MSI's Radeon R9 285 GAMING OC does not yet show up for sale but with it's factory overclock may arrive at a slightly higher price than the MSRP of $250. The RAM remains at the default 5.5 GHz but the GPU has been bumped up 55MHz to 973MHz out of the box and could likely be pushed higher as MSI has included the usual suspects on this card, Twin Frozr IV Advanced and Military Class 4 components. In [H]ard|OCP's testing the card was well matched by the GTX 760, the HD 285 won more than it lost, but not always and not by much. Compared to the HD 280 not only did the new Tonga card usually provide better performance but the additional feature the GPU supports, of which FreeSync is only one, make the HD 285 the clear winner in that contest. Check their full review for benchmarks.
Ryan reviewed Sapphire's model here.
"AMD has launched the $249 AMD Radeon R9 285 video card. We dive into this somewhat confusing GPU. We compare it to the GeForce GTX 760 as well as an AMD Radeon R9 280. We'll discuss GCN differences in this new video card that may give it the edge with some feedback from AMD."
Here are some more Graphics Card articles from around the web:
- AMD's Radeon R9 285 @ The Tech Report
- PowerColor Radeon R9 285 TurboDuo 2GB @ Custom PC Review
- PowerColor R9 285 Turbo Duo Review @ OCC
- PowerColor R9 285 TurboDuo Review @ Neoseeker
- PowerColor Radeon R9 285 2GB Review @HiTech Legion
- Sapphire R9 285 Dual-X OC @ Kitguru
- AMD’s GTX 760 Killer? MSI Radeon R9 285 Twin Frozr IV Review @ Techgage
- Sapphire Dual-X AMD R9 285 @ eTeknix
- Asus R9 285 STRIX @ Kitguru
- Radeon R9-285 @ HardwareHeaven
- Sapphire R9 285 Dual-X OC 2 GB @ techPowerUp
- AMD Radeon R9 285 @ Legion Hardware
- MSI R9 280X Gaming 3G GPU Review @ Modders-Inc
- Sapphire R7 260X OC 1GB @ eTeknix
- AMD Radeon R9 290: Gallium3D vs. Catalyst Drivers @ Phoronix
- The Most Energy Efficient Radeon GPU For AMD Linux Gaming @ Phoronix
- 20-Way Radeon Comparison With Open-Source Graphics For Steam On Linux Gaming @ Phoronix
- AMD FirePro W9100 Professional Graphics Card @ X-bit Labs
- The Fastest NVIDIA GPUs For Open-Source Nouveau With Steam Linux Gaming @ Phoronix
- Examining Nvidia’s Driver Progress Since Launch Drivers: GTX 780 Ti & GTX 680 @ eTeknix
Is anyone gonna test the R9
Is anyone gonna test the R9 285 in crossfire in comparison to the R9 280 or 280x in CF. I bet that could be an interesting story.
AMD R9 280 250W.
AMD R9 280 250W.
Dammit we know! Sahout is
Dammit we know! Sahout is wrong, you are right! Are you happy now? Now kindly drop it.
Whats there to be happy about
Whats there to be happy about if PCPerspective keeps giving bad numbers.
He is doing the editors job for free.
You are missing the point
You are missing the point here. A new AMD card, especially after Maxwell, that performs almost the same and is only 10W more efficient compared to a chip that is 2,5 years old, IS A HUGE FAIL FOR AMD. A card that is 60W more power efficient it is a totally different story. It’s NOT a failure. This isn’t just an insignificant number about for example PCB size. It is a mistake that it is ignored. At least someone tell me that ALL the other sites are wrong and I will ShutUp.
Also this difference can play a major role in the final decision about what card someone would choose to buy. With almost the same performance and 10W difference, a lower priced 280 is the logical choice. Put an 60W difference between these two cards and that alone could be enough to send someone to 285.
OK I get your point. I
OK I get your point. I personalty don’t think TPD is something significant for desktop builds as savings in power bills are trivial, and generally cooling solution in desktops are such they can reliably handle 0.5kW or more. But I can see how some people can think TDP is important and make buying decisions based on it.
Anyhow now I checked again Shrout’s article and I see he still did not fix his error on the table on page one, where he lists R9-280 TDP as 200W. While to someone like me, that does not care about TDP, this is trivial error, I still find it unprofessional to leave it in the article after it was pointed out. Someone in PCper should fix that table.
When 290X come out, sites
When 290X come out, sites like Tom’s in their reviews, did anything possible to redirect the reader’s attention from the performance of the card, especially the performance per dollar of the card, that was just great compared to the ridiculous expensive Nvidia cards, to the noise, wattage and temperature of the card.
That’s of course just my opinion, but also an example how things that we consider insignificant can also spoil a card’s image.
The wattage was correct in the beginning, but someone posted that it was wrong and the number change in a second from the correct 250W to the 200W.
Now, more than one posts by me that are not just simple text, but also have photos and links are totally ignored. No one have fixed that number and no one cared to justify that 200W.
I had a 7950 TF3 from MSI
I had a 7950 TF3 from MSI that would run stable 950mhz with just 0.940 volts on the core. I never should have sold it 🙁