Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 19

Thread: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    31,709
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2,073 times in 719 posts

    Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Captain Jack's performance is revealed by ChipHell.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    11,193
    Thanks
    1,394
    Thanked
    1,091 times in 833 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Patriot Viper 2 @ 3466MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Quote Originally Posted by Hexus
    Please remember that these are unconfirmed results of an unlaunched, unannounced graphics card and while mining the ChipHell forum can unearth gems of truth it can also be the source of large nostril-fulls of methane.


    That did make me giggle.

    If true then thats very good results indeed, I was expecting it to take AMD a few generations before they really nailed the power consumption of this architecture.

  3. #3
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    38
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    But if this is on the new 20nm process, then it's worrying that the power consumption is comparable to the GTX980... When Nvidia's 20nm cards arrive, they could be much more efficient.

  4. #4
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    30,802
    Thanks
    1,799
    Thanked
    3,295 times in 2,653 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Quote Originally Posted by bob3406 View Post
    But if this is on the new 20nm process, then it's worrying that the power consumption is comparable to the GTX980... When Nvidia's 20nm cards arrive, they could be much more efficient.
    Depends on their size. I wouldn't expect the equivalent chip (large die) to be that much more efficient than this. The mid-range smaller die chips, yes, but then the smaller die ones from AMD will also be much more efficient too.

    Obviously pinch of salt time, but either way AMD have done well here - if this is a 20nm chip then they've managed to beat nVidia to it - and impressively they've done so with an enthusiast card rather than a safe low-end one. On the other hand, if this isn't 20nm, then they've done impressively well to get such a large/performant chip in under such low power usage.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    1,020
    Thanks
    34
    Thanked
    26 times in 20 posts
    • [DW]Cougho's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Crosshair VI Hero
      • CPU:
      • AMD Ryzen 3600 @ 4.3 1900 FLCK
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Team Group DDR4 @ 3800 C16
      • Storage:
      • 512GB Samsung 870 EVO NVME & 1TB Samsung 850 Evo
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte GTX1070 G1 Gaming
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AX760
      • Case:
      • Silverstone FT-05B
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • BenQ XL2730Z 1440p 144Hz
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 1

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    From reading elsewhere I thought the original leak identified this mysterious 'Captain Jack' card as the 380X not the 390X? Has this changed?

  6. #6
    Evil Monkey! MrJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,137
    Thanks
    200
    Thanked
    385 times in 298 posts
    • MrJim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Supermicro C9Z390-PGW
      • CPU:
      • Intel 8700K
      • Memory:
      • 32Gb G.skill DDR4 @ 3200Mhz
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB NVMe, Samsung 850 Evo 1TB SATA, Toshiba 3TB SATA HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI RTX 2080
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Prime Ultra Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Jonsbo UMX4 Black
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic 27" XG2703-GS
      • Internet:
      • 72mb/s fibre

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Quote Originally Posted by Biscuit View Post


    That did make me giggle.

    If true then thats very good results indeed, I was expecting it to take AMD a few generations before they really nailed the power consumption of this architecture.
    I read somewhere that Nvidia attributed a lot of the improvements they've made with their Maxwell power efficiency to their experience gained with their development of ARM cores like their Denver architecture. Although since AMD are also an ARM partner, presumably they should have similar resources?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Newcastle Upon Tyne
    Posts
    936
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked
    105 times in 72 posts
    • Jowsey's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asrock H81M-ITX
      • CPU:
      • Intel Xeon E3-1230V3
      • Memory:
      • 8GB Corsair XMS3
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Crucial MX100 & 2TB Seagate Barracuda
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus GTX 770 DCUII 2GB
      • PSU:
      • EVGA SuperNova GS 550 watt
      • Case:
      • Phanteks Evolv ITX
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 64 bit
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 100Mb

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Quote Originally Posted by MrJim View Post
    I read somewhere that Nvidia attributed a lot of the improvements they've made with their Maxwell power efficiency to their experience gained with their development of ARM cores like their Denver architecture. Although since AMD are also an ARM partner, presumably they should have similar resources?
    They are but there is multiple levels of partnership with ARM I believe. Though that would explain the above power improvements.

    However, I'll wait till I see a retail product on a test bench before I believe anything. The rumours are always the same. Company X will leapfrog Company Y and do it cheaper/cooler/quieter... let's just see.


    (I want to believe though!)
    Steam - ReapedYou - Feel free to add me!!

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Kingdom of Fife (Scotland)
    Posts
    4,991
    Thanks
    393
    Thanked
    220 times in 190 posts
    • crossy's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS Sabertooth X99
      • CPU:
      • Intel 5830k / Noctua NH-D15
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Samsung 850Pro NVMe, 1TB Samsung 850EVO SSD, 1TB Seagate SSHD, 2TB WD Green, 8TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix GTX970OC
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AX750 (modular)
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster HAF932 (with wheels)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit, Ubuntu 16.04LTS
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG Flattron W2361V
      • Internet:
      • VirginMedia 200Mb

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Quote Originally Posted by [DW]Cougho View Post
    From reading elsewhere I thought the original leak identified this mysterious 'Captain Jack' card as the 380X not the 390X? Has this changed?
    If that's true that the CJ card is the lesser 380X rather than the top-of-the-line 390X then those values are pretty impressive.

    That said, like the Hexus writer, I'm pretty dubious that AMD would be able to pull out something this impressive that quickly, so I'm going to chalk these figures up as "spoof".

    Of course, if AMD have managed to deliver a "midrange" card with 980-beating performance and get it to draw less power than the equivalent current-gen card, then I'll definitely raise a beer to them. And start looking to put in an order when they start shipping...

    Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...

  9. #9
    ZaO
    Guest

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Pretty cool to get a little idea of what we might expect here! But I'll be waiting for Tom's Hardware benches before I make my mind up with these

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    375
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    13 times in 13 posts

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    A 4096, 1GHz + core is not going to be light on the electricity unless they've spun a lot of magic into it. 200W would be doing very good for such a big core.

    The average benchmark score is a bit of blind ally. It only takes one of those games where it's super fast to skew the average by a significant margin and that could come from incorrect rendering / bug

  11. #11
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    21
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    i seriously hope they dont charge too much for this card because the specs look abit cool for wehat it is lol i actually might sell my gtx 780's for it if the reviews come across well

  12. #12
    Senior Member Kovoet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    883
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked
    49 times in 42 posts
    • Kovoet's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus ROG crosshair Hero VIII
      • CPU:
      • AMD 5900x
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Viper 3733mhz
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 980 pro 500GB Samsung 850 512GB,Samsung 860 1TB SSD & 950 PRO NVMe M.2 SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus RTX3080Ti
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AX1200i
      • Case:
      • Corsair Carbide 680x
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus Tuf VG32VQ1B
      • Internet:
      • 1GB Virgin

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Doing a total upgrade in March next year so hope this will a big improvement on there last card
    JABULANI NONKE

  13. #13
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    38
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Quote Originally Posted by kalniel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bob3406 View Post
    But if this is on the new 20nm process, then it's worrying that the power consumption is comparable to the GTX980... When Nvidia's 20nm cards arrive, they could be much more efficient.
    Depends on their size. I wouldn't expect the equivalent chip (large die) to be that much more efficient than this. The mid-range smaller die chips, yes, but then the smaller die ones from AMD will also be much more efficient too.

    Obviously pinch of salt time, but either way AMD have done well here - if this is a 20nm chip then they've managed to beat nVidia to it - and impressively they've done so with an enthusiast card rather than a safe low-end one. On the other hand, if this isn't 20nm, then they've done impressively well to get such a large/performant chip in under such low power usage.
    I agree, if this is a 28nm card then they've done really well.

    If it is a 20nm chip, then I think AMD will be in trouble compared to NVidia.

    The things is, moving from 28nm to 20nm should give approximately double the number of transistors within the same die size. (Very roughly this should give double performance for the same power consumption). Looking at the charts, the rumoured 390X is around 30% faster than the 290X, whilst consuming ~30% less power). This is more or less in-line with what you'd expect from a die-shrink of the 290X with around 30% more cores.

    If NVidia do the same with the GTX980 (die shrink with 30% more cores), then you'd expect performance comparable if not higher than the 390X, and power consumption less than 150W...

  14. #14
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    96
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • canopus72's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus sabretooth X58
      • CPU:
      • I7-960
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Kingston HyperX @1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 6TB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 560 Ti SOC
      • PSU:
      • coolermaster gold 1200watt
      • Case:
      • CM HAF932
      • Operating System:
      • W7 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Philips 234EL

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Point to note!. Previous articles on Hexus, Toms Hardware and WCCFTech stated that the 380X would be competing against the GTX980 and that the 390X would be going up against the upcoming (not yet released!) Titan2 and 980Ti. Looking at the above benchmark table (which btw is very poorly worded and doesn't make much sense), the 'captain jack' test/preview sample scored 65.6 whereas the GTX980 scored 56.6, so I am inclined to believe this is a test sample for the 380X and not the 390X. Also, about 6 weeks ago there was an article on WCCFTECH titled 'GTX980 may lose performance crown to 380X'. Furthermore, Hexus et al reported that AMD confirmed it is on schedule for release of 380X in February 2015.

    Based on previously disclosed information, I do think this leaked result is for the 380X and not 390X (also, the Titan2 and 980Ti are not even on this table).

    If it really is for the 390X, then that is worrying because what are AMD going to do when the 980Ti and Titan2 are released?.

    So imo, this leaked result is for the 380X and not 390X.

  15. #15
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    96
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • canopus72's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus sabretooth X58
      • CPU:
      • I7-960
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Kingston HyperX @1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 6TB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 560 Ti SOC
      • PSU:
      • coolermaster gold 1200watt
      • Case:
      • CM HAF932
      • Operating System:
      • W7 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Philips 234EL

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    See -

    http://wccftech.com/gtx-980-lose-performance-crown-amds-r9-380x-febuary-2015/

  16. #16
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    31,689
    Thanks
    3,777
    Thanked
    5,075 times in 3,917 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

    Quote Originally Posted by bob3406 View Post
    I agree, if this is a 28nm card then they've done really well.

    If it is a 20nm chip, then I think AMD will be in trouble compared to NVidia.

    The things is, moving from 28nm to 20nm should give approximately double the number of transistors within the same die size. (Very roughly this should give double performance for the same power consumption). Looking at the charts, the rumoured 390X is around 30% faster than the 290X, whilst consuming ~30% less power). This is more or less in-line with what you'd expect from a die-shrink of the 290X with around 30% more cores.

    If NVidia do the same with the GTX980 (die shrink with 30% more cores), then you'd expect performance comparable if not higher than the 390X, and power consumption less than 150W...
    Even if it were 20NM,AMD is months ahead of Nvidia,so ultimate trying to say they are in trouble is coming across as excessive negativity. You should make the argument Nvidia is in trouble to the same level if they need to use 28NM parts to compete with 20NM parts for like six months at least.

    That is if any of these rumours are true.

    This is what slightly annoys me - AMD is frequently 3 to 9 months ahead of Nvidia,especially for midrange parts,on process node shrinks and no one ever says Nvidia is in trouble during those time periods ever.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •