An interesting question is whether or not this is as much as GCN can take.
I was hoping to see something along the lines of what AMD did for the 4870 - release a slightly revised 4890 that offered better clocks, but did not increase the power consumption. That does not seem to be happening. Perhaps AMD simply doesn't have the money to do it.
Perhaps that is why they made Vega as well - this may be the limit of what GCN can do as an architecture, which is party why they have to release Vega. The next GPU will hopefully be a refinement - a leap on the scale not seen since the 7970 was released for AMD. If not AMD is in trouble on the GPU front.
What I really want to know is if there is more OC headroom. The very best RX 480 could do up to 1500 MHz. I am wondering if this will exceed that or if this will not.
I think that it is likely that we will have to see better coolers across the board. This thing is hot. Not quite to 290X levels, but still hot.
It will be interesting to see if they have upgraded the PCBs as well to account for this. I would also like to see a 75W limited for the PCIe slots, particularly given the past criticism that AMD has received on this matter.
Agree they are way past the power efficiency vs performance curve on GCN. I don't see this selling that well, but considering the power consumption, it is extremely important this time to buy a good PCB and cooler.
Originally Posted by spyshagg
I did not know the 390 pulled that much power over the 290x, thx.
Even more baffling, is that these rx580 are pulling as much watts (or more) as the 1080ti and half the performance.
Sadly it was just an overclocked 290X. There was no refinement of the die unlike the 4890 vs 4870. The same thing seems to be happening here.
They have reached a point where you don't see much performance, but a lot of power consumption for eat fps you can get. It's like a "pre overclocked" GPU.
Originally Posted by LazarusIV
As someone who upgraded from an XFX R9 290 to the Sapphire R9 Fury NITRO+ I respectfully disagree. I am experiencing much improved performance with the Fury compared to my old card and will sell this 290 off when I can. It was a beast when I got it and I really enjoyed it, but this Fury is a beastial card and the build quality on it is second to none.
The Fury X is within 25-30% performance of the 290X. That's not really the night and day that we were hoping for - we were hoping for a near 45% increase considering the presence of HBM and 45% more shaders. The Fury X underwhelmed, like due to a combination of its weak front end (command processor was not updated) and back end (ROPs may have been a bottleneck here too).
That's why there was very little enthusiasm for the Fury X - it was also very limited in the amount of overclocking headroom.