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

got a ASUS R9 290X

#221ShebeskiiPosted 12/18/2013 3:06:12 PM(edited)
Snuckie7 posted...
Shebeskii posted...
Except AMD themselves deny the existence of the BIOS, despite the obvious discrepancies. Are you going to see what it's front of you, or not? Why would they deny it?

That's a good question, it could be anything from dishonesty to incompetence (I'm sure you could back either). So since we don't know, it's inconclusive.

Considering most people consider Uber mode as part of the package, and that a superior cooler could have provided that Uber mode with better acoustic performance, and considering some outlets still put Quiet mode as well beyond other cards (6db with a grating quality is not small), then the argument isn't as simple as quiet mode vs. X. It's 290X with all features provided, including overclocking and tweaking vs. X.

Considering all uber mode does is add noise most of the time, there's a reason why quiet mode is the default "stock" configuration.


I guess you could argue the 780 Ti has a 533mm^2 die vs. the 438mm^2 die of the 290X, which would allow for increased surface dissipation, but considering nearly 1 Billion less transistors found on the 290X, it's hard to make a convincing argument.

The Titan and 780 have 2.5 billion more transistors than the 7970 GHz, yet consume less power than the 7970 GHz. I guess there's no such thing as "efficiency".


Well, in the case of the Titan and 780, they have more transistors than the 290X, but perform worse a lot of the time without a clock boost.

Efficiency with respect to power consumption, yeah, but with respect to an end goal, such as performance? I don't know.

And I forgot to mention:

At least you concede a possibility of either dishonesty or incompetence. The same either/or was hypothesized with respect to frame pacing and crossfire.

We've also not addressed the fact that selling a 600 dollar card that needs a BIOS flash to probably perform like the press rendition is a little... disconcerting, no?
---
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens
#222Snuckie7Posted 12/18/2013 3:09:49 PM(edited)
Shebeskii posted...
Well, in the case of the Titan and 780, they have more transistors than the 290X, but perform worse a lot of the time without a clock boost.

Because the 290X boosts too?

Efficiency with respect to power consumption, yeah, but with respect to an end goal, such as performance? I don't know.

With respect to power consumption, and therefore heat. Which is what is related to what we were discussing: how easy it is to cool the GPU die.

Shebeskii posted...
We've also not addressed the fact that selling a 600 dollar card that needs a BIOS flash to probably perform like the press rendition is a little... disconcerting, no?

Because we really don't know what's going on. What if an earlier build of the BIOS was mistakenly flashed onto the initial batches of cards? What if the press cards received a new BIOS that has yet to be introduced as an official update?

We really have no idea what's happening, which is why I called it inconclusive.
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | - | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W
#223ShebeskiiPosted 12/18/2013 3:17:33 PM(edited)
Snuckie7 posted...
Shebeskii posted...
Well, in the case of the Titan and 780, they have more transistors than the 290X, but perform worse a lot of the time without a clock boost.

Because the 290X boosts too?

Efficiency with respect to power consumption, yeah, but with respect to an end goal, such as performance? I don't know.

With respect to power consumption, and therefore heat. Which is what is related to what we were discussing: how easy it is to cool the GPU die.


Without testing identical coolers it's hard to make any claims. We can just infer based on recorded information.

I meant clock boost as in overclocking, which takes away a lot of their power consumption advantage.

http://www.techspot.com/review/738-gigabyte-geforce-gtx-780-ti-ghz/page10.html

Btw, despite the 780 having very high power consumption, notice the operating temperatures:

http://www.techspot.com/review/738-gigabyte-geforce-gtx-780-ti-ghz/page10.html

Even though the 290X still has a slight lead over all, differences in architecture don't seem to make up for the huge load temp differences.

The 290 series cards are lagging unreasonably.
---
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens
#224Snuckie7Posted 12/18/2013 3:17:24 PM
Shebeskii posted...
Btw, despite the 780 having very high power consumption, notice the operating temperatures:

http://www.techspot.com/review/738-gigabyte-geforce-gtx-780-ti-ghz/page10.html

Even though the 290X still has a slight lead over all, differences in architecture don't seem to make up for the huge load temp differences.

The 290 series cards are lagging unreasonably.


Because GK110 is a more efficient architecture that is easier to cool in general.
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | - | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W
#225ShebeskiiPosted 12/18/2013 3:23:12 PM
Snuckie7 posted...
Shebeskii posted...
Btw, despite the 780 having very high power consumption, notice the operating temperatures:

http://www.techspot.com/review/738-gigabyte-geforce-gtx-780-ti-ghz/page10.html

Even though the 290X still has a slight lead over all, differences in architecture don't seem to make up for the huge load temp differences.

The 290 series cards are lagging unreasonably.


Because GK110 is a more efficient architecture that is easier to cool in general.


We don't know that until Gigabyte, MSi or ASUS put on their trademark cooling solutions.

Until then, it's conjecture and some faith in the stock cooler.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/r9-290-accelero-xtreme-290,3671-4.html

Which seems completely unfounded.

Doesn't seem particularly hard to bring down into the 60s, let alone 80s.

As far as I can tell, there's nothing about the 290X cooler that is good. The cooler is sub par to cut costs and increase margins.
---
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens
#226Sergei_DukanovPosted 12/18/2013 3:25:12 PM
http://imgur.com/fEG5S6g

Good thing I got a spare H60 and ordered a nzxt kraken G10.... AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHA
---
FX8350 oc'ed 4.8ghz| Kraken X60| ASRock 990fx Extreme9| 16 gigs ripjaws ddr3| HIS 7870| Evo 240GB ssd| 1TB cuda'| antec 750W| NZXT Phantom
#227Snuckie7Posted 12/18/2013 3:32:27 PM
Shebeskii posted...
Snuckie7 posted...
Because GK110 is a more efficient architecture that is easier to cool in general.


We don't know that until Gigabyte, MSi or ASUS put on their trademark cooling solutions.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_geforce_gtx_780_directcu_ii_review,8.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_radeon_r9_290x_directcuii_oc_review,10.html

GTX 780: 66C
R9 290X: 77C
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | - | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W
#228MannerHatcheryPosted 12/19/2013 6:12:33 AM(edited)
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/ASUS-Radeon-R9-290X-DirectCU-II-Graphics-Card-Review/Overclocking-and-Conclus

"Here in performance mode, you'll notice that the AMD Catalyst Control Center doesn't list a target GPU temperature and also defaults to having the maximum fan speed at 50%. Don't be scared though! These fans are MUCH more quiet than the reference cards."

"What does this mean? The custom cooled R9 290X DirectCU II from ASUS is the first R9 290X we have seen to consistently run at its rated frequency and as a result it will be among the fastest cards we have ever tested!"

"As it turns out, the DirectCU II cooler, in performance mode, is significantly more quiet than the reference cooler in quiet mode. Think about that for just a second. Okay, let's move on."

"The custom built ASUS R9 290X is 6 full dbA lower in our noise testing than the reference R9 290X and is even able to come in under the sound levels of the GTX 780 Ti. It's still louder than the original GTX 780 that runs at a lower fan speed, but it's pretty close."



Pricing and Availability

Before we go any further, yes we know there are some issues with R9 290X availability. It's out of stock or over priced everywhere you look but I am hopefully that will change in the coming weeks. I think that part of the hold up has been AMD's desire to see custom designs rather than reference designs populate physical and virtual store shelves. But, if we look at the expected MSRP of the competitors, here is where we stand:

ASUS R9 290X DirectCU II 4GB - $569 (mid-January)
AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB - $549 (Newegg.com)


It is only $20 more than the reference cooled launch version of the R9 290X and yet it performs and behaves in a much more sane and expected manner.

If you were thinking of picking up an R9 290X I would highly recommend you wait for custom designs like the one ASUS has put on display here today. It totally changes the game.


Well, you don't say! >_>

Alright sorry I'm gone now
#229Killah PriestPosted 12/19/2013 5:45:54 AM
Mid Jan huh, well if amazon.com gets them in stock by then I can just return the normal 290x and get the DC2. Holiday return window is until Jan 31st.
---
Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and you weep alone.
The armory of god is guarding me but all you can see is holographic artistry.