THE AMD R9 290X is now the NEW champion for ARMA3 with @_@ performance at all res!!

[wasserkool 1]

Happy to see that many tier 1 reviewers are including ARma 3 in their latest reviews for the R9 290X. The performance is simply breathtaking and I can't wait to get 2 of them for the ULTIMATE Arma3 experience! Right now my two Radeon 7970s can run Arma 3 okay with some custom tweaking at 2560X1200 with a viewdistance of 4500M. The 290X might finally allow me to crank everything up and keep the same view distance! To be honest, I was a bit tempted to get the Geforce TITAN but looking back I am glad I waited and didn't have to pay the STUPID NVIDIA TAX!

This game is also GODSEND for PC hardware manufacturers as it is estimated fans will spend $800 MILLION to upgrade their rigs for Arma 3:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2046151/report-one-pc-shooter-will-drive-800-million-in-hardware-purchases.html

HARDOCP - http://hardocp.com/article/2013/10/23/amd_radeon_r9_290x_video_card_review/7#.UmnALRAn2lA

Tomshardware - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290x-hawaii-review,3650-8.html

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/4167/2iy2.jpg (224 kB)

Edited October 26, 2013 by wasserkool

[St. Jimmy 272]

By an average of 0,1fps compared to Titan :eek:

I'd like to see with lower object distance. Max 2K.

[wasserkool 1]

By an average of 0,1fps compared to Titan :eek:

I'd like to see with lower object distance. Max 2K.

But with the price of one TITAN, you can almost get TWO R9 290X and based on their new crossfire bridgeless architecture, the scaling is close to 100% And why limit to 2K viewdistance. the ultimate goal is to have the FULL 10K viewdistance hehe...which is what everyone is trying to achieve. I am diehard ARMA player started with OFP and this is the only game that I invest in top of the line hardware for!

Check out this review - http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290X_CrossFire/23.html

Priced just 10 percent higher than a single NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN graphics card, AMD's Radeon R9 290X CrossFire is an interesting high-end graphics option if you're willing to overlook a few things. At 2560x1600 and in its "Uber" mode, the R9 290X CrossFire offers 30% higher performance than the GTX TITAN and 26% higher performance than the GTX 690, a dual-GPU graphics cards priced around the $1000 mark. So the R9 290X "Uber" CrossFire configuration is a great deal from a price-performance perspective. Please note that we are discussing 2560x1600 here because it is the absolute minimum resolution you should use for 290X CrossFire. Serious CF performance scaling only happens at that resolution and beyond.

Edited October 25, 2013 by wasserkool

[mr burns 132]

appr.2k$ worth of hardware and Min. FPS 10? ArmA´ed! :cool:

[Arrowhead 0]

However, the 290X runs hotter than the core of the sun, sounds like a vacuum cleaner and sucks up power like a washing machine with a full load. All that for an extra 0.1 fps!

Yup, time to sell my Titan. :p

[wasserkool 1]

However, the 290X runs hotter than the core of the sun, sounds like a vacuum cleaner and sucks up power like a washing machine with a full load. All that for an extra 0.1 fps!

Yup, time to sell my Titan. :p

Thats why I'll wait for the non-reference models to come out before getting them. Either way, the 290X is now the reining champ in single card performance and has really dethroned the TITAN, especially at 2560X1200 and above!

---------- Post added at 01:19 ---------- Previous post was at 01:17 ----------

appr.2k$ worth of hardware and Min. FPS 10? ArmA´ed! :cool:

Maybe that 10 FPS is caused by the game stuttering as the HardOCP test system is running a 7200RPM WD Caviar Black HDD. This game really needs an SSD or even SSD RAID to truly shine!

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Either way, the 290X is now the reining champ in single card performance and has really dethroned the TITAN, especially at 2560X1200 and above!

Nope

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r9_290x_review_benchmarks,21.html

Titan still on top for some games.

And for some heat and power consumption are still important. I'd be truly stupid to buy a 290X, considering my machine gets between 2-10 hrs of use per day and I live in a hot country. And I'd still need two of them to beat the performance of my GTX690. The hidden cost of keeping my machine , and my self cool with 2 GPUs wanting to hit 95deg certainly out weighs a few extra (and redundant) frames. I understand why folks building today will swallow 290s whole. But seeing this really does make me feel even happier about purchasing my 690 a little over 12months ago, on the balance of power and heat vs comparable frames and what it $cost to beat it, the 690 is still a great card.

Really the 290X card is typical of AMDs solution to everything, make an inefficient card and let the consumer deal with the rest.

But I do like the crossfire solution, using the previously unused PCIE3 bandwidth and doing away with the bridge.

[lev 21]

Uh doesn't your image from tom's hardware immediately disprove what you just said? Seems like the top card to beat is the GTX 690 right now?

[Robertqx 10]

I have a pretty nice system (3770k @ 4.6, 16 gb of 2400mhz GSkill, 840 Pro), but I just can not justify spending 550 dollars to get 12-15 more frames in the one video game I do play (Arma III) over my current card (7950).

[roshnak 41]

Since when is an average of 40 fps with dips to 10 good performance?

[Piru 10]

I'd llike to see them test these on multiplayer... There would be like the top 20 gfx cards at the same 30fps no matter what configuration or overclocks. :j:

[wasserkool 1]

Uh doesn't your image from tom's hardware immediately disprove what you just said? Seems like the top card to beat is the GTX 690 right now?

The GTX 690 is a dual GPU card and you can't really compare that with the 290X. As for those saying the 290X having higher power consumption and heat than the titan, while this is true but we are only looking at less than 100W or so difference. The NVIDIA TAX of $500+ you paid to purchase the Titan can pay for the extra AC or Powerbills for many many months over...unless of course if you load your GPU 100% 24/7 for folding or mining.

---------- Post added at 07:55 ---------- Previous post was at 07:53 ----------

Since when is an average of 40 fps with dips to 10 good performance?

Like i said earlier, they should've tested the game with an SSD and the dip is probably caused by stuttering.

[maddogx 13]

As for those saying the 290X having higher power consumption and heat than the titan, while this is true but we are only looking at less than 100W or so difference.

The Titan apparently uses 298W while the 290X is at 304W. (Source)

Not a huge difference, at least as far as power consumption is concerned, though it does mean the 290X will need two 8-pin connectors instead of one 8-pin and one 6-pin (which would only deliver up to 300W).

[Leon86 13]

The Titan apparently uses 298W while the 290X is at 304W. (Source)

Not a huge difference, at least as far as power consumption is concerned, though it does mean the 290X will need two 8-pin connectors instead of one 8-pin and one 6-pin (which would only deliver up to 300W).

A 50W difference with sleeping dogs, 40W in Max payne 3.

the 6W difference is in crysis 3, where the titan is faster, maybe amd needs to tweak the driver a bit more for that game.

[maddogx 13]

A 50W difference with sleeping dogs, 40W in Max payne 3.

the 6W difference is in crysis 3, where the titan is faster, maybe amd needs to tweak the driver a bit more for that game.

Ah, you're right. I guess I should have read further than the first "power consumption" chart. ;)

[clydefrog 3]

Since when is an average of 40 fps with dips to 10 good performance?

That's due to Arma 3's bad optimisation and not the cards. If you look at other comparisons between the GTX 770 and R9 280x/7970 on hard OCP they also both get minimum 10fps with 40fps average in the combined arms showcase as well. You probably realise that but just pointing it out in case you didn't.

Edited October 25, 2013 by clydefrog

[Fushko 59]

You can get like 3 times better FPS if you disable SSAO, which has little to no effect but kills performance.

[bangtail 0]

No thanks, sounds like a leafblower and runs at 95C.

Wouldn't even want to contemplate 2 of them in the same box without WC.

AMDs idea of a 'stunning victory' is releasing a card that trades blows with 9 month old cards, runs ridiculously hot and loud and won't have any custom cooling designs before next year.

The price is fantastic but there is a reason for that price.

I'm pretty sure the 780 refresh will put Nvidia back in the lead again, smartly.

I'd really like to see AMD come out with something groundbreaking but I just can't get excited about this (maybe if it had been released in Feb at that price).

[jumpinghubert 49]

http://hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTM4MjA4ODA1OWE0N1FTMjNiTlFfN18zX2wuZ2lm

"Interestingly the R9 290X dropped down lower during our intense gunfight around the 196 second marker, compared to TITAN or GTX 780"

a important detail. I hope its driver related.

@10fps dip in showcase

I think its a kind of short lag/freeze, look in the apples to apples graph on hardocp above. But we all know, sp performance isn´t the problem of arma3.

Edited October 25, 2013 by JumpingHubert

[mamasan8 11]

No thanks, sounds like a leafblower and runs at 95C.

Wouldn't even want to contemplate 2 of them in the same box without WC.

AMDs idea of a 'stunning victory' is releasing a card that trades blows with 9 month old cards, runs ridiculously hot and loud and won't have any custom cooling designs before next year.

The price is fantastic but there is a reason for that price.

I'm pretty sure the 780 refresh will put Nvidia back in the lead again, smartly.

I'd really like to see AMD come out with something groundbreaking but I just can't get excited about this (maybe if it had been released in Feb at that price).

Not only that. To get decent (Titan-equivalent) performance, the card needs to run at 300+ Watt and fan making 72 Dba of noise.

Who in their right mind would do that? This card sounds like the AMD fx-9000-series. Way too warm, too power-hungry.

A big failure in my book.

[CptMacMillan 20]

Question a bit OT.

Is there a system set up (regardless of price), that can run everything in Ultra at 1080p, and object distance+view distance @10000?

[wasserkool 1]

Question a bit OT.

Is there a system set up (regardless of price), that can run everything in Ultra at 1080p, and object distance+view distance @10000?

Nope....not possible at this moment...

[Dwarden 1125]

any bench where the R7 260X compared with R9 290X yet?

[Beagle 684]

The problem I see here that back in the 90's when i got in touch with PC games you could without any problem play most games on your average business PC.

Nowadays the average buniness PC can't handle most games anymore. Game Consoles come in handy now because I do not believe the majority of PC systems sold are gaming PCs.

My willingness to upgrade all 2 years jst for games like I did back till 2003 is now definately gone because other priorities to spand all that money have take over...and is it not stange that we srew in 7Watts energy saving bulbs everywhere, ban conventional light bulbs because they produce more heat than light but have PC runnign under that desk that easily rise the room temperature for 3°C and need a 2kw power supply?

Edited October 25, 2013 by Beagle

[celery 8]

The problem I see here that back in the 90's when i got in touch with PC games you could without any problem play most games on your average business PC.

Nowadays the average buniness PC can't handle most games anymore. Game Consoles come in handy now because I do not believe the majority of PC systems sold are gaming PCs.

Back in the 90s, a gaming PC was rendered obsolete within a couple of years. These days a mid-range PC from 2009 can run most games fine unless you specifically want to play Crysis, Arma & co. I'm not sure what hardware today's casual PCs have, but it has to be pretty low-budget if what you're saying is correct.