1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Radeon R7 260X 2048 MB

Discussion in 'Reviews' started by W1zzard, Oct 8, 2013.

  1. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,962 (3.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,768
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 15, 2013
    _JP_, TheLaughingMan, Ikaruga and 3 others say thanks.
  2. alwayssts

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Messages:
    371 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    This is IMHO the most interesting review of the day, as W1z really tackled all the curious things it could entail.

    We got our 7ghz ram and 896sp design, which was (in one scale or another) always something I've wanted to see with this architecture. Yay.

    Obviously the mem controller (or some other hardware/software limitation, perhaps the hynix curiously-rated 1.55v ram?) kept AMD from using it as a default clock. I've always chocked their clocks (usually around 90% of ram speed and/or controller potential) to leaving room for AIBs and still being able to warranty it. The fact we don't see over 7200mhz overclocked could be telling why there isn't a bigger brother to this design, if not the power consumption from it...which was always something I've been curious about (and we clearly see taking it's toll on the >225w 294mm gk104 770).

    The shame is that this part would have been pretty awesome (from an efficient/cheap arch design pov, not power consumption obviously) default clocked at 1100-1125/7000, but I imagine partners will do just that. While obviously teetering over efficiency on the core (seemingly 850-925mhz is most efficient with decent scaling up to 1150ish) and without a doubt eatting juice on the memory controller, it's an intriguing use of the architecture purely from what you can get from 160mm2. It makes you wonder what a mem controller like nvidia's (ie a slightly bigger chip) and/or samsung memory could do with a similar design within 150w, as the core clearly can stretch 10% higher than the memory can sustain while still having enough power room within 150w for that to make sense.

    While I have little doubt this will quickly fall into the realm of the low-end AMD gpu price structure (~$120 with 7790 around $100), it certainly is overshadowed by the fact 7850 became so incredibly dirt cheap. If nothing else, this solidifies many of the choices made for Pitcairn (and conceivably Hawaii).
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2013
  3. Dj-ElectriC

    Dj-ElectriC

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,220 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    845
    This card should have came out with a price-tag of 110$ to win the market.
     
  4. DarkOCean

    DarkOCean

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,618 (0.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    350
    Location:
    on top of that big mountain on mars(Romania)
    Agreed, even overclocked cannot touch the stock 7850 wich is cheaper, good job AMD(sarcasm).
     
  5. Initialised

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    Messages:
    264 (0.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Disappointing that it doesn't beat the 650 Ti Boost as predicted.
     
  6. AsRock

    AsRock TPU addict

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    10,998 (4.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,723
    Location:
    US
    Thank You for adding the 6970 to the review
     
  7. Ikaruga

    Ikaruga

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2011
    Messages:
    870 (0.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    183
  8. Casecutter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,167 (0.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Bah, this stinks... I hoping this was the one card AMD might pull something out of the hat! :banghead:

    At least this as the 260X they might have picked up the extra two compute units that Bonaire appears to have missing (8/6) for a 1024 Shader units, and was even hoping there might have been an extra set of memory controllers concealed in it providing 256-Bit.

    When 7790 released I figured AMD used full chips to go into one of the consoles and used these till they fulfilled the early demand for MS/Sony. I thought I read one of those consoles would be using a discrete graphic and one is a APU, but honestly I don't really keep-up with that. Either way I figured AMD had been binning enough of such chips; so either the silicon was never a full "8/8" configuration or those chips are still heavily demanded for consoles?

    So, AMD gives us an extra 1Gb of memory and a $10 price drop for a card that's today is just shy for all but basic 1080p gaming. I was hoping a slight bit more processing power and 256-Bit would provide a good successor to the 7850, but this is not it! :shadedshu
     
  9. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    18,680 (9.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,154
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    Its slower than a 7850 yet costs more.......
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  10. HTC

    HTC

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,240 (0.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    303
    There seems to be a problem in performance per dollar and performance per watt pages: the card being review should be listed @ 100% but it's way above that: 132% and 143% respectively (see pics in attach).

    A prob with the bench script, i guess, no?
     

    Attached Files:

  11. xorbe

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    398 (0.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    Ha, I noticed those charts ... no 100% base value suggested!
     
  12. suraswami

    suraswami

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    6,232 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    832
    Location:
    Republic of Asia (a.k.a Irvine), CA
    W1z is tired of these cards, he is zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
     
  13. Casecutter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,167 (0.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Hey yea, that's erroneous data... time to get it corrected!
    Or are we waiting on ??? Nvidia price drop to make it... ;)
     
  14. xorbe

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    398 (0.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    It doesn't make the data wrong, just scaled. So you have to bust out the calculator, that's all.
     
  15. DarkOCean

    DarkOCean

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1,618 (0.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    350
    Location:
    on top of that big mountain on mars(Romania)
    Funny thing, in my country the 260x is more expensive than gtx 660! lol
     
  16. Casecutter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,167 (0.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    I know... you know, but for folks who come and read the the artical it useless or misleading. :wtf:

    W1zz said he's been in Russia, for that I'll cut him a bunch of slack...
     
  17. de.das.dude

    de.das.dude Pro Indian Modder

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,808 (4.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,070
    GIMME SOME DAMN GOOD 7790 DRIVERS NOW PLEAsEEEEEEEEEE
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page