AMD acknowledges 390 series crashes, looking into it

[Humbug]

the problem with W10 is that MS is forcing WHQL drivers over user-installed ones; there is a work-around, but not many people know about it .. they just assume it's "normal"

Ah.. K

I did notice that on the tech preview I would manually install new beta drivers from the AMD website in order to get the newest game specific optimizations... But windows update always wanted to revert to the driver it thought I should be using.

[FLUFFYJELLO]

I'm not gonna read every comment, but from what I'm seeing all people are saying is "the 3xx series is so bad" even though the 380 destroys the 960 and the 390 beats the 970, both are better price/performance, and were overall successful improved versions of their 2xx counterparts, not simply "rebrands". It's like the majority of this forum has never seen a benchmark in their entire life.

Proud owner of a currently overpriced 980 here saying: Well done AMD. 300 series was an excellent improvement on your old architecture. Now make sure you don't fuck up with Zen like you did with the FX line.

[patrickjp93]

I'm not gonna read every comment, but from what I'm seeing all people are saying is "the 3xx series is so bad" even though the 380 destroys the 960 and the 390 beats the 970, both are better price/performance, and were overall successful improved versions of their 2xx counterparts, not simply "rebrands". It's like the majority of this forum has never seen a benchmark in their entire life.

Proud owner of a currently overpriced 980 here saying: Well done AMD. 300 series was an excellent improvement on your old architecture. Now make sure you don't fuck up with Zen like you did with the FX line.

What improvements? The only thing new is the power delivery micro arch. in Grenada. The 380 is a 285 rebrand straight up. The 370 is a 265. There's nothing new here of note.

[Prysin]

to put it simple, the system sends a request to the video card, if the video card takes more than 2 seconds to respond (I think it's the default response time), the OS will reset the video card driver

 

 https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff569917(v=vs.85).aspx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396

Thats a driver thing. Im on 15.7 with my 295x2. I had those issues PRIOR to overclocking my 295x2. Now, after OC, i get it less (oh the irony)...

So i dont think its a hardware issue

[DEDRICK]

Such as?

 

Such as this.  It went away immediately the second I rolled back to 15.6

 

[Xorbot]

Such as this.  It went away immediately the second I rolled back to 15.6

 

 

That looks like when you use multiple displays, and the power-saving clock speed is too low.  Sometimes the low-power clock speed gets stuck and is apparently not enough to drive the display when the GPU is needed for something more than just Notepad.

[othertomperson]

So by your logic, you should only compare the 390 with the best of the best cherry picked 970 card?

The 390 doesn't matter, it can be a random card... but the 970 nope...

This community is getting worst by the day, I feel sorry for linus for this place is becoming with high levels of toxic fanboyism.

 

Average doesn't mean "the worst of the worst", which certainly describes Jay's 970, it means representative, middle, most common. It's rare to find a 970 that can't be overclocked to beat a 390, you would have to cherry pick to find examples that can't.

[DEDRICK]

That looks like when you use multiple displays, and the power-saving clock speed is too low.  Sometimes the low-power clock speed gets stuck and is apparently not enough to drive the display when the GPU is needed for something more than just Notepad.

 

I never tried disabling ULPS mode when I had it installed, I might give that a go when I get home.  It didn't always happen and it stopped if I turned one monitor off.  It would start in games during a resolution change or graphics API refresh as well

[bogus]

Average doesn't mean "the worst of the worst", which certainly describes Jay's 970, it means representative, middle, most common. It's rare to find a 970 that can't be overclocked to beat a 390, you would have to cherry pick to find examples that can't.

I'm sorry, but I can't take you serious: you are defining a card from a reviewer that it's known for testing and benchmark on overcloked conditions, as "the worst of the worst" ... @1442 in what seems to be a card that float around such values. 

 

And the problem is that you belive in that shit so blindly, that you say "it's rare to find a 970 that can't be overclocked to beat a 390" even after the guy said that maybe he got lucky with the 390 (he managed to get 1250 out of it, althought not stable enough for his taste)... you just show to this community nothing but ignorance and fanboyism.

It's sad, that's all. I won't even bother to spend more time replying to this, it's just ridiculous... but keep fighting the good fight! Go on and keep discrediting this guy review because of your blind love for a brand.

 

[Xorbot]

I never tried disabling ULPS mode when I had it installed, I might give that a go when I get home.  It didn't always happen and it stopped if I turned one monitor off.  It would start in games during a resolution change or graphics API refresh as well

 

Indeed.  I am only saying words about what I see, so I am not sure if this is the real issue.

 

I just notice that my video card was 324 MHz when I had one monitor while sitting at the desktop.  Once I plugged in 2 or 3, it sits at 862 MHz.  However, after sleep mode, sometimes the primary card stays in 324 MHz, and then it bounces back and forth between 324 MHz and 500-something, and this is when I see that glitch effect.

 

I am witnessing this on my GTX 680, 2 of them in SLI, btw.  So even if it isn't the same brand, I am familiar with that glitch effect.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

It's sad, that's all. I won't even bother to spend more time replying to this, it's just ridiculous... but keep fighting the good fight! Go on and keep discrediting this guy review because of your blind love for a brand.

 

To be frank, you have little to no authority to say that, especially considering that you were singing a different tune not too long ago.

[Curufinwe_wins]

I'm sorry for you tax, exchange rate of whatever made you guys get the short end of the stick

290x = $549

390x = $429

Even at your 50 pound difference, you get a 1060 mHz core with 8 GB of VRAM over 947 mHz and 4GB.

And just think how stupid you would feel if the 290x tri-x (8gb relatively strong overclocker) from sapphire was at the time of the 300 series release 240 dollars.... O wait... It was...That's it. It had no issue being flashed to 390x bios and taking advantage of the improved tesselation.

Unlike the 680/770 event (at which the price of a 770 when it launched was cheaper than a 680 was at THE SAME TIME) here you got rebranded products that's only improvements are through OEMs having two more years to refine their components/coolers and software that amd could have easily given the 200 series but chose not to because then their wouldn't have been a point.... For a price premium over their contemporaries...

Indeed the closest thing to this is what Intel did with haswell refresh (well and amd cpus lol) but they didn't try to call devils canyon broadwell did they? (And amd even tried to hide it with "Grenada")

It is 100% relevant what contemporary pricing was and this is what rightly should piss people off over what amd did.

Also the Fiji chip is a piece of shit compared to even the most underwhelming hype that was given to it (likely because the 980ti forced them to oc the shit out of it before sale). Unless going for extreme sff pc in which case its king.

Just saying...

Nvidia has fucked up a shit load of times as well. But right here, right now, amd's fiasco is theirs to deal with.

And btw I still recommend Tahiti gpus to people constantly for the budget range, but that isn't an endorsement of AMD's general policy.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

To be frank, you have little to no authority to say that, especially considering that you were singing a different tune not too long ago.

If you're gonna be telling him that, might as well tell everybody that. Frankly, no one here has the authority to talk like that.

[DarkBlade2117]

A rebrand is where they'd honestly just take a 290x, place a piece of tape of the 290x and put 390x.

AMD improved the 200 series and called them the 300 series. More VRAM, better TDPs, better heat out put. And they are really,putting some competition up for Nvidia. A lot of people including myself reccodmend the r9 380 over the 960, a lot of people do the same they reccodmend the r9 390 over the GTX 970. As for the GTX 980 and 390x it all depends. The 390x is a bit cheaper but also gets like 5-10FPS less in games. Now to some people that doesn't matter but to some of those FPS junkies that matters a lot. Face it, AMD is doing pretty good in the GPU world. Now if only they could do the same in the CPU world which frankly isn't possible. Intel has more then enough money to put AMD out of business but won't do it because they need competition. Same with Nvidia.

[Curufinwe_wins]

To be frank, you have little to no authority to say that, especially considering that you were singing a different tune not too long ago.

technically speaking (while I understand and agree with your premise) the very fact that recently in the past he was singling a different tune actually makes him more morally qualified to be upset about blind fanboyism (because the very idea that one flip-flopped is anathema to fanboyism).

But don't let that stop you.

[Dabombinable]

A rebrand is where they'd honestly just take a 290x, place a piece of tape of the 290x and put 390x.

AMD improved the 200 series and called them the 300 series. More VRAM, better TDPs, better heat out put. And they are really,putting some competition up for Nvidia. A lot of people including myself reccodmend the r9 380 over the 960, a lot of people do the same they reccodmend the r9 390 over the GTX 970. As for the GTX 980 and 390x it all depends. The 390x is a bit cheaper but also gets like 5-10FPS less in games. Now to some people that doesn't matter but to some of those FPS junkies that matters a lot. Face it, AMD is doing pretty good in the GPU world. Now if only they could do the same in the CPU world which frankly isn't possible. Intel has more then enough money to put AMD out of business but won't do it because they need competition. Same with Nvidia.

More vRAM? R9 290X 8GB

R9 390=same card as the 390X except with a slightly nerfed R9 290 GPU=R9 290X 8GB. As mentioned before the R9 290X can be flashed without problems to the R9 390X and make use of the better tessellation. As for the TDP and higher clocked vRAM, its amazing what you get when vendors decide to use higher quality components on their graphics cards.

[Curufinwe_wins]

A rebrand is where they'd honestly just take a 290x, place a piece of tape of the 290x and put 390x.

AMD improved the 200 series and called them the 300 series. More VRAM, better TDPs, better heat out put. And they are really,putting some competition up for Nvidia. A lot of people including myself reccodmend the r9 380 over the 960, a lot of people do the same they reccodmend the r9 390 over the GTX 970. As for the GTX 980 and 390x it all depends. The 390x is a bit cheaper but also gets like 5-10FPS less in games. Now to some people that doesn't matter but to some of those FPS junkies that matters a lot. Face it, AMD is doing pretty good in the GPU world. Now if only they could do the same in the CPU world which frankly isn't possible. Intel has more then enough money to put AMD out of business but won't do it because they need competition. Same with Nvidia.

I can still recommend them but AMD didn't do any of that. Why do you think there isn't any reference models? Because the only improvements in TDP/Cooling etc is because OEMs have actually gotten better/smarter about making graphics cards in general. (And the 285 tesselation improvements were added as part of drivers/bios, but those could have also been on the 200 series.)

I'll still recommend the cards (actually only the 380, I only ask that people consider the 390 when in that price point, I don't tell them to grab it or a 970). But that doesn't make what AMD did for this series right or even good. It's a stopgap and a shitty one at that. And the idea that they are going well in the market is laughable, less than a 25% market share, bah. They won't even exist in 5 years.

[othertomperson]

I'm sorry, but I can't take you serious: you are defining a card from a reviewer that it's known for testing and benchmark on overcloked conditions, as "the worst of the worst" ... @1442 in what seems to be a card that float around such values. 

 

And the problem is that you belive in that shit so blindly, that you say "it's rare to find a 970 that can't be overclocked to beat a 390" even after the guy said that maybe he got lucky with the 390 (he managed to get 1250 out of it, althought not stable enough for his taste)... you just show to this community nothing but ignorance and fanboyism.

It's sad, that's all. I won't even bother to spend more time replying to this, it's just ridiculous... but keep fighting the good fight! Go on and keep discrediting this guy review because of your blind love for a brand.

 

And I can't take you seriously because you come into this argument clearly not even understanding how overclocking works. It doesn't matter who Jay is or what reputation he has for benchmarking, he lost the silicon lottery on his 970.

 

1440 is the worst maximum overclock I've ever seen on a 970. Mine both boost to 1300 without any overclock, just with GPU Boost. Most float around 1500 MHz, not 1400. I don't see how Jay suspecting that he got a particularly good 390 sample discredits my assertion that his video is not representative. Maybe his 390 is representative and he is wrong, but if he isn't then he is comparing a fantastic 390 sample with a potato of a 970 and you are saying you can't take criticism of this seriously?

 

I don't have a love of any brand, I couldn't give a shit if it's AMD or Nvidia, but for all your complaints about "cherry picking" you don't seem to know what that means because this video looks like a highly cherry picked example.

 

You're so quick to pull the fanboy card, jeer, and find an excuse to not bother reading comments that disagree with your misconceptions. I'm not the problem with the forum.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

If you're gonna be telling him that, might as well tell everybody that. Frankly, no one here has the authority to talk like that.

  

technically speaking (while I understand and agree with your premise) the very fact that recently in the past he was singling a different tune actually makes him more morally qualified to be upset about blind fanboyism (because the very idea that one flip-flopped is anathema to fanboyism).

But don't let that stop you.

For context, I was referring to the sudden 180 in regerds to his views on J2C. You cannot accuse someone of discrediting a person when you have made worse attacks against the same person yourself. That is textbook hypocrisy.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

For context, I was referring to the sudden 180 in regerds to his views on J2C. You cannot accuse someone of discrediting a person when you have made worse attacks against the same person yourself. That is textbook hypocrisy.

So when jayz complained about the Fury X his point is valid and when he shows the 390 beating the 970 his point is not valid? Do you not realise that the very same people have their roles switched?

[ybriK]

The amount of fanboyism ITT.

[Dabombinable]

And I can't take you seriously because you come into this argument clearly not even understanding how overclocking works. It doesn't matter who Jay is or what reputation he has for benchmarking, he lost the silicon lottery on his 970.

 

1440 is the worst maximum overclock I've ever seen on a 970. Mine both boost to 1300 without any overclock, just with GPU Boost. Most float around 1500 MHz, not 1400. I don't see how Jay suspecting that he got a particularly good 390 sample discredits my assertion that his video is not representative. Maybe his 390 is representative and he is wrong, but if he isn't then he is comparing a fantastic 390 sample with a potato of a 970 and you are saying you can't take criticism of this seriously?

 

I don't have a love of any brand, I couldn't give a shit if it's AMD or Nvidia, but for all your complaints about "cherry picking" you don't seem to know what that means because this video looks like a highly cherry picked example.

 

You're so quick to pull the fanboy card, jeer, and find an excuse to not bother reading comments that disagree with your misconceptions. I'm not the problem with the forum.

TBH, his 970 is ok as mine some how managed to get passed the Gigabyte binning process for G1 Gaming cards, which means I've got a chip that meets none of the points advertised on the box-aka it can't be overclocked at all and has one of the lowest Asic scores I've seen on any graphics card that can have the Asic read.

[othertomperson]

TBH, his 970 is ok as mine some how managed to get passed the Gigabyte binning process for G1 Gaming cards, which means I've got a chip that meets none of the points advertised on the box-aka it can't be overclocked at all and has one of the lowest Asic scores I've seen on any graphics card that can have the Asic read.

 

Really? Shit, unlucky. Can you RMA it? Mean normally overclocking isn't something that you can, but in the case of the G1 their binning process is literally something they are charging you (a decent amount of) money for. It's what separates the G1 from the Windforce version.

[bogus]

To be frank, you have little to no authority to say that, especially considering that you were singing a different tune not too long ago.

 

Who are you to talk about authority? Another NVIDIA offended dame?

Give me a break.

[bogus]

And I can't take you seriously because you come into this argument clearly not even understanding how overclocking works. It doesn't matter who Jay is or what reputation he has for benchmarking, he lost the silicon lottery on his 970.

 

1440 is the worst maximum overclock I've ever seen on a 970. Mine both boost to 1300 without any overclock, just with GPU Boost. Most float around 1500 MHz, not 1400. I don't see how Jay suspecting that he got a particularly good 390 sample discredits my assertion that his video is not representative. Maybe his 390 is representative and he is wrong, but if he isn't then he is comparing a fantastic 390 sample with a potato of a 970 and you are saying you can't take criticism of this seriously?

 

I don't have a love of any brand, I couldn't give a shit if it's AMD or Nvidia, but for all your complaints about "cherry picking" you don't seem to know what that means because this video looks like a highly cherry picked example.

 

You're so quick to pull the fanboy card, jeer, and find an excuse to not bother reading comments that disagree with your misconceptions. I'm not the problem with the forum.

 

Nah you just need to check some forums and see alot of people posting their results in the 1400 range.

 

So, just show us the numbers, if you claim that MOST of the 970 float around 1500... just show us the facts.

 

Don't put this on me, I'm not trying to shame any reviewer here - I just pointed the obvious bullcrap and disinformation.