Radeon 290x will be a lot better heat-wise when vendors start adding third-party heatsinks to the equation. Remember the Geforce 480?
Yep. But it won´t be 550$ then. It will be more expensive.
Third-party heatsinks usually add $10-$20 to the cost of the card. But I would expect Radeon 290x to actually get a little cheaper now, because of the 780ti announcement.
I don´t think some 20$ heat sinks will fix 90 C temperature issues of x290. Look more for Liquid Sinking models.
Ron posted a link yesterday were they took an cooler from an non-reference 280x and stuck it on a 290x and were getting max temps of around 78 degrees, which is obviously much better than the normal 95. So liquid cooling isn't a must.
As for the 780ti, great card but for 200 more you could get 2 780's, so...
I wouldn't buy a reference flagship AMD GPU card e.g. my 7970 at 1Ghz has HIS ICEQ X2 cooler on it.
That's pretty good performance there. It seems to handle 4K gaming very well. 4K monitors will definitely be worth the investment as even "first generation" 4K gpus can run modern games on ultra with 30+ fps.
Still wondering how powerful of a PC you'll need to run Crysis 3 @ Ultra, 8 X AA, Dx11, 3 * 4K monitor displays and get 60 fps. I played Crysis 3 on a 3-way GTX Titan system and even a single 2560x1600p screen made them struggle when I turned every setting to its highest. I wonder what 4 way Radeon R9x can do though
With 4 290x at fan speed 100% you can literally sucked out your motherboard!
@airshocker: Other guys will definitely put some of this stuff on it for later non reference cards. I'm not too worried about that issue. Just saying that installing your own cooler is something you can do.
I do wish that amd would put some of this kind of stuff into their reference... They love being the budget guys though.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
Your assumption has no basis.
You have yet to prove otherwise.
Why do I have to prove my POV when it's you who started some unsupported claim?
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
One of the 1st R9 290X factory overclock with 1030 Mhz and end user's 1125Mhz
95MHz that requires the use of a 3rd party cooler. Again, proving my point that the 290X is not a good clocker. Its loud and hot, plus when you take into account that the 780 Ti completely smashes it once that is overclocked using the stock cooler no less.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
One of the 1st R9 290X factory overclock with 1030 Mhz and end user's 1125Mhz
95MHz that requires the use of a 3rd party cooler. Again, proving my point that the 290X is not a good clocker. Its loud and hot, plus when you take into account that the 780 Ti completely smashes it once that is overclocked using the stock cooler no less.
Your "I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers" assumption is wrong.
The above PowerColor R9-290X OC is not using PowerColor's VORTEX II coolers on it i.e. it still uses AMD's reference cooler. VORTEX II similar to HIS ICEQ X2 i.e. large double fan setup.
Again, AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
I expected $700 card with large 551mm^2 chip size would beat $549 card with 438 mm^2 chip size.
I wouldn't purchase a reference cooled AMD flagship GPUs e.g. my 7970 at 1Ghz uses HIS ICEQ X2. My next flagship AMD GPU card would be another non-reference cooled solution.
PS; I don't use credit cards for my personal PC purchases i.e. only cash from my rental income.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
One of the 1st R9 290X factory overclock with 1030 Mhz and end user's 1125Mhz
95MHz that requires the use of a 3rd party cooler. Again, proving my point that the 290X is not a good clocker. Its loud and hot, plus when you take into account that the 780 Ti completely smashes it once that is overclocked using the stock cooler no less.
Your "290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers" assumption is wrong.
The above PowerColor R9-290X OC is not using PowerColor's VORTEX II coolers on it i.e. it still uses AMD's reference cooler. VORTEX II similar to HIS ICEQ X2 i.e. large double fan setup.
Again, AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
I wouldn't purchase a reference cooled AMD flagship GPUs e.g. my 7970 at 1Ghz uses HIS ICEQ X2. My next flagship AMD GPU card would be another non-reference cooled solution.
PS; I don't use credit cards for my personal PC purchases i.e. only cash from my rental income.
As I already stated, it doesn't matter how good the cooling can be if the chip won't accept high clocks. Its already been reported that the Hawaii core is already running at max in Uber mode out the box. Clock for clock, stock for stock, the 290X gets stomped by the 780Ti in all but 4K res.
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
One of the 1st R9 290X factory overclock with 1030 Mhz and end user's 1125Mhz
95MHz that requires the use of a 3rd party cooler. Again, proving my point that the 290X is not a good clocker. Its loud and hot, plus when you take into account that the 780 Ti completely smashes it once that is overclocked using the stock cooler no less.
Your "290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers" assumption is wrong.
The above PowerColor R9-290X OC is not using PowerColor's VORTEX II coolers on it i.e. it still uses AMD's reference cooler. VORTEX II similar to HIS ICEQ X2 i.e. large double fan setup.
Again, AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
I wouldn't purchase a reference cooled AMD flagship GPUs e.g. my 7970 at 1Ghz uses HIS ICEQ X2. My next flagship AMD GPU card would be another non-reference cooled solution.
PS; I don't use credit cards for my personal PC purchases i.e. only cash from my rental income.
As I already stated, it doesn't matter how good the cooling can be if the chip won't accept high clocks. Its already been reported that the Hawaii core is already running at max in Uber mode out the box. Clock for clock, stock for stock, the 290X gets stomped by the 780Ti in all but 4K res.
No, your "I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers" assumption is wrong.
"Uber mode" with reference coolers still has throttling that is influenced by the temperature i.e. Uber mode modifies the fan speed RPM vs temps curve, still hits 95C and still lower than 1Ghz clock speed.
HIS ICEQ X2 (AIB) cooler lowers the temps (~60C to ~70C) hence reduces throttling. We know Hawaii core can be factory overclock to 1030Mhz.
Your "stock for stock" argument is the same argument as with "original 7970 vs 680" and then AMD releases 7970 Ghz Edition.
From http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/video-card/#sort=d3&qq=1&c=148
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
One of the 1st R9 290X factory overclock with 1030 Mhz and end user's 1125Mhz
95MHz that requires the use of a 3rd party cooler. Again, proving my point that the 290X is not a good clocker. Its loud and hot, plus when you take into account that the 780 Ti completely smashes it once that is overclocked using the stock cooler no less.
Your "290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers" assumption is wrong.
The above PowerColor R9-290X OC is not using PowerColor's VORTEX II coolers on it i.e. it still uses AMD's reference cooler. VORTEX II similar to HIS ICEQ X2 i.e. large double fan setup.
Again, AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
I wouldn't purchase a reference cooled AMD flagship GPUs e.g. my 7970 at 1Ghz uses HIS ICEQ X2. My next flagship AMD GPU card would be another non-reference cooled solution.
PS; I don't use credit cards for my personal PC purchases i.e. only cash from my rental income.
As I already stated, it doesn't matter how good the cooling can be if the chip won't accept high clocks. Its already been reported that the Hawaii core is already running at max in Uber mode out the box. Clock for clock, stock for stock, the 290X gets stomped by the 780Ti in all but 4K res.
No, your "I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers" assumption is wrong.
"Uber mode" with reference coolers still has throttling that is influenced by the temperature i.e. Uber mode modifies the fan speed RPM vs temps curve, still hits 95C and still lower than 1Ghz clock speed.
HIS ICEQ X2 (AIB) cooler lowers the temps (~60C to ~70C) hence reduces throttling. We know Hawaii core can be factory overclock to 1030Mhz.
Your "stock for stock" argument is the same argument as with "original 7970 vs 680" and then AMD releases 7970 Ghz Edition.
From http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/video-card/#sort=d3&qq=1&c=148
Half of R9-280X product lines are not stock.
Ron quit being bias and believing a simple cooler change will help alot. The overclocking potential of the card is limit by its ~300w TDP.... The max power draw on is 300w from pci-e bus and pci-e 8+6 pin , Even if you can slap on a cooler rated for 300w TDP your overclocking abilities will be limited by power limits. Unless AMD or partners come out with a dual 8 pin power plugs The overclocking will be limited to 1ghz
I don't think the 290X will get any better performance wise with AIB coolers. It comes pretty much running at max. On topic, I've had my credit limit raised on my card!
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Read my post again...
Your assumption is wrong when somebody has actually used a non-reference HIS ICEQ X2 cooler with real life results.
IF NVIDIA aimed for 370 watts system power consumption load for 780 Ti, AMD could do also aim for similar system power consumption load e.g. R9 290X Ghz Edition.
Also, there's a new driver that mitigate the "variance of fan speed" issue. http://www.techpowerup.com/194081/amd-rolls-out-catalyst-13-11-beta9-2-driver.html
Still didn't read my post correctly.
Your assumption is still wrong.
AIB coolers improves the TDP headroom for additional overclocking (e.g. for Ghz Edition) and minimise throttling.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
It will. If you didn't know the 290 was throttling when using AMDs reference cooler @ 40% RPM, and it was throttling to 700MHz.
AMD updated the fan profile to 47% RPM and the card stop throttling, reaching its max core clock.
What's limiting the overclocking potential of Hawaii is the temperature. Once these cards get decent coolers they will be the best value you can get.
The guy that managed to attach an IceQ X2 cooler was getting just 63C in gaming situations.
I'd bet to say a lot of 290X were throttling when reviewed.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
It will. If you didn't know the 290 was throttling when using AMDs reference cooler @ 40% RPM, and it was throttling to 700MHz.
AMD updated the fan profile to 47% RPM and the card stop throttling, reaching its max core clock.
What's limiting the overclocking potential of Hawaii is the temperature. Once these cards get decent coolers they will be the best value you can get.
The guy that managed to attach an IceQ X2 cooler was getting just 63C in gaming situations.
I'd bet to say a lot of 290X were throttling when reviewed.
Its not just temps, The 290x is basically a 300w gpu, and the power available is 300w pci-e , 8+6 pin , overclocking will hit a physical wall with power limits Unless partners switch out the 8+6 pin to two 8pin overclocking will be limited.
Umm... no. Stop thinking that slapping a decent cooler will suddenly make the 290X a good clocker. The core on the 290X is pretty much maxed with little room for OC'ing.
It will. If you didn't know the 290 was throttling when using AMDs reference cooler @ 40% RPM, and it was throttling to 700MHz.
AMD updated the fan profile to 47% RPM and the card stop throttling, reaching its max core clock.
What's limiting the overclocking potential of Hawaii is the temperature. Once these cards get decent coolers they will be the best value you can get.
The guy that managed to attach an IceQ X2 cooler was getting just 63C in gaming situations.
I'd bet to say a lot of 290X were throttling when reviewed.
Its not just temps, The 290x is basically a 300w gpu, and the power available is 300w pci-e , 8+6 pin , overclocking will hit a physical wall with power limits Unless partners switch out the 8+6 pin to two 8pin overclocking will be limited.
780 Ti actually consumes more power than R9-290X.
R9-290X's reference cooler is just sub-standard.
If AMD has used reference cooler from 7990, the temps and noise would be lower.
Recycled HIS ICEQ X2 on R9-290 sample resulted 76C max.
Ron quit being bias and believing a simple cooler change will help alot. The overclocking potential of the card is limit by its ~300w TDP.... The max power draw on is 300w from pci-e bus and pci-e 8+6 pin , Even if you can slap on a cooler rated for 300w TDP your overclocking abilities will be limited by power limits. Unless AMD or partners come out with a dual 8 pin power plugs The overclocking will be limited to 1ghz
I was not talking about the 780 ti, dont deflect.... 290x is near its power limit and thinking that providing more cooling will gain moderate to good overclocking potential....
Yet another review site shows the 780ti using 37w less then a 290x uber.
I was not talking about the 780 ti, dont deflect.... 290x is near its power limit and thinking that providing more cooling will gain moderate to good overclocking potential....
Yet another review site shows the 780ti using 37w less then a 290x uber.
You can LOL all you want. This topic is about 780 Ti. Hardocp's result is in conflict with techreport's result.
I was not talking about the 780 ti, dont deflect.... 290x is near its power limit and thinking that providing more cooling will gain moderate to good overclocking potential....
Yet another review site shows the 780ti using 37w less then a 290x uber.
You can LOL all you want. This topic is about 780 Ti. Hardocp's result is in conflict with techreport's result.
Hardocp's PSU = Enermax MaxRevo 1350 Watts.
Techreport's PSU = Corsair AX850 850 Watts.
PSU's as you should well know operate at maximum efficiency at 50% load. Also, where the test systems the same? I think not, that will give different results.
lol such cherry picking it does not matter what psu is being used, on the same system same specs different cards 290x uses more power from multiple sources
lol such cherry picking it does not matter what psu is being used, on the same system same specs different cards 290x uses more power from multiple sources
"lol such cherry picking it does not matter what psu is being used, on the same system same specs different cards 290x uses more power from multiple sources"
From http://www.legitreviews.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-ti-video-card-review_128012/11
Now that the Radeon R9 290X has been released, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti power consumption looks okay as it is just 10-20 Watts more
lol such cherry picking it does not matter what psu is being used, on the same system same specs different cards 290x uses more power from multiple sources
"For this test, we only measured the power consumption of the graphics card via the PCI-Express power connector(s) and PCI-Express bus slot"
Techreport's result is for total system power.
Which is why you can't compare them. To say that the 290X has a lower power usage is untrue as its been proven by many sites that it is more power hungry.
lol such cherry picking it does not matter what psu is being used, on the same system same specs different cards 290x uses more power from multiple sources
"For this test, we only measured the power consumption of the graphics card via the PCI-Express power connector(s) and PCI-Express bus slot"
Techreport's result is for total system power.
What a lame excuse lol Are you that desperate?
Multiple source prove that the 290x uses more power get over it.
lol such cherry picking it does not matter what psu is being used, on the same system same specs different cards 290x uses more power from multiple sources
"For this test, we only measured the power consumption of the graphics card via the PCI-Express power connector(s) and PCI-Express bus slot"
Techreport's result is for total system power.
What a lame excuse lol Are you that desperate?
Multiple source prove that the 290x uses more power get over it.
You got the old copy.
From http://www.legitreviews.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-ti-video-card-review_128012/2
"Now that the Radeon R9 290X has been released, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti power consumption looks okay as it is just 10-20 Watts more".
From http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/62085-nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-ti/?page=10
Log in to comment