• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Radeon R9 290X Clock Speeds Surface, Benchmarked

EarthDog said:
INteresting speculation, but you can't take a clock speed and 1:1 it to performance. Same with SP/Shader count...
Click to expand...

If you did that math and looked at the scaling in SP count and core speed the correlation in performance is dependent on the memory and GPU core speed. It is usually within a few percent on all cards except those artificially crippled.

And we are not talking about exponential increases, but percentage of raw output standardized.

So on he 7970 tests the increase was directly tied to core and memory speed, a 10% increase on both resulted in a 10% increase in performance. Same with Titan.


I am aware of the boost speeds Titan uses, and so it does make it a apples to coconut comparison, if this test card is stuck at 800Mhz and is still hand in hand with Titan that is boosting to 1Ghz speeds, what happens when the memory is ramped up and the core is capable of reaching the same clocks as the 7970?
 
Steevo said:
I am aware of the boost speeds Titan uses, and so it does make it a apples to coconut comparison, if this test card is stuck at 800Mhz and is still hand in hand with Titan that is boosting to 1Ghz speeds, what happens when the memory is ramped up and the core is capable of reaching the same clocks as the 7970?
Click to expand...

The card was benched at 1050, edited in main article, so unless somebody clarifies further:

290X @ 1050mhz vs Titan boosted to 1000mhz
 
WHo knows Steevo.

Let's wait for real benchmarks instead of trying to continue to speculate with values that really cannot be used to achieve any greater accuracy than guessing in the first place. :)
 
How i LOOOOOOOOOOVE speculation! At least this thread hasn't urned into an nVidia thread :laugh:

W1zz: I got some spare coke and an extra hooker, you interested? :p

:peace:
 
m1dg3t said:
How i LOOOOOOOOOOVE speculation! At least this thread hasn't urned into an nVidia thread :laugh:

W1zz: I got some spare coke and an extra hooker, you interested? :p

:peace:
Click to expand...

Extra? You have two?
 
You can't handle two? Coke got to your willy son?

I heard they are going to fix that problem with some magic blue powder, that's right, add crushed Viagra to the coke for a better pecker picker upper.
 
Honestly, it more a leak of what the "Hawaii part" can do rather than saying it’s actual R9 290X performance. Those clocks could be more representative of the Hawaii LE part.
This crap going to bubble up... and there's less inference to draw form it because we don't know how old it is, or what the drivers were.
So keep the seat belt on it's going to get bumpy, while in this holding pattern.
 
RCoon said:
Extra? You have two?
Click to expand...

An "extra" would imply more than 1, nothing more. Nothing less. Use your imagination :)

Steevo said:
You can't handle two? Coke got to your willy son?

I heard they are going to fix that problem with some magic blue powder, that's right, add crushed Viagra to the coke for a better pecker picker upper.
Click to expand...

:laugh: Heinekken hard - on strikes again! :nutkick:

Casecutter said:
Honestly, it more a leak of what the "Hawaii part" can do rather than saying it’s actual R9 290X performance. Those clocks could be more representative of the Hawaii LE part.
This crap going to bubble up... and there's less inference to draw form it because we don't know how old it is, or what the drivers were.
So keep the seat belt on it's going to get bumpy, while in this holding pattern.
Click to expand...

AMD/ATi are trolling nVidia and the mainstream, that is all. Same thing nVidia has been doing from time... Looks like the red team finally put the shoe on the other foot ;)
 
Graphs corrected for 1050/4500 MHz.
 
Those are decent numbers. When not overclocked, the 290X is around the same performance as Titan except for Crysis 3 and Rage. It seems that AMD cards don't do well in those two games. Even when overclocked, the 290x still losses to the Titan in those games.

Of course this is a multi-display setup and things might look different on a 1440P monitor.

All of this shouldn't matter at this point. We need to see how efficient Mantle is. If Mantle does deliver on the 9x promise, which is quite likely given that console developers have managed to squeeze folds more in performance out of those console chips using low level coding that interfaces semi-directly with the hardware.

Truly what matters at this point to me as a PC gamer is getting next gen PC games; a revolution in PC games. We need games with better mechanics, graphics and physics.
All these old games just don't cut it for PC gamers like myself. The crappy game mechanics and physics especially are no longer bearable.
 
I can't help but think if AMD truly had a Titan killer they would of bragged about having the world's fastest single GPU at GPU'14. Their marketing is beyond over the top, and they would of had a field day with that.

TrueAudio is neat, don't get me wrong, but this was a GPU conference, and they spent more time talking about that than touting their new flagship. Maybe they learned from Bulldozer, but I doubt it.

As a side note, I have no doubt they will beat nVidia's offerings at price/performance.
 
I must be losing my mind but I thought there was another article on the R9 290X with dual bios, with the other one being overclocked?
 
RCoon said:
The card was benched at 1050, edited in main article, so unless somebody clarifies further:

290X @ 1050mhz vs Titan boosted to 1000mhz
Click to expand...

You must oc Titan if you want boost to 1000MHz, so HD 290X also was oc or BS again.
 
tacosRcool said:
I must be losing my mind but I thought there was another article on the R9 290X with dual bios, with the other one being overclocked?
Click to expand...

No, I saw that too. I figure it got pulled before it evoked the wrath of AMD.
 
Recus said:
You must oc Titan if you want boost to 1000MHz, so HD 290X also was oc or BS again.
Click to expand...

You are a typical victim of the fall assumption created by nVidia's dynamic boost. The cards with this technology always boost themselves to the highest stable clock assuming the power target (6xx) or temperature target (Titan, 7xx) is satisfied. In case of Titan, with stock setting it runs games at more than 1GHz. The base clock is mostly just for show.
 
Last edited:
Not sure I missed anything...?

Here is a paragraph from the article talking about what you are though...

As mentioned in the initial article, the 876 MHz stock boost clock was quite conservative. When run for short periods and a moderate distance from the temp target (at stock that’s 80 °C), it was boosting to 1006 MHz consistently. If you adjusted the fan profile to keep it away from 80 °C, it would probably stay there indefinitely.
Click to expand...

Is adjusting the fan profile overclocking? Overclocking is adjusting the clock speeds in my head. He adjusted the fan profile in the second graph which was then overclocked and hit 1100+ Mhz. The first is stock. ;)

So, with temps in order and not using the overly 'quiet' stock fan settings, this card will boost 1006 Mhz all day long. I guess we are splitting hairs? lOl!
 
Casecutter said:
I think you missed where they said, "and the temp target was set at 90°C"... that isn't stock correct?

W1zzard only found slightly below 1000Mhz on his referance review, but it ran there alot as it's a dark diamond.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan/34.html
Click to expand...

I can see the 993MHz -1006 MHz gap is small enough, right? So, this bench is between a 1050 MHz R9 290X and a 993MHz Titan. Personally I think it's a fair comparison, not to mention the mem clock of R9 290X is far more lower than Titan's.
 
hilpi said:
Very fishy Tomb Raider Benchmark, Min FPS higher or the same as the AVG FPS...
Click to expand...

Either those 2 collumns got switched on accident or they are fake... who knows...

min being 29 makes more sense 35 avg... would fall about same % behind amd...
 
Slacker said:
I can't wait for this card to be officially lifted of its NDA and gets benched. It looks really promising and maybe a great upgrade from my 6970:)
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I've got about a year to look for solid replacements for my dual 6950's, and I'd love to see ASUS put out a rock-steady OC pair for a good price...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top