Radeon R9 390X is a High-End Graphics Card based on the First Revision of the Graphics Core Next (GCN) Architecture.
The GCN 1.1 revision of the Graphics Core Next Architecture adds new important technologies and is largely oriented for energy efficiency. New technologies such as PowerTune and TrueAudio are the biggest additions as well as DirectX 11.2 support.
It equips a GPU Codenamed Grenada XT which has 44 Compute Units activated and thus offers 2816 Shader Processing Units, 176 TMUs and 64 ROPs. The Central Unit is clocked at 1050MHz.
The GPU accesses a 8GB frame buffer of fast GDDR5, through a 512-bit memory interface. The size of the frame buffer is exaggerated and in no way benefits the GPU. The Memory Clock Operates at 1500MHz.
With a rated board TDP of 290W, it requires at least a 750W PSU with one available 6-pin and one available 8-pin connectors.
Radeon R9 390X competes with GeForce GTX 980 and is essentially a Higher Clocked Radeon R9 290X with the addition of twice as much video memory (8GB against 4GB).
Its Performance lies somewhere between GeForce GTX 970 and GeForce GTX 980, as does its price.
However, the lack of DirectX 12.1 Support paired with the enormous Power Consumption (almost twice as much as GeForce GTX 980) and the Gimmicked 8GB Frame Buffer, makes it an extremely uncompetitive product.
Still, Radeon R9 390X 8GB is around $120 cheaper than GeForce GTX 980 and performs reasonably better at 4K, though it is still best suited for 2560x1600.
Radeon R9 390X is best suited for resolutions up to and including 2560x1600. We recommend a Very Strong Processor and 8GB of RAM for Optimal Performance.
How is this identical to the Nano?
I guess it's to do with average speeds?
A 10% performance increase over the 290x. That may seem bad, but when Intel makes a 10% boost we all PRAISE THEM. Sure Intel changes architecture, but it's 10% just the same. If anything it's even more impressive they got 10% more out of running the same exact chip.
Plus it's not their 650$ card anymore like the 290x was- the FuryX is.
More VRAM and slightly overclock with a better power consumption compared the R9 290x. Basically a better 4k support, but still can't play it that well for AAA titles. No cards really can so far.
Just wondering… when it comes to AMD, which manufacturer you guys suggest?
A 290X Rebrand, what a nice inventions ..
as per specs its more or less same performer as GTX 970 :/
Rx-3xx series dissapoints.. T_T
Now I know why AMD stock has dropped.
R9 380 is just the same as R9 280x.
This series was really over-hyped.
I hope the Fury be as good as advertised.
AMD really dissapointed its lovers with the whole r-300 series and even with the fury series
the so called R9-FURY X can't beat the 980-ti and the previous benchmakrs say that the R9-390X is better than the Titan x!!
WTF was that?? http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-390x-nvidia-gtx-980ti-titanx-benchmarks/
That 8GB VRAM though… XDDD
My r9 290 is only 11% worse?
|Popular Game System Requirements|
|Call of Duty: WWII||65%||39%|
|Mass Effect Andromeda||62%||6%|
|Grand Theft Auto VI||69%||13%|
|Tom Clancys Ghost Recon Wildlands||55%||2%|
|Dawn of War 3||75%||37%|
|Resident Evil 7||69%||39%|