MSI R9 390X Gaming 8 GB

[mirakul]

$50 for 4 GB GDDR5 is actually roughly correct

Not really.

AMD releases "new" card after 2 years of "hard work"... and the result is: price/performance = DOWN; Power consumption = UP... I am not an expert, but shouldn't it be the other way around? (just sayin)

290x was 550$ at launch, and this time you have 4GB more and a factory overclock card. The price is stupid btw but this is how they clears 290/290x stock, as they did with 280x/7970 rebranding 2 years ago.
AMD spent 2 years to give us Fury line-up with the sparkling new tech HBM, which will be the future of GPU world. I don't see why people are making big fuss about the rebrand cards instead of giving the new tech a warm welcome.

 

[Cataclysm_ZA]

@W1zzard, isn't the VRAM running at 6.0GHz effective instead of 5.0GHz?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/4.html

 

[the54thvoid]

Not really..

It's good you know more than @W1zzard. I'll turn to you for all my info now. Tell me, how far up your ass is your head? I'd like to see how it's done.

On other news - 390X is a Failiosaurus. If it matches a 980 - I'd still have the 980, based on the other metrics.

However, as I and others keep thinking, Fury X will be Awesomausaurus.

Then we wait and see if Nvidia has kept anything back.....

 

[newtekie1]

@W1zzard, isn't the VRAM running at 6.0GHz effective instead of 5.0GHz?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_390X_Gaming/4.html

Yes, the RAM is running at 6.0GHz(6.1GHz on this card actually), but it is only specced to run at 5.0GHz. MSI is overclocking the RAM.

 

[Mindweaver]

This chip, with this same clocks, but 4 GB of RAM, at $350, coulda worked out.

I agree this wouldn't be a bad card for that range of cards. This is exactly how I expected this card to perform for a rebrand. This should be priced around the same as the
SAPPHIRE Tri-X OC Radeon R9 290X 8GB... I have a buddy that just picked that card up and he loves it, but he is a big AMD fan, and coming from a 270 he should love it. I tried to talk him out of it and wait for the new 3XX series but when the itch hits.. lol

Plus, amd should see a nice boost when ever DX12 hits, but power is another story... If your worried about power I don't see Hawaii based cards saving any trees.. hehe Plus, these are not the cards we are looking for.. (I had to do the Star Wars reference after E3.. lol)

 

[Mindweaver]

I agree this wouldn't be a bad card for that range of cards. This is exactly how I expected this card to perform for a rebrand. This should be priced around the same as the
SAPPHIRE Tri-X OC Radeon R9 290X 8GB... I have a buddy that just picked that card up and he loves it, but he is a big AMD fan, and coming from a 270 he should love it. I tried to talk him out of it and wait for the new 3XX series but when the itch hits.. lol

Plus, amd should see a nice boost when ever DX12 hits, but power is another story... If your worried about power I don't see Hawaii based cards saving any trees.. hehe Plus, these are not the cards we are looking for.. (I had to do the Star Wars reference after E3.. lol)

EDIT: Reference meaning we want FURY! lol

 

[Cataclysm_ZA]

Yes, the RAM is running at 6.0GHz(6.1GHz on this card actually), but it is only specced to run at 5.0GHz. MSI is overclocking the RAM.

Ah, that agrees with how I'm reading it now, as in that's the actual reference clocks for the RAM. I wonder how much headroom is left there.

 

[the54thvoid]

Having checked back on the 980 Custom reviews - they run 5-10% faster than stock 980, so the custom to custom comparisons still have 980 ahead of the 390X. Stock versus stock and best OC versus best OC - these are what matters.

 

[SASBehrooz]

Too high power consumption
4GB Useless Memory
2% more Perormance than 3.5 Gb GTX 970 in 1080p
High temperature even in custom design
barely match GTX 980 in total performance

after 1.5 years ........ gg wp AMD.

 

[Nokiron]

Too high power consumption
4GB Useless Memory
2% more Perormance than 3.5 Gb GTX 970 in 1080p
High temperature even in custom design
barely match GTX 980 in total performance

after 1.5 years ........ gg wp AMD.

There is no real reason to complain about the amount of memory. It's better it's there instead of a lack of it.

 

[fullinfusion]

so they still cant cool that chip down, what a burn.

 

[SASBehrooz]

There is no real reason to complain about the amount of memory. It's better it's there instead of a lack of it.

actually we should say this . because they did say that after GTX 970 memory allocation issue. so why dont we.

 

[Nokiron]

actually we should say this . because they did say that after GTX 970 memory allocation issue. so why dont we.

There isn't a lack of memory on GTX 970, it is still 4GB. But that's not the point. Hawaii has the bandwidth to actually make use of it.

So again, why shouldn't it be 8GB?

It is exactly the same with Titan X, why shoudn't it have 12GB?

 

[SASBehrooz]

So again, why shouldn't it be 8GB?

as w1zzard said : 8 GB VRAM provides no benefit. the card is not powerful to address full 8gb (like r9 290x 8gb version).

It is exactly the same with Titan X, why shoudn't it have 12GB?

and same story with 12gb titanx.

i think they do this to sell their product little more ( for no reason )

 

[cokker]

guru3d reports 28w less vs the 290x, 76c temp load

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,8.html

overclock3d reports 6w more vs 290x, 72c temp load

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/msi_r9_390x_gaming_8g_review/4

results are going haywire

+1, Even:

http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/his_iceq_xsup2_oc_radeon_r9_390xr9_390_r9_380,10.html

and

http://www.techspot.com/review/1019-radeon-r9-390x-390-380/page7.html

Got similar results to the 290/x.

The biggest difference I've seen is ~50w not the near 100w over the 290x, duff card or borked the readings...

 

[Cataclysm_ZA]

The biggest difference I've seen is ~50w not the near 100w over the 290x, duff card or borked the readings...

Its possible that drivers are also a component of the higher power use. The Catalyst 15.15 drivers handed out for the reviews are only compatible with R-300 cards, so there may be a few tweaks AMD can do to get things more in line with their initial expectations.

 

[jchambers2586]

2 of these cards would eat up my power supply I just bought (EVGA supernova 850 G2) glad I just bought a 970.

 

[thebluebumblebee]

Power delivery requires one 8-pin and one 6-pin PCI-Express power connector. This configuration is specified for up to 300 W power draw.

Isn't this a HUGE problem?

 

[W1zzard]

Isn't this a HUGE problem?

not really, you can easily draw more power from the PCIe connectors, it's not like there is a magical device that shuts them down when they exceed power

 

[W1zzard]

So I've benched power consumption of the PowerColor R9 390X PCS+ and I get:
Typical Gaming: 231 W
Peak Gaming: 253 W

Which seems to fall in line with what to expect.

Next, I shut down the system, removed the PowerColor card, installed the MSI card, booted up the system, ran power testing again, and the numbers in my review are confirmed.

MSI is running higher clocks, at higher voltage, and the card gets hotter. GPU temperature is a huge factor for power consumption, the hotter the GPU, the higher power draw, for doing the same thing.

Also I'm not starting my power consumption test from a cold card. I first do one run of about 2 minutes, then do another for which power is measured, which ensures you get realistic long-term gaming conditions, not just some magical numbers that don't apply to gaming.

Also, we are testing real card-only power consumption while many other sites test system power, this could also be a factor.

It might also be possible that the variation between Hawaii GPUs is very large and I got an unlucky sample. Let's just not hope that reviewers get low-power-picked cards and the high-power cards end up with customers.

GPU-Z ASIC Quality, MSI: 79.3, PowerColor 73.1

 

[fullinfusion]

@W1zzard you test on an open bench right?

any crossfire action in the near future with this card?

one card at 85c is hot and having a second installed, that card would be like a melt down.

 

[W1zzard]

you test on an open bench right?

half-open case

any crossfire action in the near future with this card?

no plans for CF, look up 290X CF articles

 

[HD64G]

So, most possible this MSI 390X that W1z tested here is a problematic GPU (core problem or bios) which causes the excessive power consumption. All other reviewers didn't have any of these, so...

In W1z place I would RMA that card if it is bought by TPU and redo the test once the new arrives.

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

I gotta admit I'm surprised it caught up to the GTX 980 & beat it out in some games but man oh man, that power consumption is too damn high.

Same as 290x when you overclock it. It can reach a GTX980's performance.. but then, a GTX980 can also be overclocked even more, so it is back to square one or even worse. Plus the heat and power consumption of the 290x / 390x.

 

[illli]

would have been decent if it had half-ish the power consumption. I wish amd would succeed, but why do their chips use so much more power compared to nvidia?