I'm not saying these numbers are not true. But if they are representative and can survive under the scrutiny of reviewers, that's the interesting question.
Printable View
I'm not saying these numbers are not true. But if they are representative and can survive under the scrutiny of reviewers, that's the interesting question.
history told us answers already. All "marketing results" from manufacturers are inaccurate, different games locations, different settings, every reviewer has own settings = different resultsQuote:
Originally Posted by boxleitnerb
Its allready hard to find 2 reviews with same results... its clear everyone have his method, location, settings, games, when they are not just re use previous review results .... ( i dont say the results we are seeing now are accurate ).
Is it just a compilation of the number allready given / seen, or their numbers ?.. Ok i see its the compilation of the numbers seen in " the AMD guide ".
Someone just pulled out their secret weapon - G-SYNC
(In a nutshell, the GPU controls video sync. In other words at 40FPS your monitor refresh is at 40Hz, at 100FPS your monitor is at 100Hz. So, no more tearing. Requirement is a G-SYNC equipped monitor.)
in detail you are wrong, on 40fps will be 80Hz i think, BUT this is thread about AMD
So Nvidia IS releasing a new card: GTX 780 TI in mid November. Things are getting more interesting!! We'll get a new competitive situation with the new AMD cards.
Some very nice improvements over the 780, but on several games the difference isn't that much oddly.
Clearly this will be interesting end of the year.Quote:
Originally Posted by nossy23
LoL. Didn't realize it was April 1st...Quote:
Originally Posted by cx-ray
no not really, AMD (ATI) nearly always used the best cpus to not bottleneck there cards, they have learnd from the past. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
so.. 3fps is... :S 3hz?Quote:
Originally Posted by cx-ray
So it is essentially overclocked?Quote:
Originally Posted by PedantOne
By the way, 2160p results are likely influenced by 512-bit bus (which is why AMD is pushing them). So they may be quite different at 1080p and 1600p.
Not really.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Please elaborate so he understands what you mean with your response. He may need help to understand the concept fully
The card is designed to run within certain specifications, and on a refrence card it's not likely to deviate from that set of guidelines. Assuming the card has a dual bios, one with quiet mode and perhaps another with "uber" mode. Baisically uber mode would sacrifice silence and maintain clock speeds and power limits closer to its TDP or power consumption limits for longer periods of time, requiring quite a bit more cooling and higher sustained fan speeds, sacrificing silence for performance.
The card was not overclocked, it's just running at or near its limit all the time.
Pendant one was trying to discredit the benchmarks by making it seem as the the cards were running out of specification by offering no explanation for his comment or what "uber-mode" was if that's what it's called. This omission of information may create doubt in the minds of the uninformed that AMD wasn't playing fair or cheating somehow.
From your description, uber-mode sounds like factory overclock to me.
Higher voltages to maintain higher clocks. Higher TDP and noise levels being the consequence of this.
Not much different from manually raising TDP limit, fan speed and frequency.
So I guess, quiet mode (AMD) vs stock (Nvidia) and max OC (AMD) vs max OC (Nvidia) would still be the fair way to compare the cards.
So you consider boost on reference/stock cards to be factory overclocked?Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
An overclock describes a situation where a user has manually altered the speed and power of the device so that it is now running out of its original limits. Therefore there is no such thing as a factory overclock if those limits were not breached. Third party "factories" may produce overclocked cards with AMDs permission no doubt but they are in fact operating outside of the original specifications and limits, an original refrence card is not likely to do.
you just need to turn off boost , my 680 directcu ii's boost to 1238 under factory settings when they should only go to 1201 maxQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
ahh well I understand the reason perfectly fine... i just had a little laugh on the inside when I saw itQuote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
I figure it makes sure there is absolutely no reason for anyone to even suggest platform bias. Verifies even ground between the two cards.
It makes perfect sense that the proving ground belong to a third party. Same reason the superbowl is played on a neutral field. Very astute anaylisis
What do you expect, mate ? That's exactly how OBR operate, in thread crapping everything AMD related, past, present, and in the future. after past banishment, he tried to make another (expected) comeback under another nick name & appear more nicer + sincere in providing leaks & infos, but old habit & true color always show themselves out in the end. :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
There are two instances I would consider it an overclock.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
If its like awesome mode like on the 6990, where activating a switch gives higher clocks, gives more voltage, speeds up the fans and lastly voids the warranty, it would definitely be an overclock.
The second instance I would consider is based on Tahiti's reference form.
How quiet is AMD quiet mode? Tahiti based cards have been pretty loud using a reference cooler. If quiet more is more of a standard mode that matches the loudness of current tahiti cards, I would then have to consider the loud mode, even if it didn't void the warranty based on loudness
Referenced designed Tahiti cards are loud enough as it is. The max I would want from a stock card. If turning on loud mode, makes it loud to an undesirable level beyond that, then I would for consider it an overclock.
Reference design vs reference design, gk104 has been much quieter than tahiti, even with boost enabled. This was further emphasized with the reference cooler based 7970 ghz editions which were pretty much unusable with the reference cooler. Enough that card makers just skipped the reference cooler altogether since it couldn't cool enough without sounding like a jet engine.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6025/r...-to-gtx-680/16
If it advertises a certain clock speed and goes beyond, its an overclock.
Which AMD card dont, they state Core Clock: Boost Clock: and they never go beyond that by themselves unlike NV Core Base Clock:Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
- Core Boost Clock: which can go beyond advertises clock speeds by itself.
Kind of amused about g.synch, no reason it cant be done on older monitors or with other gpu's.
UBER MODE is NOT overclock in clocks, it pushing the TDP limits, stabilize Clock (against Boost) and raises High voltage
So basically it's a more advanced "powertune +20" thing? And you have to raise the clocks manually, then?Quote:
Originally Posted by PedantOne
No, the card has just better maneuver space when it comes to clock speeds. You can always manually OC but this is not what is going on here.
Where did I say this mode *is* overclocking? Nowhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I really will be happy if they do that with older monitors. I didnt read much about this tech but my thinking is if i can change monitor's refresh rate from os then why shouldn't it work with old monitors.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Sent from my SM-N9000Q using Tapatalk
Changing refresh rates takes quite some time for some reason, I think this just does it SIGNIFICANTLY quicker.
i thought the same after writing my message also it blinks for a moment too. so maybe what is special about the monitor is changing the refresh rate quicker.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
Something tells me that G-Sync will only work with 144hz screens... and thus why the companies that will collaborate will be Asus, Benq, Viewsonic and Philips... since those 4 have all 144hz screens. Mmmm.
Hmm let's see:Quote:
Originally Posted by boxleitnerb
Quote:
So basically it's a more advanced "powertune +20" thing? And you have to raise the clocks manually, then?
You will need specific hardware, hence why the Nvidia little addon card.. but in theory: Any Nvidia GPU with updated driver can communnicate with this card for set the timing. Now, if a similar hardware is provided by panel builder directly, any GPU with a driver could do it too.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
I suspect Asus, Benq and other are more after continue their actual specific "gamers " Nvidia based monitors lineup ( 3Dvision 2.0 - 120-144hz ) . so this will consist of a 24 and a 27" from each brand who include it...Quote:
Originally Posted by prava
AMD Radeon R9 290X CrossFire performance leaks out
Attachment 131565
http://videocardz.com/46990/amd-rade...formance-leaks
Sick scaling there (if turns out true).
it is from reviewers guide, and the same scaling value like Radeons HD 7000, far better then last two GeForce generations.
worst is more then 1.8. very good scaling if frame delay reduced to acceptable levels.
How so? SLI scales just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by PedantOne
No. Worst is -7%....it's just that AMD won't show that in their materials now will they? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by kromosto
In what game? (I bet I know the answer)Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
unless they show fake results it is ok for me to if they hide some results. at the end we will see all results from tech sites and you :D. but if i see a big difference in numbers amd gave and the numbers tech sites gave i will be very upset about amd.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Dont tell me you are surpised to find games who have negative scaling or where the CFX or SLI is just not working ? :D I know many peoples who are still waiting about support on some games, whatever it is SLI or CFX. ( I even know some games where it will just never been possible for Nvidia and AMD to enable SLI or CFX, but thats another story ).Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/05c...bf6b705573.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Tha Last Meal
Uber Mode can give negative results compared to quiet mode ? :confused:
lol maybe what we understand from uber does not match with amd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
Endless Space, COH 2, Rome 2, Krater, Borderlands 2, Saints Row IV....want me to go on?Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
The issue is that both AMD and NVIDIA have very, very poor support when moving outside the games that reviewers benchmark.
On my LGA 2011 Platform, Gtx 780 SLI scaling wasn't nearly that good, however a single card was able to overclock a higher. whether that was worth 6000 points I doubt it
14069 marks with GeForce GTX 780 at 1110/3312MHz
22363 marks with 2x GeForce GTX 780 at 1058/3305MHz
http://hwbot.org/submission/2402859_...80_14069_marks
http://hwbot.org/submission/2402854_...80_22363_marks
Lower end cards faired a little better
7770 marks with GeForce GTX 570 at 944/2202MHz
13948 marks with 2x GeForce GTX 570 at 942/2204MHz
http://hwbot.org/submission/2419059_...570_7770_marks
http://hwbot.org/submission/2419063_...70_13948_marks
7721 marks with GeForce GTX 480 at 940/1042MHz
13820 marks with 2x GeForce GTX 480 at 956/1035MHz
17666 marks with 3x GeForce GTX 480 at 891/1003MHz
21354 marks with 4x GeForce GTX 480 at 887/998MHz
as you can see here, 3 and 4 cards don't fair nearly as well......
AMD claimed a 80% scaling in the reviewer's guide, no ?Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
SO AMD have done a slide where their Uber mode is slower of their quiet mode, and think use it as a selling point... this do 3 pages i heard AMD is not honest with this slides, maybe not so much ? Where is the other bars ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
3DMark Performance Preset...you're kidding, right? The Performance Preset is quite CPU bottlenecked, obviously that hurts scaling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
How about some games with demanding settings?
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulle...19#post9735819
http://tof.canardpc.com/view/013dc2a...b458508fd1.jpg
http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-r9-29...rmance-leaked/
Nothing really impressive regarding Fire Strike. 780 well-OCed (1200+) got around 5500pts+ on the GPU score.
no. im not "Kidding, right". Those benchmarks are all with 3930K @ 5.1-5.2ghz, and its the only comparison I have to offer as I don't game much. If you don't agree with them, please dismiss them.
3DMark11 runs at 1280x720 in performance preset, I guess you know that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
It's a myth that highest oc'ed CPUs are enough for 2-4 modern highend GPUs in any setting. 5.2 GHz is only about 30% more than stock clocks, but with a second GPU you already get 100% more raw power that would require double the CPU power for perfect scaling in "tame" settings. See the discrepancy? That's why I posted the benchmarks in my link. With proper settings, the CPU becomes completely irrelevant and scaling is mostly excellent at least until the 3rd GPU (unless something like CUDA (Just Cause 2) or PhysX is involved).
unfortunately, I don't have any of these GPUS available for retesting as I usually have to sell out my old hardware to be able to afford newer stuff to benchmark. A vicious cycle lol.
I dont think you really need to pull out the spyglass to see those numbers look different (photoshopped).Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanek
no it is not photoshoped! Sometimes is difference between UBER and QUIt mode 0,1 fps and sometimes is in UBER mode slower
So, what's the point with Uber Mode ?
More noise???Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
Sent from my SM-N9000Q using Tapatalk
from 3D Mark point not much. Games, games, games. Not 3D marks. 3D Mark could be benchmarked with AMD system FX-9000 series. And of course, there is lower score than with i7-4960x (maybe 100 points?).
if you are in Uber mode, you have Higher TDP limit for YOUR manual OC, you have more Voltage limit for your OC, you have stabile clocks without annoying BoostQuote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
PS. It seems nobody here knows what is UBER mode. In normal QUIET mode, GPU is switching clocks between 800 base and 1 GHz max clocks under max TDP envelope. Average clocks is +/- 920-960 in TDP, depends on game a tests. But if you switch button for UBER, your TDP is higher and max is still 1 GHz, but average clocks are higher then 920-960 MHz little bit.
Okay, so "silent mode" is ~225W TDP limit and "uber mode" 300W ? Something like that ?
auto turbo within TDP= silent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
Manual no turbo = uber
seems as far I judge what it is.
Apparently it's the same thing you would get when you increase power and temperature target on Nvidia GPUs. Possibly with the addition of a more aggressive fan curve.
In silent mode, the card might throttle, not always maintaining the maximum boost. In uber mode, it will boost to the maximum clocks more often if not always at the expense of noise and power consumption.
This makes no sense. No difference does (maintained frequency is the same), though.Quote:
Originally Posted by PedantOne
^ maybe tolerance. If it's 39.9 and 40.1 fps, it is basically the same. No two benchmark runs will give you the exact same result, there always is a (small) variance.
Additionally, if they run quiet mode first, then uber mode, the card could be warmer during the uber mode benchmarks which may influence results slightly:
idle: 32C
during first benchmark: 85C (card relatively cool in the beginning)
after first benchmark: 60C (a little cool down while changing the mode and starting the second benchmark)
during second benchmark: 94C (max temp target) -> throttling
I never said it WAS photoshopped, I said it looked photoshopped because the numbers look different, and they do, whether its because of manipulation or terrible compression of the image format, I can't say.Quote:
Originally Posted by PedantOne
http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/5cb...2aaef44020.jpg http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/b80...bd5ed83386.jpg http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/8b4...02e2a23ecb.jpg http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/4b2...6d7eb1acfd.jpgQuote:
Furmark 94C
3DMark 52C (100% fan)
3DMark + OC 55C (100% fan)
Metro 2033 70C (20% fan)
According to the leaker, his R9 290X sample can go up to 1130 MHz. It wasn?t stable at 1150 MHz, so instead he kept overclocking the memory, which we have to say has some potential, but not as much as we expected.
http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-r9-29...cked-1130-mhz/
original link : http://www.chiphell.com/thread-881612-1-1.html
For reference:
In Metro 2033 I get 57 fps with Titan at 1006/3004 (default clocks) with CPU-PhysX in the CP selected and Adv. PhysX in the benchmark. So R9 290X is a tad faster than Titan per clock in this benchmark, likely (at least in part) due to the higher bandwidth.
thats pretty sick standard firestrik score, more then standard gtx 690
Fire Strike ared OCed scores and they're not so impressive, around a GTX 780 clocked ~1275MHz.Quote:
Originally Posted by highspeed
COH 2 does not support SLI / CF. its the game's fault. similarly for total war rome 2. if the developer wants they can definitely get SLI / CF to perform well. but few developers do not bother to get multi GPU to work at all. the top AAA games like BF4, Batman Arkham Origins come out on day one with excellent SLI / CF support. so can't blame Nvidia / AMD for few developers lack of interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Newer testing with titan makes it look less impressive somewhat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
http://www.legitreviews.com/galaxy-g...review_2238/10
Titan at stock gets 4800. Shouldn't take too much overclocking to beat 5359.
None the less, pretty impressive that they got this much performance out of a 438mm2 chip.
I think what we all need to see is power consumption figures and if it takes 100% fan to stabilize those clocks. 100% fan on cards, particularly AMD cards as of late is unusable due to noise.
Kind of a guess at this point, but I have a feeling gtx 780 Max OC competes with Max OC 290x. Which is pretty good.
If the gtx 780 ti comes with atleast as much shaders as titan and is clocked at a ghz, I am guessing it will put them into the position they have typically occupied, their flagship beating AMD's flagship by about 12 percent.
It's too bad for Nvidia, if they cannot release a fully enabled, gk110.
What, do you have the card next to your ear?
Noise isnt a problem unless you're sitting idle or watching a movie.
That said, heatsinks for GPU's suck.
what, noise isn't an issued ? those whiney fan noise from GPUs are like someone scratch their fingers on the blackboard, very uncomfortable when it is even slightly audible.
My take is that max playable oced 290x = max playable oced GTX 780, at stock the 290x will be slightly faster cause AMD had a couple of months to adjust final clock to just beat the GTX 780 anyways. That said iam gonna get the 290x for my next upgrade :D
100% percent fan noise from just about any blower type fan is awful. It's a high pitched noise that doesn't sound like the somewhat tolerable noise of just a regular case fan or the noise from your air conditioner or heater.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Its distracting and it can be heard from rooms away. So being a few feet away is just a headache waiting to happen.
http://www.firstpost.com/topic/organ...E-48380-6.html
Heres a video for a 7970 at 100% fan speed. They record it from probably a few feet away than probably 6 or 7 feet away. If your saying that wouldn't be an issue unless your watching a movie or just listening to it idle, your dead wrong.
Yes, I know exactly how loud they can be.
Do you have the card next to your ear? Are you forcing the fan to run 100%? Are you bothering to look into why your GPU is running the fan excessively fast if its not supposed to? Have you tried to mitigate the issue at all, or are you just complaining because the card "can be" loud but usually isnt?
Did you read my original post. I said I was talking about if 100% fan speed was necessary to stabilize that overclock?Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
"I think what we all need to see is power consumption figures and if it takes 100% fan to stabilize those clocks. 100% fan on cards, particularly AMD cards as of late is unusable due to noise."
If it takes 100% fan speed to stabilize that type of overclock, its basically in practice an usable setting due to the noise. Its practicality of the cards I am talking about because I am wondering what kind of fan speed is necessary for the card to remain stable at these types of clocks.
If you looked at those screen shots that were posted, the person overclocking the cards set the fan speed to 100%, so I am wondering if that fan speed is necessary to reach those clocks.
The blower in your AC air handler for your house is a blower style fan more than likely :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
I've heard a lot of noisy video card fans but so far the absolute worst I have ever heard was the stock fan on the X1900XT back in the day. It wasn't just loud, the tone of it was very irritating.
My AC just as the regular fan type fan. And up close, even that is too noisy. Its good to have the AC outside and not have to listen to the noise up close. I wish computer cooling could be like this. Well I guess it can in summer time, with an air duct hose attached to a vent. In winter time too, but I think that's too hardcore at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
My first post after long time, was too busy and only had time to lurk often but I'm reading this thread and couple others every day since I'm looking for major system upgrade.
After reading multiple repeated post in this thread about AMD R9 290X like "not impressive", "little to no reason to buy one", "not much OC room", "too hot and noise, bad drivers", "I won't lie, I'm disappointed" etc.
I almost decided TWO GTX 780 are going to be my next upgrade, than came the Nvidia announcement about GTX 780 Ti, looks to me Nvidia is little more impressed about the R9 290X otherwise there would not be any reason for the upgrade.
First time I'm going to trust more Nvidia than NV fan-boys and I'm not sure what I'm going to bye next.
My criteria:
1.) best performing card in 4K (for my next 50 inch TV monitor, provided it's 60Hz)
2.) lower price,
3.) if 1 & 2 is going close to equal I will prefer too support AMD
So you're just getting mad about possible noise and being a troll, ok.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
If you dont want to run 100% fan speed to run retarded overclocks on air then guess what? DONT.
I hear that the cards arent all that noisy compared to 79xx and there will be custom cooling solutions out soon anyway so I dont think noise/heat/power will really be an issue. I just dont get the delay with regard to release, heres hoping it is indeed the 25th
Whenever I am trying to find the maximum usable overclock on a specific card, I always set the fan speed to 100% regardless of if I think the card needs it. I try to eliminate it as a variable right away so I can focus on the core clock and memory speeds inch by inch. I assume most overclockers would do the same if they had limited time with the card as I usually do.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
I dont think hes trolling at all. If you dont spend alot of time with these cards like some of us do, fan speed and noise can be an issue. some video cards need 100% fan speed to run at their maximum overclock and some do not. I had a few graphics cards that didnt seem to matter if you had 70% fan speed or 100%. I found this out because my wife was complaining at me as I was trying to find the maximum overclocks on a pair of GTX 570s I was testing, I was able to lower the fan speed quite a but as I realzed they refused to overclock higher regardless.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
I don't know why it would since he says he could not add volts yet because software won't do it yetQuote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
so it would be the first time a no volts oc of a small what 13% (from 1000 to 1130) needed 100% fan that I've seen with amd cards
I would not be complaining too much about an overclock of 130mhz on a refrence card thats not released yet. These things are still in their infancy and I believe there is some more to be had
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
Going for a high overclock on air but complaining that it (might) require 100% fan speed is definately trolling.
I've run plenty of loud cards and the solution is easy for gaming: Turn off the overclock or Turn up the speakers more or put headphones on. Otherwise buy a card without that style of cooler or fix the cooler, or do something other than complain.
If the reviews say the card is loud at stock settings during idle or mild (movie) use then I will agree that AMD should go fire somebody for it, but complaining about noise for an overclock is just simply looking for a something to complain about (intentional or not), nothing more and nothing less.
Here's my old (still working) 4870x2. Runs pretty quiet now.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...713_142436.jpg
i'm not i'm sure once the final drivers or 1 or two more and they get afterburner working with the new cards oc's will get higherQuote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
Wow, I didn't expect this type of reaction. I am not saying assuming it is loud or anything. Your totally over reacting as it is a question about the stability and noise of the card at those particular clocks. I am not trolling at all. I am curious(not making assumptions) and not putting down the card, I am just wondering if it takes 100% fan profile to make a 1130mhz clock stable. It is not that high of an overclock for this generation, so I am wondering what the usable limits with an appropriate, less extreme fan profile.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
I.e can 1130mhz be stable at 70% fan or 50% fan. Either case would make those clocks far more usable, I am not assuming it takes 100% fan to make those clocks stable. Again its back to my original question, did they need a 100% fan profile to keep that overclock stable. This is xtremesystems, but not everyone benches the crap out of their cards.
At this point, every single person is likely interested in how well this card overclocks and what kind of clocks we can get with a more usable fan profile.
What spurred this curiosity is 1130mhz isn't that much of an overclock over 1 ghz(particularly this generation) which this thing will often run at. Its a fine overclock if it can get to 1130 mhz without a 100% fan profile, but if it takes that much fan speed to get to those clocks, it will just be a generally bad overclocker.
Stevil, every single person on this board is interested in how well this card overclocks, but not everyone is interested in how well this card overclocks with 100% fan profile which is what I believe your being too focused on and why you are getting angry. I, along with everyone else whose primary use of their videocard is to game is likely interested in how much we can overclock in a regular usage scenario. Not just a 3 minute bench where we crank up the fan to obtain max speed and thus don't care about about the noise because we are obtaining a max score in a 3 minute period and doesn't distract our gaming.
Exactly, I am curious does it need 100% fan speed to reach those clocks. Some cards as you have said need an extreme fan profile to stabilize their clocks, some do not. Which one is it for r290x?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
If I can run around 1130mhz and run a usable fan profile, this means I can run 1130mhz when I play my games and be okay if I buy this card. If I can only run something like 1050-1070mhz with a relatively quiet fan profile, there's a good chance I might be better off running a Nvidia card at 1200mhz, particularly the gtx 780 ti, if it has the same number of shaders as Titan or greater and overclocks just as well too.
The 290x doesn't seem to overclock to well under Ln2, from the rumors I heard on this board. I am wondering how this translates into Air overclocks. The numbers that have been tossed around is 1100mhz. From the xtrememembers who's knows someone that has benched it with ln2, the 1100mhz leaked bench and this new 1130mhz 100% max fan profile.
have you got any more pics from diff angles on the card and how you rigged it up?Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Uhm, most stock intel or AMD cpu coolers are able to run at 3-6k rpms.Nobody in their right mind would just set this coolers on MAX and whine about the noise.
This whole "issue" is not an issue.People doing MAX overclocks are either using water or are just doing benching, where noise is not a problem.
Everyone else is buying cards with better (and not blower type) than reference cooling ,and also if someone is looking for a OC in day to day situatuns like gaming, theyre OCing up to a noise threshold they desire.
In any case, MAX overclock is pretty much never usable because of the inefficiency, power and loudness.I CAN go 950 on my HD6950, however i have to go MAX fan and the card uses insane power amounts, so i run it at 900 with a quiet fan ,difference of few percent isnt worth the trouble.
Whats even more interesting, is the fact that we dont really know how loud reference of this even is!
After doing a quick glance at your post history, it's safe to say you had no intention of going with the nVidia cards. The above post was just at attempt to persuade potential buyers to go with the company you clearly have inappropriate feelings for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinz68
Amazing that now with 3 nvidia threads on the main page, opening this thread to try to find new information all you still find is nvidiots and their nauseating propaganda. Beware friends if you're not a nvidiot your post history will be reviewed and exposed!
Quote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
I Imagen it goes something like this; Chop an old cooler in half, dremel out a whole and add lots of duct tape, and Voila!
A Dutch site review site put up some benchmark numbers:
http://us.hardware.info/productinfo/...ab:testresults
I don't know if these number are already known? They haven't published the review yet, so it looks like a mistake to put it online already?
Really strange reply specially after I said if everything is near to equal I would rather like to support AMD. Don't think there was any need to check my post history after that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew LB
Also can you please explain what feeling I have about any company, I sure do not wish any company to go bankrupt, unlike you who just posted today "AMD is far more likely to go bankrupt than ....."
How dare you accusing me of lying, I definitely thought not having any other option than buying 2 EVGA GTX 780 Classified after reading all the doom and gloom about the R9 290X in this thread.
I sure do need very good video cards since I want to buy 4K TV/monitor and was thinking 2000 USD for 2 Titans was lil too much to spent.
Anyway as I already said before, now there might be another option maybe R9 290X is not such a waste to buy after all, Nvidia must know better why there is a need to come with new SKU to compete.
Radeon R9 290X Pictured, Tested, Beats Titan
Only Aliens vs. Predators 3, and Battlefield 3 tested by other site than TPU. See the pictures and graphs there also good read about the specs some rumored some true.
Posted today at TPU