Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ocre or can one of you guys explain this?
I know you guys know about this technical stuff ,especially Ocre.
How does the new 390x beat the old 290x by 35% with these settings?

[Image: 1434612549l1GBQzJE5q_3_3.gif]
(06-19-2015, 04:34 AM)happy medium Wrote: I know you guys know about this technical stuff ,especially Ocre.
How does the new 390x beat the old 290x by 35% with these settings?

[Image: 1434612549l1GBQzJE5q_3_3.gif]

HardOCP user error.,15.html

Guru3d shows that game at those settings* with a whole 2fps difference in 290X and 390X.
*HBAO vs SSAO though

The ambient occlusion setting doesn't make much difference on Titan X SLi:

That game has 8GB VRAM recommended, but I notice the 4GB GTX980 beats the 8GB 390X....

I do predict every AMD fan on the planet will proclaim the 390X "the card to have" in the $400-$500 market because of that one benchmark on one site.

Just looked at about 10 other sites that used SSAO and found no difference. (or none that mattered)

Quote:For the new MSI R9 390X GAMING 8G video card we are using AMD supplied drivers for use only with the R9 300 series. This is driver version: "AMD-15.15-Radeon300-Series-Win8.1-Win7-64Bit-June15.

Quote:For the XFX Radeon R9 290X DD video card we are using, which runs at 1GHz stock AMD specs for R9 290X we are using Catalyst 15.5 Beta which is the latest driver for 290X.

Apparently the driver AMD provided for the 300 series: It should be noted that this driver will not work or install on AMD Radeon 200 series, so we cannot install it for the R9 290X comparison.

It is an artificial lock out for people with 200 series cards from the noble and angelic AMD. There is no way the driver will not work unless AMD locks it out with software ID checks. These really are the same chips.

If nvidia pulled some kind of crap like this, it would be a huge bash party. They got all kind of hate for "neglecting kepler" and here AMD 100% sabotages the 200 series performance by releasing a driver that refuses to work on their old cards- which is the same silicon.

I don't know why anyone is surprised by a dick move like this from AMD. It is what they do best. Should have seen it coming when they were piling on Kepler.

Anytime they accuse nvidia of doing something bad, you can be damn sure they are doing it too. From shader replacement, to clipping plane opimizations to trilinear/anisotropic optimizations to driver lockouts and oh so much more.
Adam knew he should have bought a PC but Eve fell for the marketing hype.

Homeopathy is what happened when snake oil salesmen discovered that water is cheaper than snake oil.

The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it. -- George Carlin
I'd be interested to see the image quality dissected between the 290X and 390X. 35% with similar IQ is pretty unheard of from a driver revision, IIRC from days I actually watched such things.

I have no doubt the 390X is a little better than the 290X but not 35% better unless the 4GB was the problem on the 290X. As it doesn't appear to be on the 980, IQ can't be the same unless NV is doing some sort of compression that lets them get under the 4GB.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)