AMD Ryzen 7 3800X review
PowerColor 5700 RED DEVIL review
MSI Radeon RX 5700 XT Evoke review
ASUS Radeon RX 5700 XT ROG STRIX review
ViewSonic Elite XG240R Monitor Review
Promo: URCDKey Summer Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
X570 Aorus master review
Cooler Master Silencio S600 review
AMD Ryzen 5 3400G review
ASUS RoG Swift PG35VQ Monitor review
MSI Radeon R9 390X Gaming 8G OC review
Posted by: on: 06/18/2015 01:56 PM [
273 comment(s) ]
We review the MSI Radeon R9 390X Gaming 8G OC edition. The card's equipped with that renamed Hawaii GPU, now called Grenada. Thanks to a huge triple slot air cooler based on the TwinFrozr V design the product is purring at just roughly 75 Degrees C, that's under full gaming load whilst being factory overclocked and fairly silent.
Read article
Advertisement
Tagged as:
msi
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
0blivious
Senior Member
Posts: 2509
Senior Member
Posts: 2509
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:05 PM
So it looks like some modest bumps in performance over the 290X. What I was interested in is the power consumption. It's better than the 290X but at 256 watts, it's still nowhere near the 970/980's power sipping, the obvious nvidia competition at this price point. That's unfortunate.
Nice review, as always. (still reading it/them)
So it looks like some modest bumps in performance over the 290X. What I was interested in is the power consumption. It's better than the 290X but at 256 watts, it's still nowhere near the 970/980's power sipping, the obvious nvidia competition at this price point. That's unfortunate.
Nice review, as always. (still reading it/them)
Doom112
Senior Member
Posts: 202
Senior Member
Posts: 202
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:05 PM
What a waste of line up from AMD.So MSI Radeon R9 390X Gaming is barely beating GTX 980 Reference.
What a waste of line up from AMD.So MSI Radeon R9 390X Gaming is barely beating GTX 980 Reference.
vbetts
Posts: 14510
Posts: 14510
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:14 PM
Look at the price. The 390X is $399, while the 980 is still about $500?
What a waste of line up from AMD.So MSI Radeon R9 390X Gaming is barely beating GTX 980 Reference.
Look at the price. The 390X is $399, while the 980 is still about $500?
lorikano
Senior Member
Posts: 323
Senior Member
Posts: 323
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:15 PM
Thats not as bad as I expected ,its very close to 980. If somebody really wants to go for 4k two of these will suffice just fine ,the problem it would be a bad idea to go for sli 980 because you know 4gb vram. And its $70 cheaper than 980.
Thats not as bad as I expected ,its very close to 980. If somebody really wants to go for 4k two of these will suffice just fine ,the problem it would be a bad idea to go for sli 980 because you know 4gb vram. And its $70 cheaper than 980.
Doom112
Senior Member
Posts: 202
Senior Member
Posts: 202
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:18 PM
Benchmark are compared with Reference GTX 980.
Thats not as bad as I expected ,its very close to 980. If somebody really wants to go for 4k two of these will suffice just fine ,the problem it would be a bad idea to go for sli 980 because you know 4gb vram. And its $70 cheaper than 980.
Benchmark are compared with Reference GTX 980.
Doom112
Senior Member
Posts: 202
Senior Member
Posts: 202
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:19 PM
GTX 980 has better cooling, less power consumption much better efficiency and of course much better overclocking.
Look at the price. The 390X is $399, while the 980 is still about $500?
GTX 980 has better cooling, less power consumption much better efficiency and of course much better overclocking.
lorikano
Senior Member
Posts: 323
Senior Member
Posts: 323
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:21 PM
It also has 4gb of vram in other words not good enough for 4k.
GTX 980 has better cooling, less power consumption much better efficiency and of course much better overclocking.
It also has 4gb of vram in other words not good enough for 4k.
B0GiE-uk-
Member
Posts: 41
Member
Posts: 41
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:21 PM
You are bang on with the driver support issues. AMD seriously needs to sort their **** out. Unless they come out with some sort of statement about how they are going to do day 0 driver releases for AAA games then I will not be buying an AMD GPU.
I currently run 2 x HD 7970's in Crossfire and have had enough of shoddy Crossfire driver support.
I will wait a while and then decide what to buy for my next GPU but the MSI GTX 980Ti Gaming version is looking highly likely as my next purchase at the moment.
SORT YOUR DRIVERS OUT AMD.....
You are bang on with the driver support issues. AMD seriously needs to sort their **** out. Unless they come out with some sort of statement about how they are going to do day 0 driver releases for AAA games then I will not be buying an AMD GPU.
I currently run 2 x HD 7970's in Crossfire and have had enough of shoddy Crossfire driver support.
I will wait a while and then decide what to buy for my next GPU but the MSI GTX 980Ti Gaming version is looking highly likely as my next purchase at the moment.
SORT YOUR DRIVERS OUT AMD.....
meth curd
Member
Posts: 92
Member
Posts: 92
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:23 PM
i feel AMD concentrated on the wrong segment with this new generation and shot itself in the foot. enthusiast cards like the fury won't get them out of the financial hole they're in, nor are they going to do any wonders for the market share. very unimpressive showing from the 3xx series. 390x is already based on a solid card but it all feels very underwhelming, especially for 370/380.
i feel AMD concentrated on the wrong segment with this new generation and shot itself in the foot. enthusiast cards like the fury won't get them out of the financial hole they're in, nor are they going to do any wonders for the market share. very unimpressive showing from the 3xx series. 390x is already based on a solid card but it all feels very underwhelming, especially for 370/380.
eclap
Member
Posts: 31497
Member
Posts: 31497
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:25 PM
Hmmm... MSI Gaming 980 costs about £30 more atm. I feel like AMD messed up here a little bit.
MSI did a great job with the card though, that heatsink looks massive, those VRM temps are amazing and the backplate is a nice bonus, well done MSI. Still, I feel like the 980 is the better choice out of the 2. That being said, the 980 is probably the worst value for money in nvidia's high end (bar TX, of course, but that's a niche product). Still, I feel like they're squeezing the absolute bejesus out of old tech with nowhere to go with it in the future. 390x kinda feels like a 290x with overclock to me. There's hardly anything new to be seen here. Nobody with a 290/970 will buy this, because you can simply overclock your cards and get the same result (minus the extra vram, of course).
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,24.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,25.html
talk about setting yourself up.
What a waste of line up from AMD.So MSI Radeon R9 390X Gaming is barely beating GTX 980 Reference.
Hmmm... MSI Gaming 980 costs about £30 more atm. I feel like AMD messed up here a little bit.
MSI did a great job with the card though, that heatsink looks massive, those VRM temps are amazing and the backplate is a nice bonus, well done MSI. Still, I feel like the 980 is the better choice out of the 2. That being said, the 980 is probably the worst value for money in nvidia's high end (bar TX, of course, but that's a niche product). Still, I feel like they're squeezing the absolute bejesus out of old tech with nowhere to go with it in the future. 390x kinda feels like a 290x with overclock to me. There's hardly anything new to be seen here. Nobody with a 290/970 will buy this, because you can simply overclock your cards and get the same result (minus the extra vram, of course).
It also has 4gb of vram in other words not good enough for 4k.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,24.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,25.html
talk about setting yourself up.
Doom112
Senior Member
Posts: 202
Senior Member
Posts: 202
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:25 PM
Do you want to me bring Gamework factor where AMD card do not work.
It also has 4gb of vram in other words not good enough for 4k.
Do you want to me bring Gamework factor where AMD card do not work.
Yakk
Senior Member
Posts: 130
Senior Member
Posts: 130
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:27 PM
Good review.
Not a big fan of 3 slot cards, but I do really like the fact of the excellent continued support for Hawaii this guaranteed. Same as the excellent extended support AMD provides for Tahiti owners over the years. For this reason I really like the tweaked rebranding strategy AMD is using, instead of redoing a complete new lineup just to sell similar speed grades anyways.
Good review.
Not a big fan of 3 slot cards, but I do really like the fact of the excellent continued support for Hawaii this guaranteed. Same as the excellent extended support AMD provides for Tahiti owners over the years. For this reason I really like the tweaked rebranding strategy AMD is using, instead of redoing a complete new lineup just to sell similar speed grades anyways.
Darkest
Senior Member
Posts: 10123
Senior Member
Posts: 10123
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:29 PM
I'd be more inclined to look for bargain 290's than buy one of those tbh, as suggested by HH. The cards perform well for their price segment, but for 90% of people they're literally competing against themselves. Reminds me of when the 285 was released when everyone was buying 7900 series cards.
I'd be more inclined to look for bargain 290's than buy one of those tbh, as suggested by HH. The cards perform well for their price segment, but for 90% of people they're literally competing against themselves. Reminds me of when the 285 was released when everyone was buying 7900 series cards.
eclap
Senior Member
Posts: 31497
Senior Member
Posts: 31497
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:32 PM
yeah, I'd rather pick up a ASUS DCUII 290x for £200 than this for £350. The 290x would also get very close if not on par with the 390x.
AMD will have to revise their pricing big time, no way is this a £350 card.
I'd be more inclined to look for bargain 290's than buy one of those tbh, as suggested by HH. The cards perform well for their price segment, but for 90% of people they're literally competing against themselves. Reminds me of when the 285 was released when everyone was buying 7900 series cards.
yeah, I'd rather pick up a ASUS DCUII 290x for £200 than this for £350. The 290x would also get very close if not on par with the 390x.
AMD will have to revise their pricing big time, no way is this a £350 card.
lorikano
Senior Member
Posts: 323
Senior Member
Posts: 323
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:34 PM
Hmmm... MSI Gaming 980 costs about £30 more atm. I feel like AMD messed up here a little bit.
MSI did a great job with the card though, that heatsink looks massive, those VRM temps are amazing and the backplate is a nice bonus, well done MSI. Still, I feel like the 980 is the better choice out of the 2. That being said, the 980 is probably the worst value for money in nvidia's high end (bar TX, of course, but that's a niche product). Still, I feel like they're squeezing the absolute bejesus out of old tech with nowhere to go with it in the future. 390x kinda feels like a 290x with overclock to me. There's hardly anything new to be seen here. Nobody with a 290/970 will buy this, because you can simply overclock your cards and get the same result (minus the extra vram, of course).
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,24.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,25.html
talk about setting yourself up.
Depends from the game .Shadow of Mordor is one example of high vram requirements at http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,16.html
In future titles we could begin to see 8gb vram as mandatory for 4k.
Hmmm... MSI Gaming 980 costs about £30 more atm. I feel like AMD messed up here a little bit.
MSI did a great job with the card though, that heatsink looks massive, those VRM temps are amazing and the backplate is a nice bonus, well done MSI. Still, I feel like the 980 is the better choice out of the 2. That being said, the 980 is probably the worst value for money in nvidia's high end (bar TX, of course, but that's a niche product). Still, I feel like they're squeezing the absolute bejesus out of old tech with nowhere to go with it in the future. 390x kinda feels like a 290x with overclock to me. There's hardly anything new to be seen here. Nobody with a 290/970 will buy this, because you can simply overclock your cards and get the same result (minus the extra vram, of course).
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,24.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,25.html
talk about setting yourself up.
Depends from the game .Shadow of Mordor is one example of high vram requirements at http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,16.html
In future titles we could begin to see 8gb vram as mandatory for 4k.
zer0_c0ol
Senior Member
Posts: 2976
Senior Member
Posts: 2976
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:34 PM
better cooling?? this card has awesome cooling
GTX 980 has better cooling, less power consumption much better efficiency and of course much better overclocking.
better cooling?? this card has awesome cooling
The_Gump
Junior Member
Posts: 3
Junior Member
Posts: 3
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:36 PM
Two points:
1) Was this card tested with the proper 300 series drivers, or, as the same with OC3D TV's review of the same card, it was with the older, non-optimized drivers that came on the driver CD? (The review was just posted on OC3D's YouTube channel)
2) You bag AMD about drivers using Witcher 3 as an example, really?...
Did you not know that due to it being a Nvidia Gameworks title, AMD had zero access to the game code until the game was released? In other words, AMD could not do any driver optimization until the game hit the shelves. Why is this so? Because all game dev's that partner with Nvidia Gameworks sign a contract that prohibits them from sharing any code with AMD. In fact, every man and his dog knows the story about Witcher 3 and how Nvidia tried to sabotage its performance on AMD cards... yet you used it as an example?
I thought this site provided un-bias GPU reviews? Instead it seems you are trying to continue with the "AMD have **** drivers" BS that all Nvidiot bias sites are famous for.... goodbye Guru3D...
Two points:
1) Was this card tested with the proper 300 series drivers, or, as the same with OC3D TV's review of the same card, it was with the older, non-optimized drivers that came on the driver CD? (The review was just posted on OC3D's YouTube channel)
2) You bag AMD about drivers using Witcher 3 as an example, really?...
Did you not know that due to it being a Nvidia Gameworks title, AMD had zero access to the game code until the game was released? In other words, AMD could not do any driver optimization until the game hit the shelves. Why is this so? Because all game dev's that partner with Nvidia Gameworks sign a contract that prohibits them from sharing any code with AMD. In fact, every man and his dog knows the story about Witcher 3 and how Nvidia tried to sabotage its performance on AMD cards... yet you used it as an example?
I thought this site provided un-bias GPU reviews? Instead it seems you are trying to continue with the "AMD have **** drivers" BS that all Nvidiot bias sites are famous for.... goodbye Guru3D...
Darkest
Senior Member
Posts: 10123
Senior Member
Posts: 10123
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:37 PM
Depends from the game .Shadow of Mordor is one example of high vram requirements at http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,16.html
In future titles we could begin to see 8gb vram as mandatory for 4k.
Shadows of Mordor tends to be overestimated a lot, people confuse the allocation as required use. That's not to say games wont use more VRAM at higher resolutions, but people playing at 4k + resolutions are generally running the best hardware they can get their hands on.
With that in mind, people intending to game at 4K will probably be looking at the Fury products or the 980Ti/Titan X from Nvidia.
Depends from the game .Shadow of Mordor is one example of high vram requirements at http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_oc_review,16.html
In future titles we could begin to see 8gb vram as mandatory for 4k.
Shadows of Mordor tends to be overestimated a lot, people confuse the allocation as required use. That's not to say games wont use more VRAM at higher resolutions, but people playing at 4k + resolutions are generally running the best hardware they can get their hands on.
With that in mind, people intending to game at 4K will probably be looking at the Fury products or the 980Ti/Titan X from Nvidia.
gUNN1993
Senior Member
Posts: 252
Senior Member
Posts: 252
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:40 PM
In future titles we could begin to see 8gb vram as mandatory for 4k.
mmm But that only shows a 4 fps difference between the 390X and 980 @ 4K, got to look at the Fcats ( I think that's the one that looks at smoothness) to see the full deal there.
In future titles we could begin to see 8gb vram as mandatory for 4k.
mmm But that only shows a 4 fps difference between the 390X and 980 @ 4K, got to look at the Fcats ( I think that's the one that looks at smoothness) to see the full deal there.
afaque
Senior Member
Posts: 130
Senior Member
Posts: 130
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:42 PM
why arent there any 380x and 370x, hmmm looks like amd is gonna release them later, lets see what they have up their sleeves
why arent there any 380x and 370x, hmmm looks like amd is gonna release them later, lets see what they have up their sleeves
kinggavin
Senior Member
Posts: 297
Senior Member
Posts: 297
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:42 PM
amd need fix there drivers got that one spot on the 8gb vram is good if you gonna buy 2 and crossfire them i wish my gtx 970,s had 8gb vram each , i think that is bonus its got 8gb vram but the high power usage and heat in crossfire is big problem for that card
amd need fix there drivers got that one spot on the 8gb vram is good if you gonna buy 2 and crossfire them i wish my gtx 970,s had 8gb vram each , i think that is bonus its got 8gb vram but the high power usage and heat in crossfire is big problem for that card
sdamaged99
Senior Member
Posts: 2025
Senior Member
Posts: 2025
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:50 PM
Great review. Garbage product
Great review. Garbage product
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35678
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35678
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:52 PM
Two points:
1) Was this card tested with the proper 300 series drivers, or, as the same with OC3D TV's review of the same card, it was with the older, non-optimized drivers that came on the driver CD? (The review was just posted on OC3D's YouTube channel)
2) You bag AMD about drivers using Witcher 3 as an example, really?...
Did you not know that due to it being a Nvidia Gameworks title, AMD had zero access to the game code until the game was released? In other words, AMD could not do any driver optimization until the game hit the shelves. Why is this so? Because all game dev's that partner with Nvidia Gameworks sign a contract that prohibits them from sharing any code with AMD. In fact, every man and his dog knows the story about Witcher 3 and how Nvidia tried to sabotage its performance on AMD cards... yet you used it as an example?
I thought this site provided un-bias GPU reviews? Instead it seems you are trying to continue with the "AMD have **** drivers" BS that all Nvidiot bias sites are famous for.... goodbye Guru3D...
Yes, we started with the preliminary driver to get the review going and once the new batch from yesterdays public release was out, we updated and migrated the results (which showed tiny / minor differences really).
As to your remark, I guess, you must be really happy with the driver support from AMD then. For the record, I am an editor, I watch and observe. If AMD fails to release a WHQL driver for over half a year, or is not capable of releasing driver 0-day with AAA game releases, then I find that to be bothersome.
AMD does read these reviews you know, comments are noted and in the end .. these comments might get you better drivers more often opposed to what you have gotten in the past 12 months. That's bad how ?
If you disagree with that, totally fine. Calling me bias is however stupid. Why do certain members react like you do these days ? So little respect is left it seems. Anyway, take care.
Two points:
1) Was this card tested with the proper 300 series drivers, or, as the same with OC3D TV's review of the same card, it was with the older, non-optimized drivers that came on the driver CD? (The review was just posted on OC3D's YouTube channel)
2) You bag AMD about drivers using Witcher 3 as an example, really?...
Did you not know that due to it being a Nvidia Gameworks title, AMD had zero access to the game code until the game was released? In other words, AMD could not do any driver optimization until the game hit the shelves. Why is this so? Because all game dev's that partner with Nvidia Gameworks sign a contract that prohibits them from sharing any code with AMD. In fact, every man and his dog knows the story about Witcher 3 and how Nvidia tried to sabotage its performance on AMD cards... yet you used it as an example?
I thought this site provided un-bias GPU reviews? Instead it seems you are trying to continue with the "AMD have **** drivers" BS that all Nvidiot bias sites are famous for.... goodbye Guru3D...
Yes, we started with the preliminary driver to get the review going and once the new batch from yesterdays public release was out, we updated and migrated the results (which showed tiny / minor differences really).
As to your remark, I guess, you must be really happy with the driver support from AMD then. For the record, I am an editor, I watch and observe. If AMD fails to release a WHQL driver for over half a year, or is not capable of releasing driver 0-day with AAA game releases, then I find that to be bothersome.
AMD does read these reviews you know, comments are noted and in the end .. these comments might get you better drivers more often opposed to what you have gotten in the past 12 months. That's bad how ?
If you disagree with that, totally fine. Calling me bias is however stupid. Why do certain members react like you do these days ? So little respect is left it seems. Anyway, take care.
sdamaged99
Senior Member
Posts: 2025
Senior Member
Posts: 2025
Posted on: 06/18/2015 02:52 PM
Nvidia themselves said this was incorrect, as did 3dProjektRed, AMD had many months to get involved
AMD simply don't invest money like Nvidia do (possibly can't afford to)
If this was some big conspiracy like you seem to think, how come AMD still don't have working (with AA) crossfire drivers for the Witcher 3
How long do they need?
AMD had zero access to the game code until the game was released?
Nvidia themselves said this was incorrect, as did 3dProjektRed, AMD had many months to get involved
AMD simply don't invest money like Nvidia do (possibly can't afford to)
If this was some big conspiracy like you seem to think, how come AMD still don't have working (with AA) crossfire drivers for the Witcher 3
How long do they need?
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2590
Was waiting for this one today also.Thanks