AMD R9 390X Coming With Cooler Master Liquid Cooler + Estimated Performance

[Fetzie]

Yes, I understand the temps part which I'm cool with. But for fucks sake, needing an AIO on a single GPU card? If you have limited spots for fans and radiators in your case, this will make things a huge pain in the ass. I know AMD tries to go for breakneck performance, but I wish they would think about power consumption and heat output for once.

 

The people that will be buying this card won't be doing it in a 30 dollar case with one fan in the front and one fan in the back.

[anders_b]

if it needs a watercooler it is going to have a really high tdp 

[Fetzie]

All this tells me is that AMD have put more R&D into the cooler than the GPU core.

 

It is an OEM Asetek manufactured AiO unit. You literally phone the company and say "I want an AiO cooler with these specs" and they send you a pricing sheet. Then you say "yes" and you get a truck load of them a month or so later. So don't be ridiculous and act like AMD is doing more R&D on a cooler than their chip, because that just makes you look stupid.

[DildorTheDecent]

I though their Seidon series were made in house?

Eisberg is in house i think. 

[othertomperson]

 

Why not?

 

Because that makes it the default option. Not an option, the default.

 

I didn't get that... knowing the 500w 295x2 can be cooled by it or similar tech.

 

All it told me is they knew it would be fine doing the job it may not even be needed for, but why not use it, less R&D needed for air/ref coolers on their part, the partners can do all that.

AMD played it safe, knowing the W/C will suffice MORE than ample for the job.

 

/I agree, those without 120mm fan placements will have trouble.

 

You could just ghetto/drill your own holes/cutout and make a side panel 120mm mount yourself, or buy another case.. (I know neither are ideal, dems the brakes so far until A/C cards are out)

 

Or I could just use a GPU with a sensible TDP and a sensible cooling solution. I've been down this route before with GTX 580s. I'm not about to do that again.

[HippY]

if it needs a watercooler it is going to have a really high tdp 

it will have a 300 TDP R9 190X is 290 TDP and 780 TI has 250TDP.

This card is planned to be 50% ish ( or more) better than 290x ( as it has much higher core count, 2800 vs 4092. although HBM will help too, but it cannot be said how much performance increase will be there as it is not a simple 1 factor calculation)

 

They "could" use the same reference cooler as on r9 290(X) but they paired up with ASETEK for the r9 295X2 and it was surprisingly good and cost effective. So they basically rather than try to create a new air cooler, go toCooler Master/Asetek, and get a cooler cheap and it performs well so why not? the card does not NEED a AIO, but it does benefit from it

[Khvarrioiren]

lol i love how people are treating liquid cooling like its a bad thing

 

If it were for Nvidia to do this, they'd be praised to heavens beyond for being innovative and ahead the curve.

[Sakkura]

Water cooling should be an option, but it shouldn't be the reference choice. Modern air coolers are more than capable of cooling anything sensible. Hell, Gigabyte are claiming that the Windforce is suitable up to 600W. Personally since they announced that I've really wanted to see it on a 295X2 and see how it compares with PowerColor's attempt.

 

And no, I don't have a single 120mm fan in my pc, they are all 140mm.

 

All this tells me is that AMD have put more R&D into the cooler than the GPU core.

 

Why should it not be the reference choice? All AMDs recent reference air coolers on high-end cards have been bad. R9 290X/290, bad. 7990, bad. 7970/7950, not good. 6990, bad. 6970/6950, not good. And then AMD releases the R9 295X2 with an AIO reference cooler, and everyone rightly praises it. Why would AMD then go back to air cooling on a power-hungry card?

 

This is really a no-brainer. AMD doesn't get bad press because of a bad reference cooler, and early adopters or less tech-savvy buyers don't get screwed by a bad reference cooler.

[NateGSR117]

This thing going to awesome

[flibberdipper]

The people that will be buying this card won't be doing it in a 30 dollar case with one fan in the front and one fan in the back.

It doesn't have to be a cheap case to have crap options for radiators.

[othertomperson]

Why should it not be the reference choice? All AMDs recent reference air coolers on high-end cards have been bad. R9 290X/290, bad. 7990, bad. 7970/7950, not good. 6990, bad. 6970/6950, not good. And then AMD releases the R9 295X2 with an AIO reference cooler, and everyone rightly praises it. Why would AMD then go back to air cooling on a power-hungry card?

 

This is really a no-brainer. AMD doesn't get bad press because of a bad reference cooler, and early adopters or less tech-savvy buyers don't get screwed by a bad reference cooler.

 

The 295X2 needed this because it was two unadulterated 290Xs on a single PCB. Nvidia's solution here is to nerf the cards. You end up with the GTX 590, the 690. The Titan Z was two down-specced Titan Blacks AND that thing required a triple slot cooler. There was only one air cooled 295X2 and the only time that didn't thermal throttle itself into pointlessness was when it was on a test bench. Put that thing in a case and it suffers.

 

Intel and Nvidia are both going the other way. They're going towards more energy efficiency, running cooler, quieter, and doing more with less power. AMD seems locked in this process of brute forcing worse tech with all of the voltage, all of the clock speed and all of the heat and power. The fact that they've decided that a cooler that was necessary for an obscene dual GPU monster is also the way to go for a single GPU that is directly competing with Maxwell is completely tone deaf and the wrong direction to be going in.

 

 

It doesn't have to be a cheap case to have crap options for radiators. 

 

It also doesn't have to be the case's fault! My case isn't wanting for places to put a 120mm slot. However, I've thought through exactly how I want my cooling to be. The two air flow fans at the front that are semi-passive, the exhaust out of the back by the VRM, and the H110 in the roof for the CPU. That alone should tell anyone that I'm not against the concept of AIOs on principle, but I don't want to have to redesign my whole thought process for quiet cooling just to change GPUs. There's a reason I was weighing the merits of 290Xs and 970s when I was upgrading in the Autumn, and not looking at the 295X2.

 

If the default option for CPUs was an AIO, that'd be just as bad.

[bogus]

better then 980

Did you expect it not to be better then the 980?

This is a card meant to be in the tier of the Titan/980ti.

Anyway, cool to see AMD taking a step and choosing to diferentiate themselfs with AIO Cooling in the reference cards I might be getting one!

[spartaman64]

 

The 295X2 needed this because it was two unadulterated 290Xs on a single PCB. Nvidia's solution here is to nerf the cards. You end up with the GTX 590, the 690. The Titan Z was two down-specced Titan Blacks AND that thing required a triple slot cooler. There was only one air cooled 295X2 and the only time that didn't thermal throttle itself into pointlessness was when it was on a test bench. Put that thing in a case and it suffers.

 

Intel and Nvidia are both going the other way. They're going towards more energy efficiency, running cooler, quieter, and doing more with less power. AMD seems locked in this process of brute forcing worse tech with all of the voltage, all of the clock speed and all of the heat and power. The fact that they've decided that a cooler that was necessary for an obscene dual GPU monster is also the way to go for a single GPU that is directly competing with Maxwell is completely tone deaf and the wrong direction to be going in.

 

 

 

It also doesn't have to be the case's fault! My case isn't wanting for places to put a 120mm slot. However, I've thought through exactly how I want my cooling to be. The two air flow fans at the front that are semi-passive, the exhaust out of the back by the VRM, and the H110 in the roof for the CPU. That alone should tell anyone that I'm not against the concept of AIOs on principle, but I don't want to have to redesign my whole thought process for quiet cooling just to change GPUs. There's a reason I was weighing the merits of 290Xs and 970s when I was upgrading in the Autumn, and not looking at the 295X2.

 

If the default option for CPUs was an AIO, that'd be just as bad.

 

cut amd some slack they cant spend billions on R&D like nvidia and intel can

[Briggsy]

**looks over at 290's running in system**

 

"It's been a good run boys"

[othertomperson]

cut amd some slack they cant spend billions on R&D like nvidia and intel can

 

You're saying I should buy their stuff out of, what, charity?

 

On the CPU side of it if Zen is everything it's rumoured to be, then I would love for my next system to be AMD based, and generally their GPUs are already decent. But they have to appeal to things that I care about.

[spartaman64]

You're saying I should buy their stuff out of, what, charity?

 

On the CPU side of it if Zen is everything it's rumoured to be, then I would love for my next system to be AMD based, and generally their GPUs are already decent. But they have to appeal to things that I care about.

if your electric bill isnt expensive buying amd actually makes a lot of sense as they are usually cheaper with more performance

[AxelRantila]

Yup. The 980M is roughly the same as a desktop 970, so, in terms of laptops, especially, Nvidia is winning me over.

I knew the 980m was good, but it becomes even more impressive if it roughly the same as a regular 970. Makes me really excited to see what Nvidia brings us in the future

[HippY]

You're saying I should buy their stuff out of, what, charity?

 

On the CPU side of it if Zen is everything it's rumoured to be, then I would love for my next system to be AMD based, and generally their GPUs are already decent. But they have to appeal to things that I care about.

the efficiency is really something that must be measured before we talk about it.

 

390X is 4096 cores that is 1200 more than 2800. 390X is rumoured to consume 300W ( if I remember well, it might be 300W TDP tho...) but let say it is TDP. 290X is 290W TDP. so basically they could use 4000 cores at the 5% more TDP than 2800 and that is great

Secondly, different analogy. if it needs to perform 4096 cores and 300W TDP to be as good as 960, than it is really not efficient. but if it needs 300W and perform twice as good as 980 than it is very efficient, with the same TDP (Warning, exaggeration!) we need to see how do they perform, as talking about efficiency at this moment is unnecessary

 

Bear in mind that it might be cost effective to let a 3rd party to build and design the AIO, as they might have some off the shelf part, that reduces the cost while maintaining good cooling capabilities. they are probably aiming higher with this cooler from 290/X, where they used a ref cooler that was barely enough for the cards.

[flibberdipper]

I knew the 980m was good, but it becomes even more impressive if it roughly the same as a regular 970. Makes me really excited to see what Nvidia brings us in the future

Isn't it great? I think back when the GTX 480 was the flagship desktop GPU, the mobile version 480M was like 40% the performance of the 480. Now it's like 80%.

[othertomperson]

 

if your electric bill isnt expensive buying amd actually makes a lot of sense as they are usually cheaper with more performance

 

OK. But then you have to deal with not being able to game in the summer because your room gets unreasonably hot. (Note, this doesn't change just because you've shoved an AIO on it.) Or even if you can deal with the heat, your increased ambient temperature is causing your GPU to throttle. Or you could just not live in the USA and thus you actually do pay a lot for your electricity. And couple that with the fact that the 290X is still more expensive than the 970 by a decent amount outside the US and doesn't perform better generally speaking, and then how exactly does AMD make more sense?

 

 

the efficiency is really something that must be measured before we talk about it.

 

390X is 4096 cores that is 1200 more than 2800. 390X is rumoured to consume 300W ( if I remember well, it might be 300W TDP tho...) but let say it is TDP. 290X is 290W TDP. so basically they could use 4000 cores at the 5% more TDP than 2800 and that is great

Secondly, different analogy. if it needs to perform 4096 cores and 300W TDP to be as good as 960, than it is really not efficient. but if it needs 300W and perform twice as good as 980 than it is very efficient, with the same TDP (Warning, exaggeration!) we need to see how do they perform, as talking about efficiency at this moment is unnecessary

 

Bear in mind that it might be cost effective to let a 3rd party to build and design the AIO, as they might have some off the shelf part, that reduces the cost while maintaining good cooling capabilities. they are probably aiming higher with this cooler from 290/X, where they used a ref cooler that was barely enough for the cards.

 

They've deemed it inefficient enough to need the same cooling solution as the 295X2. It's not going to be anything like as efficient as Maxwell.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

If the new cards can make me as happy as when the 970 came out,

mah 280x is gonna retire this year :B

[ACatWithThumbs]

cut amd some slack they cant spend billions on R&D like nvidia and intel can

It's AMDs own fault.

They were ahead of Nvidia and Intel several times and pretty much messed up for the last 4 years in both the GPU and CPU space.

While this card looks impressive compared to the 980 you shouldn't forget that the 980 wasn't supposed to exist like that in the first place.

Maxwell was planned to be 20nm with Virtual Unified Memory which obviously didn't work out.

Let's hope AMD kicks Nvidia's butt so that they get off their high horse and stop releasing GPU's at those insane high prices.

 

[worldwin]

It's AMDs own fault.

They were ahead of Nvidia and Intel several times and pretty much messed up for the last 4 years in both the GPU and CPU space.

While this card looks impressive compared to the 980 you shouldn't forget that the 980 wasn't supposed to exist like that in the first place.

Maxwell was planned to be 20nm with Virtual Unified Memory which obviously didn't work out.

Let's hope AMD kicks Nvidia's butt so that they get off their high horse and stop releasing GPU's at those insane high prices.

 

At what point was AMD ahead of both Nvidia and Intel? You realise that AMD has to split R&D between the two fronts.

[spartaman64]

 

 

 

OK. But then you have to deal with not being able to game in the summer because your room gets unreasonably hot. (Note, this doesn't change just because you've shoved an AIO on it.) Or even if you can deal with the heat, your increased ambient temperature is causing your GPU to throttle. Or you could just not live in the USA and thus you actually do pay a lot for your electricity. And couple that with the fact that the 290X is still more expensive than the 970 by a decent amount outside the US and doesn't perform better generally speaking, and then how exactly does AMD make more sense?

 

 

 

They've deemed it inefficient enough to need the same cooling solution as the 295X2. It's not going to be anything like as efficient as Maxwell.

 

idk my air conditioning and heating is good enough that is actually cooler in my house during the summer and warmer during the winter but i guess different people have different situations

[Victorious Secret]

 

 

 

OK. But then you have to deal with not being able to game in the summer because your room gets unreasonably hot. (Note, this doesn't change just because you've shoved an AIO on it.) Or even if you can deal with the heat, your increased ambient temperature is causing your GPU to throttle. Or you could just not live in the USA and thus you actually do pay a lot for your electricity. And couple that with the fact that the 290X is still more expensive than the 970 by a decent amount outside the US and doesn't perform better generally speaking, and then how exactly does AMD make more sense?

 

 

 

They've deemed it inefficient enough to need the same cooling solution as the 295X2. It's not going to be anything like as efficient as Maxwell.

 

 

I think people forget that efficiency matters. Not in the "power bill" sense, but in how you make a build. 

A very efficient GPU puts out less heat and produces less noise, it needs a smaller PSU which means you can use a smaller PSU (which itself kicks out less heat) and you can use far smaller ITX/mATX builds (make your so called console killers!!! /s) and have a more pleasant couch gaming experience since your PC, even under load, isn't getting loud or hot. 

 

 

At what point was AMD ahead of both Nvidia and Intel? You realise that AMD has to split R&D between the two fronts.

 

Because AMD had the brilliant idea to buy out ATI, a decision that will be the end of them; IMHO. I think that was such a big mistake.