AMD Radeon R9 300 Series MegaThread: FAQ and Resources

Page 22 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Any ideas as to when the 380x is due to come out. I've seen dates ranging as far as Q2 this year (so by the end of June) to Q1 2016. I'm trying to decide between a 290 or a 380x. I'm hoping that the 380x will have similar performance to a 290 in 1080p, just with less power draw. Any thoughts?
 


No. The 380X is not a rebranded 7970. It's a R9 285 rebranded. Or at least, that's what I remember reading.

Cheers!
 

Not likely. If the pattern holds true, it's looking like the 380x will be somewhere between a 280x and a 290, but probably closer to the 280x.

perfrel_1920.gif

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_980_Ti_SC_Plus/30.html
 


The inter-poser tidbit got me a little scared... That means I won't be able to re-paste it with the same confidence level as I do now. I really hope youtube will come to the rescue here. Or even Toms, haha.

In regards to the Radeon 300 series rebrands, read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Radeon_Rx_300_series

I think Wikipedia has all of the cards. And there are no 370X nor 380X, so Pitcarin and Tonga are for 370 and 380 respectively.

Cheers!
 
I have been thinking about that as well on how HBM going to complicate if we want to reapply thermal paste. Also it will be interesting to see non reference solution on fury x. Does it possible to use regular air cooler that used by many gpu right now on Fury? Reading about architecture Fury architecture preview at tech report it seems AMD want to keep the core temperature as low as possible when fully loaded to minimize power leakage.
 
Well, it's a 275W card, so they should, yes.

That implies the custom HSFs won't have to change that much, I guess. Still, the holes seem to be different, so they will still have to change them and you won't be able to use them "out of the box" with it. Plus, manually changing one, after the inter-poser tidbit... I don't know... Haha.

Cheers!
 
I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as a reference 390 or 390x. Correct me if I'm wrong. They had to bump up the voltages in order to get a sustained clock speed higher than the 290x, which was already problematic in its reference form. A 390x with a reference cooler would be a no-go then.

HardOCP is showing that the performance increase from the 290x to 390x is merely a function of the higher clock speeds.

"This proves it, at the same clocks the AMD Radeon R9 390X performs exactly the same as the AMD Radeon R9 290X."
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/18/msi_r9_390x_gaming_8g_video_card_review/9#.VYloupVRGUk
 


From what I read (semiaccurate and other places), the mature 28nm process of the 390X allowed them to go higher, reaching the thermal limit without throttling all the time as the 290X did at launch time. Now, I think AMD did learn their lesson back then, so they did not offer a "reference" card this time and let OEMs cool it as they pleased. Since we already "knew" how the original 290X behaved, I'd say it's not such a bad thing.

Cheers!
 
So this is the first time monitor technology is leagues ahead of the component gpu needed to actually view a game on that monitor. Really sad. With how old the 290x is already and the idea that a few years later AMD drops a rebrand of the same card, we gamers are in for a world of hurt in in 2017 or so and onward. The tech will have to leap forward in gpu's to an incredible degree by then to start to level off and be able to perform well on 4k displays. Graphics in 2+ years are going to be more intense than they are now, and we still wont have any 60+fps 4k solutions that are humanely priced.

Very sad future for us, IMO. I mean, look what AMD just did with the new Batman game. They read all of this stuff we post, they ignored the witcher 3 problems and spent time on the Batman game with a new update. I mean...isn't that the red flag for how things are going to be for us? The Batman devs didn't care to even test AMD cards with their game, AMD didn't care enough to ask for a demo to test performance and bugs out, neither side gave a crap.
 
@ Sinty
That's just not the case at all. I won't get into the placebo of 4k on small screen sizes.
2 years ago a Titan cost $1k and now performs at roughly the equivalent of a 970.
In 2017 a Titan X performance will be mainstream and the ultra high end will be something like SLI Titan X performance which is perfectly capable of 4k play.
 
make a quick check and 370 indeed based on 265. i thought that AMD made improvement to 270 hence 370 only needing 1 6 pin instead of 2 like 270. looks like i was wrong. and 265 can be had for much cheaper than 370. R 300 really is a mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom