AMD 290X Video card. Titan performance: $450 cheaper

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
Title says it all.

Hardocp review.
Anandtech review.

Highlights.
- $549 vs $999 for Titan.
- Titan like performance, slightly better @ 4k (3840x2160 res).
- More power/heat than Titan.
- 4 GB Vram.
- 512-bit memory bus.
- NO CF/SLI bridge needed for CF.
 

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
Is AMD still doing that frame-skipping thing that was padding the benchmarks?

I think they updated the driver to "fix" the problem, at least on single monitor setups. Can't recall if multi-monitor setups are fixed. Seems that Nvidia multi-card setups were always a bit to a LOT better. Don't know how the NO-SLI-Bridge required setup of the 290X will change this.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,737
Location
USA
It's nice to see a card get close to the Titan in performance and surpass it in some cases. What I like the most is that it will possibly cause nvidia to lower their prices to be more in line with AMD so I can get the card I want rather than AMD's catch-up card.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,511
Location
Horsens, Denmark
Indeed. I'll likely still go nVidia because of the better power/heat/noise situation. Not that I'm in any hurry to upgrade; I'm running one Titan per system now @ 2560x1600 and it is fine.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,737
Location
USA
I agree. I would like one of EVGA's cards with their ACX cooler rather than deal with 1st gen AMD 290X reference designs running at 95C.
 

P5-133XL

Xmas '97
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,173
Location
Salem, Or
Considering AMD's new clocking arrangement, I'd like to see what this card can do with a high quality water cooling setup.
 

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
Indeed. I'll likely still go nVidia because of the better power/heat/noise situation. Not that I'm in any hurry to upgrade; I'm running one Titan per system now @ 2560x1600 and it is fine.

Agree with the lower heat/power of Titan vs 290X. The 290X was designed to be run @95C with the fan @ 40%. That does seem very hot and would reduce the life of the card. And plus I DO NOT want 200+ degree air pumped into my room in the middle of the AZ summer.
 

P5-133XL

Xmas '97
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,173
Location
Salem, Or
It is not the absolute temp of the air being pumped in the room that matters because you do not know how much air every second is being added at 200C. A better comparison is 400W (290x) vs 350W (Titan) at load or 89 (290x) vs 80W (Titan) at idle. So the difference at maximum load for the 290 is an extra 50W/9W heater running in the middle of the summer.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
21,564
Location
I am omnipresent
I'm sure these things are breathtaking for GPU computing, but do these things offer any subjective improvement for 1080p single-screen gaming over the $500 cards that were out a couple years ago?
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,511
Location
Horsens, Denmark
1080p? Almost certainly not. But how many out there are considering spending $500+ on a video card while playing on a $300 monitor?
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,737
Location
USA
1080p? Almost certainly not. But how many out there are considering spending $500+ on a video card while playing on a $300 monitor?

We may be able to answer that question with real data. I believe Steam publishes (or used to publish) numbers on the system configurations used for gaming when the collect it from their user-base. I don't know if monitor make/model is in there but that would be interesting data to see.

I'm sure certain games see some improvements in the 1080P resolution when the highest levels of anti-aliasing are used along with all the other visual options set to the maximum. Is it worth upgrading from cards of a couple years ago...I doubt it.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
21,564
Location
I am omnipresent
1080p? Almost certainly not. But how many out there are considering spending $500+ on a video card while playing on a $300 monitor?

But that's the problem with PC gaming: The number of individuals with multiple-monitor setups or screen configurations larger than 1920x1200 is vanishingly small, and most PC games are just going to be shitty console ports with only the most minimal of graphics engine improvements over and above whatever consoles are able to do. If you don't have a GPU computing application, these top-end cards are just generating premium amounts of waste heat.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,511
Location
Horsens, Denmark
But that's the problem with PC gaming: The number of individuals with multiple-monitor setups or screen configurations larger than 1920x1200 is vanishingly small, and most PC games are just going to be shitty console ports with only the most minimal of graphics engine improvements over and above whatever consoles are able to do. If you don't have a GPU computing application, these top-end cards are just generating premium amounts of waste heat.

The percentage of users with >1920x1200 is small, but so is the market for $500+ GPUs. I can say that the Titan makes a huge difference, even on console ports (Dirt 3, for example) at 2560x1600.
 

P5-133XL

Xmas '97
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,173
Location
Salem, Or
I think there are more people with multi-monitor low-end displays than users with a single massive monitor >1920x1200 and a high-end GPU makes a big difference with multi-monitors too.
 

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
Apparently 290X Crossfire is faster than Titan SLI in all cases. $900 cheaper than Titan SLI. Stuttering eliminated from multi-monitor setups and 4k gaming. 20-40% faster than 780 SLI. HardOCP review here. Nvidia is lowering their prices. Very impressive showing for AMD on the uber high end of the video card spectrum.
 

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
And now we have the AMD R9 290 video card. Only $400 and matches the GTX 780.

HardOCP review here.
Anandtech review here.

Nvidia must be annoyed that the 290X and 290 are going to seriously cut-down the huge margins on their high-end cards. Competition is good.

Nvidia's GTX 780ti is coming soon at $700. 2880 CUDA cores vs 2688 for Titan vs 2304 for the 780. It's going to be close on what will be the fastest card. But in any case AMD will win most bang-for-the-buck.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,737
Location
USA
And now we have the AMD R9 290 video card. Only $400 and matches the GTX 780.

HardOCP review here.
Anandtech review here.

Nvidia must be annoyed that the 290X and 290 are going to seriously cut-down the huge margins on their high-end cards. Competition is good.

Nvidia's GTX 780ti is coming soon at $700. 2880 CUDA cores vs 2688 for Titan vs 2304 for the 780. It's going to be close on what will be the fastest card. But in any case AMD will win most bang-for-the-buck.

I doubt they are annoyed. Nvidia had a window of time where they had a two cards unmatched by AMD. I'm happy that there is equal ground now causing a price war. Nvidia seemed ready for the new from AMD because their prices dropped fairly soon after the R290X reviews flooded in. Maybe the GTX 780 will drop again in price with the release of the R290 so I can pick up another one. :)
 
Top