facebook rss twitter

Benchmarks from purported AMD Radeon R9 390X published

by Mark Tyson on 27 November 2014, 10:35

Tags: AMD (NYSE:AMD)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qacl4f

Add to My Vault: x

Benchmark results, said to include the rumoured upcoming AMD Radeon R9 390X, have been uploaded to Chinese tech forum ChipHell. If these results have any validity then we are seeing the first set of benchmarks from AMD's upcoming high end graphics card challenger based upon the 'Pirate Islands' GPU architecture.

We saw the first signs of AMD's new R9 300 series emerge into the material world about a fortnight ago when shipping manifests detailed the export of a 'Fiji XT' based graphics card. At the same time synthetic benchmark database testing results emerged, with further spec details, for what was thought to be the Radeon R9 390 and the R9 390X.

To recap, it is currently thought that the R9 390 is equipped 3520 stream processors at 1050MHz and the R9 390X has 4096 stream processors at 1000MHz with 4GB of VRAM. So what kind of performance can gamers expect from these new graphics cards? ChipHell says it has the answer to that question with its charts comparing the frame rates and power consumption of the 'Captain Jack' graphics card it has got its hands on.

Click to zoom in

The first chart you see above creates a metric from an average gaming performance using a pretty large selection of modern games including Far Cry 4, Watch Dogs, Dragon Age: Inquisition, Battlefield 4, Titanfall and several more. The tests were run on a system with an Intel Core i7-4790 with a 2560×1440 resolution screen with IQ settings set to maximum. The tester used the 344.75 WHQL drivers for NVIDIA cards and Catalyst 14.11.1 BETA drivers for AMD cards.

The chart above shows average graphics card power consumption when under load playing a selection of modern games.

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.

HEXUS Forums :: 18 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Posted by Biscuit - Thu 27 Nov 2014 10:52
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.

:lol::lol::lol:

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.
Posted by bob3406 - Thu 27 Nov 2014 10:59
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.
Posted by kalniel - Thu 27 Nov 2014 11:16
bob3406
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.
Posted by [DW]Cougho - Thu 27 Nov 2014 11:40
From reading elsewhere I thought the original leak identified this mysterious ‘Captain Jack’ card as the 380X not the 390X? Has this changed?
Posted by MrJim - Thu 27 Nov 2014 11:54
Biscuit
:lol::lol::lol:

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?

SEE NEWER »