Unreleased R9 290X review performance charts

[lhikary]

will my 550w psu handle this? any thoughts ?

[EChondo]

will my 550w psu handle this? any thoughts ?

Yes. The benchmarks showed a max power draw of 400w from the whole system while playing Metro: LL.

[lhikary]

Yes. The benchmarks showed a max power draw of 400w from the whole system while playing Metro: LL.

k

[lhikary]

Yes. The benchmarks showed a max power draw of 400w from the whole system while playing Metro: LL.

tnx

[ACatWithThumbs]

Actually, you see two threads were merged into one, and what you see is that. So calm down just a little there Hoss. The fact is, these are the results that are out, the simple fact is that this isn't the "Titan Killer" that AMD said they were going to put out. And yeah, you said these cards aren't OC'd? So? OCing doesn't mean jack right about now. These are tests that show stock versus stock, as in if you were to go buy it off the shelf and install it right this second. Pretty good indication of performance, I would say. Give me a ball park, how many % of people that buy AMD or Nvidia graphics cards, overclock them? (Hint: Not as large as one would think.)

700 seireis overclocks itself most of the time.

Im pretty sure that somebody that buys a GTX780/Titan would Overclock they're $550-$900 GPUs.

[Blake]

Im pretty sure that somebody that buys a GTX780/Titan would Overclock they're $550-$900 GPUs.

Sorry to disappoint you, people that overclock aare a very small market, and most of the people that do use the factory overclock.

[Nicktrance]

It'll probably be a tossup between the 290X and 780 Ti, it all depends on the price...

[ACatWithThumbs]

Sorry to disappoint you, people that overclock aare a very small market, and most of the people that do use the factory overclock.

Yes and the GTX780 and Titan are part of that very small market only few People pay that much for GPUs

[TheMissxu]

destroys? 5-10 fps is hardly a huge deal.. it's a new card designed to compete w/ the 780/titan, so obviously newer technology will win lol.  But "destroys" is hardly it. Especially since the 780 already plays almost every game at well over 60 fps already, adding an extra 5-10 fps ontop of that is barely a big deal

I agree. People with 780/Titans don't need to sell their card for this. But people building new systems...

[Osmium]

Honestly I am taking all these charts with a huge grain of salt here (is that even how the saying works?). There are so many reasons these numbers can be either tampered with or are just not representative of performance in the real world. Essentially I am going to wait till after release with drivers sorted and a lot more widespread benchmarks available to view.

[Lays]

I agree. People with 780/Titans don't need to sell their card for this. But people building new systems...

 

isnt the 290x supposed to be like 749$? or something

[TheMissxu]

isnt the 290x supposed to be like 749$? or something

No, it's supposed to be $550-650. The bundles are supposed to be more expensive due to the extra items you receive.

[Tall Gora]

No, it's supposed to be $550-650. The bundles are supposed to be more expensive due to the extra items you receive.

550-650 is a huge range of possibilities... I see this card being NO less than $600. Why would AMD want to cut margins by putting it so low? if its comparable to 780/780Ti then why not keep it close in price? Im not sure that undercutting Nvidia by that much would do well for their profits. Yes you can play the whole higher volume = more sales = more profit response. But remember that when a new card launches it first has to pay back the investment cost, and THEN makes the company profit.

[Vitalius]

550-650 is a huge range of possibilities... I see this card being NO less than $600. Why would AMD want to cut margins by putting it so low? if its comparable to 780/780Ti then why not keep it close in price? Im not sure that undercutting Nvidia by that much would do well for their profits. Yes you can play the whole higher volume = more sales = more profit response. But remember that when a new card launches it first has to pay back the investment cost, and THEN makes the company profit.

Why not keep it close in price? 

... You wouldn't be a very good businessman tbh. To undercut the competition and get consumers to choose your product because it is cheaper. I know you mentioned that in your post, but the number 1 thing AMD needs is market share above all other things. Period. Undercutting is the fast and easy way to do that.

You don't seem to realize that they are making a lot off these cards. Top tier GPUs (such as the 780 Ti and the 290X) back in the day were around $300-$400. Yes, inflation, but still, that's a huge mark up. The 780 has been over priced for quite a while.

[Tall Gora]

Why not keep it close in price? 

... You wouldn't be a very good businessman tbh. To undercut the competition and get consumers to choose your product because it is cheaper. I know you mentioned that in your post, but the number 1 thing AMD needs is market share above all other things. Period. Undercutting is the fast and easy way to do that.

You don't seem to realize that they are making a lot off these cards. Top tier GPUs (such as the 780 Ti and the 290X) back in the day were around $300-$400. Yes, inflation, but still, that's a huge mark up. The 780 has been over priced for quite a while.

im a business major going into the new CPA accounting designation... dont tell me about business. Im certainly thinking of all the extra factors that go into the costing process. AMD already has good market share in GPU, NVIDIA has a lead but its not massive. But maybe they designed this new high-end chip at a lower price than im thinking, but whoever is in charge of finance over there has to make sure the price covers investment first. Unless they dont mind taking a loss on flagship and make up for it in lower tier products, but i doubt AMD wants to take any loss atm while still recovering, good that they finally showed a profit this last quarter, although a portion of that came from sale of assets but good regardless.

 

Last i heard GK110 was an expensive chip to produce unless thats all bull****. I thought the price was justified, im sure as time goes on flagships have increased in price because of all the R&D that goes into the new gen chips that the company needs to earn back as well as lower yields on nvidia's large chip. i cant say the same about AMD because i havent read much about dev costs of GCN.

[Tall Gora]

im a business major going into the new CPA accounting designation... dont tell me about business. Im certainly thinking of all the extra factors that go into the costing process. AMD already has good market share in GPU, NVIDIA has a lead but its not massive. But maybe they designed this new high-end chip at a lower price than im thinking, but whoever is in charge of finance over there has to make sure the price covers investment first. Unless they dont mind taking a loss on flagship and make up for it in lower tier products, but i doubt AMD wants to take any loss atm while still recovering, good that they finally showed a profit this last quarter, although a portion of that came from sale of assets but good regardless.

 

Last i heard GK110 was an expensive chip to produce unless thats all bull****. I thought the price was justified, im sure as time goes on flagships have increased in price because of all the R&D that goes into the new gen chips that the company needs to earn back as well as lower yields on nvidia's large chip. I cant say the same about AMD because i havent read much about their development costs for GCN.

[Tall Gora]

 

im a business major going into the new CPA accounting designation... dont tell me about business. Im certainly thinking of all the extra factors that go into the costing process. AMD already has good market share in GPU, NVIDIA has a lead but its not massive. But maybe they designed this new high-end chip at a lower price than im thinking, but whoever is in charge of finance over there has to make sure the price covers investment first. Unless they dont mind taking a loss on flagship and make up for it in lower tier products, but i doubt AMD wants to take any loss atm while still recovering, good that they finally showed a profit this last quarter, although a portion of that came from sale of assets but good regardless.

 

Last i heard GK110 was an expensive chip to produce unless thats all bull****. I thought the price was justified, im sure as time goes on flagships have increased in price because of all the R&D that goes into the new gen chips that the company needs to earn back as well as lower yields on nvidia's large chip. I cant say the same about AMD because i havent read much about their development costs for GCN.

 

ops...

[Blake]

im a business major going into the new CPA accounting designation...

No offense, but no-one cares. I already have that degree (and by that degree, I mean I have too many), but decided I don't like the idea of eating a lead sandwich in 5 years time due to the mind numbing pain that is accounting (on the bright side you do make a bit when you get your CPA/CA).

 

Also the topic that you and the other guy are talking about is not accounting based, it is more of an MBA subject.

 

Also, FYI, AMD's GPU department is well in the Black. And all the bread and butter of the GPU market comes from integrated and low-middle end discrete cards.

[TheMissxu]

550-650 is a huge range of possibilities... I see this card being NO less than $600. Why would AMD want to cut margins by putting it so low? if its comparable to 780/780Ti then why not keep it close in price? Im not sure that undercutting Nvidia by that much would do well for their profits. Yes you can play the whole higher volume = more sales = more profit response. But remember that when a new card launches it first has to pay back the investment cost, and THEN makes the company profit.

Here is a link to a sale for $570.19. I haven't personally seen a link to $550, but someone has claimed to see it.

 

I assume Newegg will launch the card for $600-660 (Assuming the 290x + BF4 is in fact 729.99, the price without BF4 would be $660. I personally think AMD was trolling for PR and it will launch at $600 to attract those saying "I won't buy it for that much!") If you wish you can pay a premium at Newegg it seems.

[totjup5]

Glad to see that 660 ti SLI still beats it in most cases

[Tall Gora]

No offense, but no-one cares. I already have that degree (and by that degree, I mean I have too many), but decided I don't like the idea of eating a lead sandwich in 5 years time due to the mind numbing pain that is accounting (on the bright side you do make a bit when you get your CPA/CA).

 

Also the topic that you and the other guy are talking about is not accounting based, it is more of an MBA subject.

 

Also, FYI, AMD's GPU department is well in the Black. And all the bread and butter of the GPU market comes from integrated and low-middle end discrete cards.

i assumed they were making pretty good money, because you are correct money comes from low-middle. You think they would take a loss on the r9 290X? you are correct it wasnt accounting based... but ive taken finance classes so i get the gyst, just not an expert of course.

[JupiteL]

There's too many flaws in this benchmark, just wait until the final result.

[Vitalius]

Here is a link to a sale for $570.19. I haven't personally seen a link to $550, but someone has claimed to see it.

 

I assume Newegg will launch the card for $600-660 (Assuming the 290x + BF4 is in fact 729.99, the price without BF4 would be $660. I personally think AMD was trolling for PR and it will launch at $600 to attract those saying "I won't buy it for that much!") If you wish you can pay a premium at Newegg it seems.

You're forgetting Premium.

The pre-order bundle comes with BF4 and Premium, which is $110 when bought together ($60 for BF4, $50 for Premium). 

So subtract that from $729.99 to get what the 290X by itself will probably cost = $620.

[TheMissxu]

Just out today (Oct 23, 2013) http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/32915-radeon-r9-r290x-aims-at-

 

Points to $549 pre-tax.