ATI R9 390X rumoured Specs

menace-uk-

Starfield Gazer
Sep 11, 2013
37,258
15,301
3,930
Here's the thing about graphics cards: we spend an inordinate amount of time contemplating the advancements of the next iteration of hardware, only to find out (most of the time) those assumptions are generally close to the truth. Take the latest leak from Videocardz, for example. If their source is to be believed, the Radeon R9 390X is going to pack in a substantial boost to performance.

As previously expected, the next card from AMD will be dubbed the Radeon 390X. The GPU will boast a 1250 MHz memory clock, 4,096 stream processors, and if this report is to be believed, the 390X will function as the hardware manufacturer's new flagship card. And given the supposed specs, that should come as no surprise.

Additionally, the new card will allegedly pack in 4096 cores, with 8GB HBM at 2 GB per stack, via Dual-Link. The 28nm GPU will supposedly feature 8.6 teraFLOPS of performance, beating Nvidia's GeForce GTX Titan X (which currently offers 6.2 TFLOPS) by a significant amount.Well, assuming these leaks are true, of course. But AMD did recently say the company is working on the 300 series of its Radeon graphics cards.


  • 1250Mhz Memory Clock
  • 4,096 Stream Processors
  • 4,096 Cores
  • 8GB HBM @ 2GB per stack
  • 8.6 teraFLOPS

8.6 teraFLOPS:surprise::surprise::surprise::surprise:
 
AMD might win this round if the benchmarks are comparable to the Titan X. Cause as Evo7 said, we already know who's going to be cheaper.
 
Yup it's true, AMD's slides have leaked, it looks to be 60% faster than R9 290X, we have a beast on our hands if performance figures are true. I can't wait to see this and Titan X go head to head, we already know what will be cheaper.

http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/81697-slides-amd-radeon-r9-390x-wce-presentation-leaked/


Their performance comparison chart is a bit misleading, isn't it. 4K gaming is a niche. Most gamers are not and will not be playing at level for a long long time. Would have been nice to see comparison at 1080P or 1440p.
 
Their performance comparison chart is a bit misleading, isn't it. 4K gaming is a niche. Most gamers are not and will not be playing at level for a long long time. Would have been nice to see comparison at 1080P or 1440p.

I assume the performance would scale with the resolution, but agreed. It would have been nice to see data at the more common resolutions.
 
I assume the performance would scale with the resolution, but agreed. It would have been nice to see data at the more common resolutions.

Most people aren't going to to be buying a 390X to play at 1080p, but I agree with 1440P
 
I bet more people buy that card and play at 720P than they do 1440p or higher.

Why would they spend 500-600 on a graphics card to play at 720p when next gen consoles can do that at 350-400?
 
Why would they spend 500-600 on a graphics card to play at 720p when next gen consoles can do that at 350-400?

Because that is PC gamers for you. I know somebody with Titan GPU who still plays on a 5:4 1280x1024 monitor, and yes, I told him he is r******d.
 
This makes me wish next gen consoles waited a little bit longer before releasing. These big power boosts are coming in left and right it feels.
 
...and cryo cooling?

Insufficient.

All GPU buyers need to fund a space mission to Neptune *Extension cables sold separately*, the only planet in our solar system cold enough to cool this behemoth.