Sapphire Nitro R9 390 8G D5 Review

[turkey3_scratch]

Yes, gtx970. And I see it there too now. Above 1080p, 390 is faster. I ignore those resolutions since they make no sense and are unplayable with the current tech.

Still at 1080p, 970 is faster on TPU while slower on THG.

Totally, not true, I run 1440p with an R9 390. It's perfectly playable on almost max settings with a stable 60FPS. I used to run a 750Ti on 1440p, which was also perfectly playable. I simply had to lower settings (something many people are scared to do for some reason).

 

[eodeo]

I see. At reasonable graphic details with 40+fps I would say that games are playable. I was talking about 4k displays. They make no sense below 80" and are unplayable.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I think the word "unplayable" is totally taken out of context. If you play a game on lowest settings with even 40FPS, that game is playable. You can play it, so it's playable.

Playable

1. capable of or suitable for being played.

 

[eodeo]

Hah
That's not a reasonable meaning in our PC master race, high end context.

Don't get me wrong. I will eventually move to 4k even on smaller displays like my current 42". I will wait until tech caches up tho.

Do you remember the craze of triple panel being driven by a single gtx 680? Sure, it could do it, but I wouldn't advise it even today.

 

[FormatC]

Yes, gtx970. And I see it there too now. Above 1080p, 390 is faster. I ignore those resolutions since they make no sense and are unplayable with the current tech.
Still at 1080p, 970 is faster on TPU while slower on THG.

I see it like TPU, the 390 is slower than a 970 custom, especially in FHD and mostly also in QHD.
http://www.tomshardware.de/sapphire-r9-390-nitro-radeon-grafikkarte-gpu,testberichte-241919-3.html

To understand me right - the 290/390 non X, might be a good card for the price, but this interpretation from Sapphire is really far away from Fiji's sweet spot. Quiet, yes and no. But too hot in a closed case. Up to 5 degrees more than open bench table are mentionable and hearable. The power consumption is on the same level as an oc'ed MSI GTX 980 Ti Lightning @1,5 GHz.

 

[eodeo]

I see it like TPU, the 390 is slower than a 970 custom, especially in FHD and mostly also in QHD.
http://www.tomshardware.de/sapphire-r9-390-nitro-radeon-grafikkarte-gpu,testberichte-241919-3.html

Thanks for the link!

 

[FormatC]

To see Fiji cards nearer to their sweet spot and to get a more positive conclusion you must take a look at the FirePro W9100 and W8100. I tested it after launch and it was a good solution for this time. More OC means always higher voltages and as follow even higher temps and more leakage. Like the Quadro M6000 also AMDs professional cards are clocked closer to the sweet spot. The 300er series was launched as pure rebrand with even higher clocks - only the bigger memory is a real advantage. It also makes no sense to reduce the power limit by driver, this makes the min fps horrible.

A R9 390 with the same telemetry as the Nano is a dream for end-users, but nothing for AMDs current marketing. Too bad

Thanks for the link!

I tested this year over 90 cards and can't understand the reason why each card is clocked to hell. This kind of competition is really stupid. More cubic capacity is always better than more rotations per minute. This is nothing new

 

[MotherBrain]

Man, these things could be really really good in xfire...

 

[wtfxxxgp]

How about an updated hierarchy chart?

I think it was unfair to down-vote this comment, even if it was "sarcastic". Toms, it is long-overdue. It is supposed to be a monthly event but the last update was June?

 

[MrVic87]

Once you factor in DX12 gaming, which we're starting to see with the Ashes of the Singularity as well as Fable Legends benchmarks, you notice that the R9 390 competes with the GTX 980 regardless of the resolution.

These are in two upcoming titles whose pipeline occurs less than 20% of the time in the compute queue. DX12 games, on the horizon, are even more demanding in terms of compute. Deus Ex: Mankind divided, is a good example of a game which will make good use of Asynchronous Compute. There's the new Tomb Raider, the new Hitman as well as the new Mirror's Edge. Each one of these titles will perform better on the R9 390 than a GTX 970 or GTX 980.

I honestly don't see a reason to purchase a GTX 970 at this point in time. Sure, naysayers will attempt to demand that we 'wait' for these titles but the problem is that these folks are not knowledgeable in terms of the GPU architectures at play. They cannot deduce future performance based on developer talks on the topics at hand.

I'm not Nostradamus, I make logical deductions based on knowledge of the aforementioned Maxwell 2 and GCN 1.1 290/390 series GPU architectures.

Feel free to save this post and return to it once the titles, mentioned in this post, are released. You will be happy to see this post to be 100% accurate

It's posts like these are why I truly appreciate coming here for valuable information. Thanks sir!

 

[MrVic87]

With so much concern on the heat output or power consumption the 390 draws, I can't even fathom trying to use Crossfire for it. I'm sure with proper cooling and improved drivers, they will stand the test of time in gaming.

 

[Warsaw]

With everyone talking about the power consumption and "cooling", most people, unless they have a very limited PSU or case (in which I don't think you should be getting these kind of cards to begin with) would be negligible to an overall outlook. In gaming most people are concerned with FPS and performance, bar none. Yes, there are other factors to look at such as noise, temp and power consumption but let's not forget these are considered after the fact of performance. I don't care what brand you root for, as I've had both companies myself. Both sides if they are stuck to a particular brand will bring up the opportunities of the other side. It's always been this way, both have had problems with these secondary benefits or issues with various releases.

I am and have currently been on the AMD ticket for a little while now due to Eyefinity and the open standards they like to do. Not saying I won't purchase an Nvidia card ever again but this is what I chose to invest in. Even with my current hardware I still am eager to always see what both produce in terms of hardware. I wasn't that fond of the performance of what Fury and Fury X came out to be as I had hoped for better but this card really sticks out to me on it's performance and price. That's the main thing that matters to me, and should for most. Let's not forget each company pushes each other to do better and we benefit when there are sweet spots with tech and price, and I think this is it for the particular moment.

 

[deadsmiley]

Got myself an MSI 390 to replace my evga 660ti 3gb. Holy poo what an upgrade !

Was running stupidly hot at 84c for a week but then noticed that was due to the game, Mech warrior online using dx 11 which has known issues on a lot of cards, not just AMD.

More than happy with it and happily clocks to 1720 core with an 83% asic

Yep. I had the same issue with my Sager notebook and the GTX 880M. I ended up capping the fps at 60 so it wouldn't sit at the main menu while driving the graphics card at full load. I wonder if that ever got fixed?

Now I play MWO with an Alienware M18x R2 with GTX 680M SLI. It's faster and smoother than the single GTX 880M and the 18.4" display is teh sexy.

 

[vertexx]

I see it like TPU, the 390 is slower than a 970 custom, especially in FHD and mostly also in QHD.
http://www.tomshardware.de/sapphire-r9-390-nitro-radeon-grafikkarte-gpu,testberichte-241919-3.html

To understand me right - the 290/390 non X, might be a good card for the price, but this interpretation from Sapphire is really far away from Fiji's sweet spot. Quiet, yes and no. But too hot in a closed case. Up to 5 degrees more than open bench table are mentionable and hearable. The power consumption is on the same level as an oc'ed MSI GTX 980 Ti Lightning @1,5 GHz.

That's interesting - two TH reviews of the same card with quite different conclusions!

 

[VaporX]

Hum, what's the best silent option of the two cards?
I mean if you're willing to sacrifice a few FPS and turn down the settings and max fps (in other words stick to 60 Hz or 75 Hz monitors) how much noise does each of these make while gaming in 1080p and 1440p?
How much does that change by allowing the card to run hotter?
The fury has more heat pipes, how much of an impact does that have to the noise?
What is the highest inaudible setting of different games for the different cards in this article?
At what point does the fans start spinning?
Would it be possible to get graphs with the noise level on the y axis and time on the x axis in different games?

Just a few questions that pops up in my head while reading this article. ;-)

Also, what is the highest performance pr dB AMD card that you've tested so far in current generation of games?

The quietest I know of so far is the Asus Strix 390x. But this does undercut it in price a lot.

The Sapphire Nitro series of cards has consistently proven of be quieter than any of the competition.

 

[FormatC]

That's interesting - two TH reviews of the same card with quite different conclusions!

The answer is really simple:

This review (copied from settings page):
GeForce GTX 980 Ti: Nvidia 352.90 Beta Driver
All GeForce Cards in Grand Theft Auto V and The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt: Nvidia 352.90 Beta Driver
GeForce GTX Titan X, 980, and 780 Ti in all other games: Nvidia 347.25 Beta Driver
Radeon R9 290 X: AMD Catalyst 15.5 Beta
Radeon R9 Fury X and Fury: AMD Catalyst 15.15

My review:
AMD: Catalyst 15.20.1061B3
Nvidia: ForceWare 355.65 (GTX 950 only) / 355.60 (all others)

Other drivers Especially the GTX 970 got a light increase from driver to driver (improved memory management?). Not dramatically, but mentionable. And additionally I'm using another card as reference (Gigabyte). I spent two days only for benchmarking all cards in all games and resolutions on two similar systems (each benchmark runs min. three times to get plausible results). Ok, this costs a lot of time and man power, but it is always a question how to organize the day (and of honor). I'm the perfect Multi-Tasker

Different conclusion? May be we have a different point of view. Especially in Europe we take care about noise and efficiency, the typical Asian like noise and the battle for the last possible fps. The global market is too big and different to satisfy all This is really not so easy and each reviewer must decide, which part is more important for him and his readers. Cooling, noise, power consumption, gaming performance, technical solutions like VR / Firmware, workmanship, personal impressions...

I have no emotional bindings to any product, but nearly 300 VGA cards in my archive (consumer and workstation, four and more generations). And I must test each month a lot of VGA cards for charts or to collect raw data. This large input can help to get a better feeling with drivers and how to find the most objective conclusion. It is always important to find the right, non-biased balance. I'm more an engineer and I'm a little bit fallen in love with my equipment, but not with the tested cards. Mostly

BTW: Eight reviews for Tom's Germany per month, own labs for product development and audio plus a family with two small boys (1 and 3 years old) - this is the perfect mix to practice. Scheduling is 99% of the success

 

[Amet Monegro]

So well but when a driver comparison?
15.7.1 vs 15.9.1b DirectX11/12 games

 

[Sunny Kapoor]

I am buying a Sapphire r9 390 specificzlly for 3D rendering, so it will be running for hours. Should I go for back plate version or without back plate?

 

[eodeo]

I am buying a Sapphire r9 390 specificzlly for 3D rendering, so it will be running for hours. Should I go for back plate version or without back plate?

You do know that most rendering engines that use GPU are CUDA only? Iray, vray RT, Octane... All CUDA. Quicksilver is directX, but like all Autodesk products, it runs better on nvidia, although it does work on AMD as well.

With all that out of the way, back plate is pure aesthetics. It does nothing but help stabilize the plastic PCB... a bit. It does not help with cooling at all, as it is raised above all the chips below. If something, it traps heat more than the same GPU without a back plate. It's not enough to want to not get a back plate, but it's surely not helping with cooling.

 

[Sunny Kapoor]

I am buying a Sapphire r9 390 specificzlly for 3D rendering, so it will be running for hours. Should I go for back plate version or without back plate?

You do know that most rendering engines that use GPU are CUDA only? Iray, vray RT, Octane... All CUDA. Quicksilver is directX, but like all Autodesk products, it runs better on nvidia, although it does work on AMD as well.

With all that out of the way, back plate is pure aesthetics. It does nothing but help stabilize the plastic PCB... a bit. It does not help with cooling at all, as it is raised above all the chips below. If something, it traps heat more than the same GPU without a back plate. It's not enough to want to not get a back plate, but it's surely not helping with cooling.

Going to use it for Blender as it now supports opencl, with limitations but that 8 GB really helps.

I read another thread on this site where it says this

"Yes you can remove the backplate but it is there to help with cooling AND it also helps the stress because of the enormous heatsink to keep the card from flexing overtime in horizontal positioning in a case. Also the backplate has thermal pads underneath which help cool the VRMs "

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2833302/sapphire-390-nitro-remove-backplate.html

 

[Sunny Kapoor]

Also ALPHACOOL has started building water blocks ( semi) for these GPUs, so the back plates might come in handy later.

 

[brandonjclark]

4.6GHZ 4790k and 16GB of ram yet Tom's articles crash my browser. Why must the entire article be loaded onto one giant page. You any idea how painful that is?

3.5GHz FX-8120 and 8GB of ram, often with +20 tabs open in Chrome, no issues whatsoever with Tom's. Your PC must be misconfigured.

Easy there buddy. Them are fighting words.

 

[eodeo]

Going to use it for Blender as it now supports opencl, with limitations but that 8 GB really helps.

Sure the 8gb is nice, but from what little I understand OpenCL is really bad. You may be limited to 4gb of vram with 970, but it will be much faster and more stable via CUDA.

I don't know how complex animations are you doing, but 4gb is surprisingly a lot. You may be better served by going CUDA now, and switching to AMD 590 down the line when openCL gets better support. Look into how much ram you really need.

I use 3ds Max, and it's Quicksilver rendering engine, since it is the only GPU rendering engine I find worthwhile- and while rendering a 70m poly animated scene with multiple characters, it used a bit less than 2gb of vram. Just something to keep in mind.

 

[Guest]

@ Sunny - This thread has scores from opencl blender and cuda -
http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?375243-The-new-Cycles-GPU-OpenCL-Benchmark
Benefits of backplate -
1. Helps prevent the card sagging/twisting
2. Helps a little towards keeping the card cooler

 

[Sunny Kapoor]

Going to use it for Blender as it now supports opencl, with limitations but that 8 GB really helps.

Sure the 8gb is nice, but from what little I understand OpenCL is really bad. You may be limited to 4gb of vram with 970, but it will be much faster and more stable via CUDA.

I don't know how complex animations are you doing, but 4gb is surprisingly a lot. You may be better served by going CUDA now, and switching to AMD 590 down the line when openCL gets better support. Look into how much ram you really need.

I use 3ds Max, and it's Quicksilver rendering engine, since it is the only GPU rendering engine I find worthwhile- and while rendering a 70m poly animated scene with multiple characters, it used a bit less than 2gb of vram. Just something to keep in mind.

Rendering a scene right now with over 4. 5GB system ram. gtx 970 HAS ONLY 3.5 GB + EXTRA 0.5 gb. So if I buy that going to use only 3.5 GB. I was going for GTX 980 ti, but it is damn expensive and gives only 6 GB.

Having a discussion here http://community.cgcookie.com/t/graphics-card-advice-for-blender/1656/540

Please chip in.