improvement shows that both Kepler and GCN are fine architectures indeed. I'm very interested in seeing what kind of improvements Maxwell brings to the table.
---
Want that Shield!
Ball and Cup on ps mobile has framerate issues. -stargazer64
#75godplaysSNESPosted 10/17/2013 5:24:06 PM(edited)
DarkZV2Beta posted...
godplaysSNES posted...
The big performance increases remain absent because both AMD and Nvidia can't move onto 20nm yet.

It was the same deal when the Geforce 500 and HD 6000 series were released, they had to remain at 40nm, just like the 400 and 5000 had used, and there were no big leaps being done.


The 6000 series had a pretty significant improvement, and the 500 series showed improved performance per watt in spite of still using Fermi.

That said, that there's not much significant improvement shows that both Kepler and GCN are fine architectures indeed. I'm very interested in seeing what kind of improvements Maxwell brings to the table.


Yeah, the HD 6970 did perform significantly better than the HD 5870 in some cases. Still pretty modest overall compared to what the HD 5870 did in comparison to the 4870 though.
In hindsight, I wonder if VLIW4 wasn't a waste for AMD, since they only ended up using it for the HD 6900 series.

The 500 series also turned out nicely, but one might argue that that's primarily because the 400 series had some significant issues that Nvidia managed to deal with in time for the refresh.


I'm also interested in seeing what Maxwell and AMD's next series will come with, but it's still pretty meh if we don't get a new major DirectX or OpenGL as well.
In a way, I'm much more hyped about the software side. It'll be really interesting to see how much Mantle will improve BF4 performance on all GCN cards
---
Super Mario Kart is the single best Mario Kart ever!
#76KamenRiderBladePosted 10/17/2013 6:12:49 PM
Why does top performance even matter to you as an individual?

As long as the 290X delivers close to Titan levels of performance for significantly cheaper, then that is all that matters, because unless you plan on spending $1,000 for the absolutely best video card, the perf doesn't matter to you since you won't have it in your hands.

What should matter to each person is the maximum performance you can attain for the amount of money you're willing to spend on the graphics card, that's it.

Touting one is faster over the other is meaningless unless you own it.

Giving customers the chance to own Titan level performance for alot cheaper is smart business.

Unless you're a fanboy, you should be as objective as possible.

Single GPU graphics card from both AMD / Nvidia are generally about equal in terms of driver quality these days, so at this point, a customer should care about getting the most performance for your money.

If anything you should be happy that cheaper options with higher performance are available to consumers, that means this is competition bringing down the cost of video cards for the masses which is always a good thing.
---
Are you a MexiCAN or a MexiCAN'T - Johnny Depp 'Once Upon A Time in Mexico'
#77SnipeStarPosted 10/17/2013 6:48:26 PM
AMD drops the ball again lmao
---
i7 3820 / Corsair H80i | Asus Sabertooth X79 | 2x GTX 680 4GB | 16GB Corsair Vengeance LP | 2x 600GB Raptor / 2x 1TB WD RE3 | Corsair HX1000w | Silverstone RV01
#78DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/17/2013 7:09:12 PM
KamenRiderBlade posted...
Tom's Hardware has a few early benchmarks

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-r9-290x-benchmark-performance,24732.html


It's nice to see it still scales nicely to higher resolutions.
---
Want that Shield!
Ball and Cup on ps mobile has framerate issues. -stargazer64
#79nIMr0D888Posted 10/17/2013 7:12:12 PM
Why are you all assuming the titan wont drop in price?
---
CAUTION: EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE
#80ThescyyPosted 10/17/2013 7:14:26 PM
These stock vs stock benchmarks are boring and won't give us the full picture. How much overclocking headroom the 290x has is going to be the real benchmark for comparing it to GK110. Voltage softmods have really let GK110 stretch it's legs.
---
i7 3930k @ 4.5Ghz | H220 | asrock x79 extreme 9 | 16GB 1600mhz ram | SLI GTX 780 | Samsung 830 256GB SSD | 8TB HDDs | EVGA Supernova 1300 G2 | Fractal design R4