AMD Radeon R9 300 Series MegaThread: FAQ and Resources

[de5_Roy]

<post-fail>
expect on-topic text later.😛

edit:
AMD Radeon R9 Fury X on triple 4K displays (11,520x2160)
http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/93/amd-radeon-r9-fury-triple-4k-displays-11-520x2160/index.html
hope i got it right this time... *fingers crossed*

 

[renz496]

Neither Nvidia Maxwell nor AMD's new GPU's are that groundbreaking... The HBM is still in its early stage. As you can see from most benchmarks that doesn't help Fury X that much. Its probably because Fury X as a GPU isn't powerful enough yet to really see that much benefit from HBM. I also think that is why Nvidia sticked with GDDR5 - they knew at this point GPU's are not powerful enough yet to take advantage of HBM. Tbh I've not seen anything interesting from GPU front for a good long while.

that's not the only reason. HBM gen one are limited to 4GB only. it might be fine with gaming card but it is not with pro card like Quadro and tesla.

 

[Jonny HS]

Fury X truly overclocked?
http://wccftech.com/unlock-memory-overclocking-amd-r9-fury/

 

[de5_Roy]

Hands On With The AMD Radeon R9 Fury X, R9 Fury X2 & R9 Nano
http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=892
AMD's Frame Rate Target Control tested with considerable power savings
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/46303/amds-frame-rate-target-control-tested-considerable-power-savings/index.html

edit:
AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Power And Pump Analysis
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-power-pump-efficiency,4215.html

 

[zared619]

Does anyone know of any reviews of for the Asus, Gigabyte, or MSi version of the 390. They are the only versions that will fit my mid tower, so I'd like to see some temperatures that they are getting. It's the main reason why I didn't get a 290 or 290x. My room can get unfortunately hot sometimes, so a cooler card is important for me.

Update: I did find a review for the MSi version.
http://www.bjorn3d.com/2015/06/msi-r9-390-gaming-8g-amd-300-series-with-a-custom-kick-from-msi/

I'd still like to be able to compare all 3 though so any links to anything else would be awesome.

 

[Bossyfins]

Does anyone know of any reviews of for the Asus, Gigabyte, or MSi version of the 390. They are the only versions that will fit my mid tower, so I'd like to see some temperatures that they are getting. It's the main reason why I didn't get a 290 or 290x. My room can get unfortunately hot sometimes, so a cooler card is important for me.

Update: I did find a review for the MSi version.
http://www.bjorn3d.com/2015/06/msi-r9-390-gaming-8g-amd-300-series-with-a-custom-kick-from-msi/

I'd still like to be able to compare all 3 though so any links to anything else would be awesome.

Why consider a 390 when a 290 is a rebrand for the 390. So same thermal performance really. Depends on the cooler.

 

[zared619]

Why consider a 390 when a 290 is a rebrand for the 390. So same thermal performance really. Depends on the cooler.

Just because the GPU hasn't changed doesn't mean that the cooling solutions haven't evolved.

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/msi_r9_290_gaming_review/3
http://www.bjorn3d.com/2015/06/msi-r9-390-gaming-8g-amd-300-series-with-a-custom-kick-from-msi/4/

The 290 ran at 84 degrees C, while the 390 ran at 72. That's about 14% cooler, so a pretty significant reduction.
Like you said, it depends on the cooler and that's why I'd like to see some reviews of the new cards with updated cooling solutions.

 

[Bossyfins]

Thought you were talking about stock coolers. I'd aim for a windforce and maybe Asus's DCU3 if it comes out for amd cards

 

[-Fran-]

Add to the list Sapphire's Vapor X or Trixx cards as well.

My GF has a Dual-X 7970Ghz and I have a Vapor-X; I can't really tell the difference, but I can say they haven't failed or gotten too hot evah.

Cheers!

 

[zared619]

Add to the list Sapphire's Vapor X or Trixx cards as well.

My GF has a Dual-X 7970Ghz and I have a Vapor-X; I can't really tell the difference, but I can say they haven't failed or gotten too hot evah.

Cheers!

I'd love to get a Sapphire 390, but the coolers on them are too large to fit into my case. From everything that I've read, Sapphire has had the best coolers on the r9's thus far.

 

[-Fran-]

Add to the list Sapphire's Vapor X or Trixx cards as well.

My GF has a Dual-X 7970Ghz and I have a Vapor-X; I can't really tell the difference, but I can say they haven't failed or gotten too hot evah.

Cheers!

I'd love to get a Sapphire 390, but the coolers on them are too large to fit into my case. From everything that I've read, Sapphire has had the best coolers on the r9's thus far.

Ah, right. The cooler design for the 290X and 390 changed. I didn't notice, sorry.

And what about an aftermarket one with the cheapest 290X?

Cheers!

 

[zared619]

Add to the list Sapphire's Vapor X or Trixx cards as well.

My GF has a Dual-X 7970Ghz and I have a Vapor-X; I can't really tell the difference, but I can say they haven't failed or gotten too hot evah.

Cheers!

I'd love to get a Sapphire 390, but the coolers on them are too large to fit into my case. From everything that I've read, Sapphire has had the best coolers on the r9's thus far.

Ah, right. The cooler design for the 290X and 390 changed. I didn't notice, sorry.

And what about an aftermarket one with the cheapest 290X?

Cheers!

I don't think it's worth the trouble when Asus, Gigabyte, and MSi all make cards that will fit most mid-atx cases.

 

[de5_Roy]

Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Pictured, Specs Confirmed
http://www.techpowerup.com/214113/sapphire-radeon-r9-fury-pictured-specs-confirmed.html
EK Radeon R9 Fury X Water Blocks Now Available
http://www.techpowerup.com/214114/ek-radeon-r9-fury-x-water-blocks-now-available.html
AMD Outs Official Statement On R9 Fury X Pump Noise
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-furyx-pump-noise-statement,29521.html

 

[grilledcheez]

I would like to get the MSI R9 390X, for almost comparable benchmarks to the GTX 980 at $100 less (CDN), but I keep reading horror stories about the drivers... apparently you need to make sure you download 15.15 from the site as the ones that come on the disks are older ones that don't work so well. Also, apparently it's only for like 64-bit win 7/8. Which I have 64-bit win 7 installed, and could easily download 15.15, but some ppl are still reporting screens going black while gaming and other crashes... however, haven't been able to confirm drivers used in most of those cases. Really wish AMD would release a new driver update that fixes all these issues... I'm hesitant about purchasing.

Think I'll wait for new drivers, hopefully around the release of Fury on July 14th. :/

 

[Bossyfins]

Dat fury cooler overhang doh. They should have put a backplate to cover it atleast.

 

[grilledcheez]

Dat fury cooler overhang doh. They should have put a backplate to cover it atleast.

Could be just the sapphire card though? Maybe MSI and ASUS won't be as gnarly?

 

[Bossyfins]

Asus DCuIII cooler might fit the Fury... Long over hang. But maybe MSI's will be a bit toned down.

 

[Genzo]

From my perspective. The Fury X is kinda lacking for me. I was expecting that it will outperform the 980 Ti and maybe Titan X but they released a new tech for consumers. "HBM" is new and i think amd didnt fully optimize the card before the release. I rather wait a good card that can beat out Nvidia's 980 Ti.

I heard some people say the drivers aren't updated and the card isnt that overclockable. I like the new HBM tech but it didnt meet my expectations.

They can still dominate the market if

*optimize the card and make it overclockable
*better drivers
*Let the Manufacturers redesign it (Like the HDMI 2.0 Thing)

Well, read the last post from de5_Roy; in particular the first link. They have shown the OC debacle saying the Fury X has no OC room is not because of the actual card not having the ability to OC, but the tools to achieve a decent OC are not ready yet for the Fury X.

And yes, AMD did not fully optimize drivers for the Fury X debut, but they still have 3 more Fiji family member in the works: Fury (non-X), Fury Nano and Fury X2 (the dual GPU card). When they arrive, the generalized consensus is that drivers will be better (or at least, a tad more polished). In AMD's defense, that has been the tune since like forever. The improve gradually over time with each driver release, even surpassing nVidia in a lot of games where they originally didn't were on par at times.

And in regards to the HDMI 2.0 thing. The one that will suffer the most for that will be the Fury Nano I would say. That card, from what I have been reading everywhere, will be the HTPC king if it can deliver on the performance / watt package for small enclosures and small PSUs. The other cards, not so much. Plus, DP 1.2 adapters to HDMI 2.0 should be coming soon-ish. There are already DP 1.2 to HDMI 1.4 everywhere, but give the Chinese a few more weeks, haha.

So, all in all, not saying the Fury X is the holy grail, but don't dismiss it so early in the game. Give it until AMD releases all the Fiji line up. In any case, if you want to get a Fury X or a 980ti, either one will make you happy. Or at least, that's the message I've gotten from all the reviews and the data they have put forward.

Cheers!

Well se e, I am building my pc maybe around end of july or august. I am still waiting for the nano. Planning a mATX rig with sweet components. Maybe i should wait for the new intel skylake. Cant decide about when to build. Soo many sweet releases are coming :lol:

 

[de5_Roy]

AMD Launches Catalyst 15.7 With Windows 10 Support
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-catalyst-157-released,29543.html

 

[Cazalan]

Dat fury cooler overhang doh. They should have put a backplate to cover it atleast.

Cooling wise you get better airflow with the open grill.

 

[wh3resmycar]

AMD Launches Catalyst 15.7 With Windows 10 Support
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-catalyst-157-released,29543.html

well quite a good release although my VSR is stuck at 1440p (r7 260x). i was able to run 4k with my gtx970 with the same monitor with DSR. frame target is quite a good addition too.

still don't understand why AMD cannot do DYNAMIC VSYNC in their drivers.

 

[renz496]

you mean adaptive v-sync?

 

[wh3resmycar]

^ yes.

 

[-Fran-]

Well, I also like Adaptive VSync and I use it through RadeonPro with my 7970, but once FreeSync and GSync catch up with market, then it will be redundant to have it. It's like MANTLE's life. You develop it until a better solution comes and then you don't continue to develop for it.

I guess nVidia is on the same boat, but they did get it done before AMD did; well, officially. Like I said, RadeonPro enables it for most AMD cards prior to the Rx 2xx series.

Cheers!

 

[grilledcheez]

I can't stop waiting for Tuesday... want to see Fury benchmarks!!