Wednesday, October 9th 2013

Radeon R9 290X Features 64 ROPs

A leaked company slide by AMD confirmed that its high-end "Hawaii" silicon indeed features 64 raster operations units (ROPs). In reference to its predecessor, "Tahiti," the slide speaks of 2 times the ROPs (32 on "Tahiti") and 1.4 times the stream processors (2048 on "Tahiti," so 2816 on "Hawaii"). Other known specifications include up to 1 GHz GPU clock, up to 5.00 GHz memory clock, and a 512-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, holding 4 GB of memory. Reviews of Radeon R9 290X could surface around mid-October.

Source: WCCFTech
Add your own comment

130 Comments on Radeon R9 290X Features 64 ROPs

#1
TRWOV
by: d1nky
whats the conclusion on these cards??

been away and missed it all!
Nothing yet. We'll know on Monday.
Posted on Reply
#2
Fourstaff
by: Horrux
I don't know, sometimes I think AMD has used up all of their "next time"s and yet, they keep coming up with more... :confused:
As long as they continue to provide value for money I will always consider them.
Posted on Reply
#3
DeadSkull
by: crazyeyesreaper
290X = 2816 / 64 = 44 shaders per ROP
7970 = 2048 / 32 = 64 shaders per ROP
7870 = 1280 / 32 = 40 shaders per ROP

so in terms of the 7870 which when overclocked could take on a 7950 relatively easily

the 290x has a much better shader to ROP ratio and with the increased bus width should prove to be power hungry but well balanced in terms of Shaders / ROPs / TMUs / Bandwidth. the 290X looks to be shaping up nicely but final performance numbers will bring us the truth of the matter. Diminishing returns will still be a problem.
This.

I'm wonderng how well the 290x will do against 780 and Titan. Nvidia always has the Titan Ultra in reserve so even if 290x beats the Titan by a few percentages all nvidia has to do is release an fully unlocked Titan with more aggressive clockspeed boostin profile.
Posted on Reply
#4
NeoXF
by: DeadSkull
This.

I'm wonderng how well the 290x will do against 780 and Titan. Nvidia always has the Titan Ultra in reserve so even if 290x beats the Titan by a few percentages all nvidia has to do is release an fully unlocked Titan with more aggressive clockspeed boostin profile.
That will be 2-3% faster than the regular one and cost 25% more and use more power than a GTX690. Yeah, makes sense.

FYI, so could AMD release a beefier R9 290X, for one thing, the memories could sure be clocked a lot faster (512bit + 6,5GHz GDDR5s a-la R7 260X?).
Posted on Reply
#5
Horrux
by: NeoXF
That will be 2-3% faster than the regular one and cost 25% more and use more power than a GTX690. Yeah, makes sense.

FYI, so could AMD release a beefier R9 290X, for one thing, the memories could sure be clocked a lot faster (512bit + 6,5GHz GDDR5s a-la R7 260X?).
Oh, AMD are DEFINITELY giving themselves headroom with the series.

I would not be surprised to see R9 295 and 295X later on, after nV launches its upcoming GeForce 8xx series.

Either that, or OEMs will have parts to make "Platinum" and "Ultra" variants of their cards, with a lot more oomph under the hood.
Posted on Reply
#6
Kovoet
I have cash in hand but I am also an impatient old fart. They need to hurry man as I have a choice of 7990, R9 290x or the 780 but will not pay that much as the titan for a single GPU
Posted on Reply
#9
xorbe
by: TheGuruStud
Nice fakes, but numbers don't add up, eh?
Why don't they add up? Just curious.
Posted on Reply
#10
TheGuruStud
by: xorbe
Why don't they add up? Just curious.
If the 280x is slower than your 7970 GE, then I have to question your testing methology at the least.
Posted on Reply
#11
Mathragh
by: TheGuruStud
If the 280x is slower than your 7970 GE, then I have to question your testing methology at the least.
The 280x is about 5% slower though.
Posted on Reply
#12
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
by: Mathragh
The 280x is about 5% slower though.
They are pretty evenly matched.
Posted on Reply
#13
TheGuruStud
by: Mathragh
The 280x is about 5% slower though.
No, it's not lol. It scores about 1 fps faster in nearly everything. It's the same damn card.
Posted on Reply
#14
N3M3515
by: TheGuruStud
If the 280x is slower than your 7970 GE, then I have to question your testing methology at the least.
The stock R9 280x is a bit slower than 7970 GE :)
source
source
source
source
Posted on Reply
#15
Horrux
Isn't the R9 290 / 290X launch date today? We wants our reviews now! :x
Posted on Reply
#16
TheGuruStud
by: N3M3515
The stock R9 280x is a bit slower than 7970 GE :)
source
source
source
source
Three of those are tools and hate AMD. Their results are automatically discounted. Eurogamer and Ten Syndicate off the top of my head show differently.

edit: And guru3D shows from 1-4 fps improvement on EVERY game. And that's not the OC versions, either.
Posted on Reply
#18
PopcornMachine
by: TheGuruStud
Nice fakes, but numbers don't add up, eh?

We'll have to wait.
by: TheGuruStud
If the 280x is slower than your 7970 GE, then I have to question your testing methology at the least.
The one place where a 7970 GE is compared to a 280x, it shows 130.6 to 127.3.

Could kind of call that margin of error, which makes sense since they basically are the same card.

I have no idea if these are accurate, but seems you are nit-picking in an effort to call it all fake.
Posted on Reply
#22
N3M3515
by: Frick
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_280X_Direct_Cu_II_TOP/images/perfrel.gif
by: TheGuruStud
Three of those are tools and hate AMD. Their results are automatically discounted. Eurogamer and Ten Syndicate off the top of my head show differently.
Just because they differ from the results here or from other sites, doesn't automatically make them fake, and since those 5 sources seem to agree with the "fake" one i'll say it's legit.

Maybe the configuration is different, cpu, drivers, etc.
Posted on Reply
#23
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
by: N3M3515
Just because they differ from the results here or from other sites, doesn't automatically make them fake, and since those 5 sources seem to agree with the "fake" one i'll say it's legit.

Maybe the configuration is different, cpu, drivers, etc.
Exactly. It could be either way really.
Posted on Reply
#25
Crap Daddy
by: MetalRacer
pconline 290x review: http://diy.pconline.com.cn/363/3631256_all.html
These pretty much confirm all the various leaks. The only two new things are the alarming heat and power consumption of this reference card. It should be priced at $550 regardless of it coming close to Titan and besting by a few frames the 780. Price could be a determining factor if this is a success.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment