390X benchmarks from the guy that unboxed it

[Techhog]

AMD, so many people where willing to buy your new gpus, they where willing to save you but you fucked up so when you go down the drain it's only your own fault...

What were they supposed to do? Pull money out of thin air?

[Altecice]

So the 390X looks even worse? 

 

I get that, its funny and all that it hardly beats a 970. But for it to be a 'Fair' comparison it would need to be 390x vs 980.

So much for that 50% performance gain over the 290x huh

 

 

It just occurred to me that its perhaps set up like this as the prices are similar... derp.

[Bouzoo]

I get that, its funny and all that it hardly beats a 970. But for it to be a 'Fair' comparison it would need to be 390x vs 980.

So much for that 50% performance gain over the 290x huh

 

 

It just occurred to me that its perhaps set up like this as the prices are similar... derp.

 

AMD said Fury will have 50% improved performance, not the 390X.

[Altecice]

AMD said Fury will have 50% improved performance, not the 390X.

 

Some sources said it was 390x.

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/210740/more-radeon-r9-390x-specs-leak-close-to-70-faster-than-r9-290x.html

 

But again take it all with a pinch of salt.

[mattebad]

This shows us nothing, we all know the 290x was slower than the 970 at 1080p in most benchmarks, it's 1440p and 4k comparisons that I would like to see. The 390x supposedly has double the ROP's the 290x has which means it should be much better at higher resolutions than the 970. Also, this won't really matter to most people as the people who buy the top tier cards generally game on higher resolutions and not 1080p. It just wouldn't make sense if you did.

[Bouzoo]

Some sources said it was 390x.

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/210740/more-radeon-r9-390x-specs-leak-close-to-70-faster-than-r9-290x.html

 

But again take it all with a pinch of salt.

 

 

At that time the 390X was believed to be the HBM card, not Fury.

The R9 390X features a 4096-bit wide HBM memory bus

[kipper]

LOL and i am to believe this?

[kipper]

Keep the fakes coming

[zMeul]

Keep the fakes coming

what fakes?! it just proves the R9 390X's codename Grenda XT GPU is nothing else than R9 290X codename Hawaii XT GPU

[kipper]

what fakes?! it just proves the R9 390X's codename Grenda XT GPU is nothing else than R9 290X codename Hawaii XT GPU

So 390x was made in 2013?

 

390x also is a Dx11.2 only GPU?

[zMeul]

So 390x was made in 2013?

that's what GPU-Z reads from the BIOS and that's the date R9 290X's GPU was created since you know .. it's the bloody same thing!

they even have the same PCB on the darn thing as a reference R9 290X!!!!!

 

390x also is a Dx11.2 only GPU?

as opposed to what!? isn't R9 290X a DX 11.2 GPU?!  <_<

 

---

 

as i said in a previous post, I would not be surprised if these cards were actually equipped with R9 290X just like it happened at R9 280X launch when they put HD7970 due to short stock - only this time  it would be because of 290X surplus  :lol:

[marldorthegreat]

well, thats worse then expected

He didnt say any specific numbers, like fan speed/ actual temps. Or actual power draw.

[Imachoirstarter]

So many people seem to be confused as to what the 390X actually is. It's the rebranded 290X, NOT the Fury flagship card AMD are launching soon.

[SteveGrabowski0]

This is sad. I was hoping they'd get the power consumption under wraps a little more so that PowerTune could push the R9 390 a little past the GTX 970, but that doesn't appear to be the case. I would really like to see AMD stay relevant to really give Nvidia some great competition like they did with the 200 series. How is this company going to make it? The 200 series was awesome and they lost tons of ground to Nvidia. Now the 300 series looks like a dog.

[Zah]

While I'll wait for actual drivers to release, and more professional benchmarks, this does not paint the 390x in a good light.  But did anyone really expect anything from rebrands?

[alamox]

i do not get why are ppl surprised the 300 series is just the 200 series same technology, same features same performance, only difference would be at 4k gaming with a small boost in perfomance.

[Me1z]

i do not get why are ppl surprised the 300 series is just the 200 series same technology, same features same performance, only difference would be at 4k gaming with a small boost in perfomance.

 

Because on average there should be a 10-15% performance increase from generation to generation. Both the GTX 680 and the GTX 780ti were Kepler based, but there was a huge performance difference. The R9 290x and the 390x could both be Hawaii based as well, but to have literally no performance increase is a load of bull. There's supposed to be some sort of revision process when you go up a generational level.

[Brainless906]

No official drivers.

Super shoddy "benchmark video" from a nobody.

Even iffffff it's a legit 390x we all know that historically nvidia has always performed better in synthetic benchmarks. I'd like some real world stuff.

 

That said, I honestly I dont really expect a whole lot more from a 390x but i'll not take much of what was shown here seriously. 

 

By all means though, continue the circle jerk.

[Zah]

Because on average there should be a 10-15% performance increase from generation to generation. Both the GTX 680 and the GTX 780ti were Kepler based, but there was a huge performance difference. The R9 290x and the 390x could both be Hawaii based as well, but to have literally no performance increase is a load of bull. There's supposed to be some sort of revision process when you go up a generational level.

It's nothing like a 680 to 780ti, because a 780ti is a completely different GPU, the 390x is (rumored) to be just a 290x but rebranded.

[Me1z]

It's nothing like a 680 to 780ti, because a 780ti is a completely different GPU, the 390x is (rumored) to be just a 290x but rebranded.

 

Yes, and that's why everyone is pissed. The 390x was supposed to be an upgrade, but its not, and AMD is just jerking us around.

[Zah]

Yes, and that's why everyone is pissed. The 390x was supposed to be an upgrade, but its not, and AMD is just jerking us around.

I think there's some confusion.  Do you mean the "old 390x" (which is now the Fury)?  Or the current 390x?  God I hate GPU company naming schemes and rumors.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

What were they supposed to do? Pull money out of thin air?

My suggestion would be for them, if they can't make any new gpu's then don't make "new" gpu's that are just rebrands they should wait till they have got something new to release, what they have done with the 300 series is not helping them at all.

[SkilledRebuilds]

Because on average there should be a 10-15% performance increase from generation to generation., but to have literally no performance increase is a load of bull. There's supposed to be some sort of revision process when you go up a generational level.

I agree, with only a memory clock increase in place (a really small real world gain) someone may think this is way better than it really is.

Hawaii @ 1050-1100Mhz is really nice to have, but requires even more juice, and is only a few FPS as a gain,....its not mind blowing, and its certainly not going to be 15%, possibly "up to @ 4K" or up to 10% at those settings for 1080p/1440p.

 

I'd also think IMO that you may be able to crossfire the 8GB 290X with the 8GB 390X... like the HD7950/R9-280

[Misanthrope]

cue Huddy blaming nVidia for the expected performance 

 

"The thing about Firestrike is that we can't optimize for Gameworks, and that somehow matters so please buy our brand new rip off cards!"

[SteveGrabowski0]

Because on average there should be a 10-15% performance increase from generation to generation. Both the GTX 680 and the GTX 780ti were Kepler based, but there was a huge performance difference. The R9 290x and the 390x could both be Hawaii based as well, but to have literally no performance increase is a load of bull. There's supposed to be some sort of revision process when you go up a generational level.

 

That's like saying the GTX 980Ti and GTX 970 are the same chip because they're both Maxwell.