Final Words

Bringing this review to a close, it’s admittedly not very often that we write a negative video card review, especially for a major SKU launch from NVIDIA or AMD. Both companies have competitive analysis teams to do benchmarking and performance comparisons, and as a result know roughly where they stand long before we get their cards. Consequently they have plenty of time to tweak their cards and/or their pricing (the latter of which is typically announced only a day or two in advance) in order to make a place in the market for their cards. So it’s with a great deal of confusion and a tinge of sadness that we’re seeing AMD miss their mark and their market, and not by a small degree.

To get the positive aspects covered first, with the Radeon R9 290 AMD has completely blown the roof off of the high-end video card market. The 290 is so fast and so cheap that on a pure price/performance basis you won’t find anything quite like it. At $400 AMD is delivering 106% of the $500 GeForce GTX 780’s performance, or 97% of the $550 Radeon R9 290X’s performance. The high-end market has never been for value seekers – the fastest cards have always commanded high premiums – but the 290 completely blows that model apart. On a pure price/performance basis the GTX 780 and even the 290X are rendered completely redundant by the 290, which delivers similar-to-better performance for $100 less if not more.

The problem is that while the 290 is a fantastic card and a fantastic story on a price/performance basis, in chasing that victory AMD has thrown caution into the wind and thrown out any kind of balance between performance and noise. At 57.2dB the 290 is a loud card. A very loud card. An unreasonably loud card. AMD has quite simply prioritized performance over noise, and these high noise levels are the price of doing so.

To get right to the point then, this is one of a handful of cards we’ve ever had to recommend against. The performance for the price is stunning, but we cannot in good faith recommend a card this loud when any other card is going to be significantly quieter. There comes a point where a video card is simply too loud for what it does, and with the 290 AMD has reached it.

Ultimately there will be scenarios where this is acceptable – namely, anything where you don’t have to hear the 290, such as putting it in another room or putting it under water – but on a grand scale those are few and far between. For most buyers who will simply purchase the card and drop it into their computers as-is, this represents an unreasonable level of noise.

As a result for most buyers the competitive landscape in the video card market will remain unchanged, even with today’s launch of the 290. With the reference 290 untenable as a purchase, this leaves the GTX 780 at $500, the 290X at $550, or the GTX 770 and 280X at the $300-$330 range, leaving a large hole in the market in the short term. In the long term it will be up to AMD’s partners to try to salvage the 290 with custom designs, enhanced coolers, and other modifications. The 290 still has quite a bit of potential both as a product and as a competitor in the larger video card marketplace, but that potential is wasted so long as it’s paired with AMD’s reference cooler and the need to run it so loudly.

On a final note, with the launch of the 290 and AMD’s promotional efforts we can’t help but feel that AMD is trying to play both sides of the performance/noise argument by shipping the card a high performance configuration, and using its adjustability to simultaneously justify its noise as something that can be mitigated. This is technically correct (ed: the best kind of correct), but it misses the point that most users are going to install a video card and use it as it's configured out of the box. To that end adjustability is a great feature and we’re happy to see such great efforts made to offer it, but adjustability cannot preclude shipping a more reasonable product in the first place.

Had the 290 shipped in its original 40% fan configuration, it wouldn’t be knocking on the GTX 780’s door any longer, but it would have been in a spot where its balance of price, performance, and noise would have made for an attractive product. Instead AMD has shipped the 290 with the equivalent of uber mode as the default, and in the process has failed to meet the needs of the majority of their customers.

Update

Originally published here.

In this week’s article I flat out avoided recommending the 290 because of its acoustic profile. When faced with the tradeoff of noise vs. performance, AMD clearly chose the latter and ended up with a card that delivers a ridiculous amount of performance for $399 but exceeds our ideas of comfortable noise levels in doing so.

I personally value acoustics very highly and stand by my original position that the reference R9 290 is too loud. When I game I use open back headphones so I can listen for phone calls or the door for shipments, and as a result acoustics do matter to me. In the review I assumed everyone else valued acoustics at least similarly to me, but based on your reaction it looks like I was mistaken. While a good number of AnandTech readers agreed the R9 290 was too loud, an equally important section of the audience felt that the performance delivered was more than enough to offset the loud cooling solution. We want our conclusions to not only be reflective of our own data, but also be useful to all segments of our audience. In the case of the 290 review, I believe we accomplished the former but let some of you down with the latter.

Part of my motivation here is to make sure that we send the right message to AMD that we don’t want louder cards. I believe that message has been received loud and clear from what I understand. It’s very important to me that we don’t send the message to AMD or NVIDIA that it’s ok to engage in a loudness war in the pursuit of performance; we have seen a lot of progress in acoustics and cooler quality since the mid-to-late 2000’s, and we’d hate to see that progress regressed on. A good solution delivers both performance and great user experience, and I do believe it’s important that we argue for both (which is why we include performance, power and noise level data in our reviews).

The Radeon R9 290 does offer a tremendous value, and if you’re a gamer that can isolate yourself from the card’s acoustics (or otherwise don’t care) it’s easily the best buy at $399. If acoustics are important to you, then you’re in a tougher position today. There really isn’t an alternative if you want R9 290 performance at the same price. The best recommendation I have there is to either pony up more cash for a quieter card, accept the noise as is or wait and see what some of the customized partner 290 cards look like once those do arrive. I suspect we’ll have an answer to that problem in the not too distant future as well.

Note that this isn't going to be the last time performance vs. acoustics are going to be a tradeoff. AMD pointed out to us that the 290/290X update is the first time its fan speed has been determined by targeting RPMs vs. PWM manipulation. In the past, it didn't really matter since performance didn't scale all that much with fan speed. Given the current realities of semiconductor design and manufacturing, the 290/290X situation where fan speed significantly impacts performance is going to continue to be the case going forward. We've already made the case to AMD for better reference cooling designs and it sounds like everyone is on the same page there. 

Overclocking
Comments Locked

295 Comments

View All Comments

  • YazX_ - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    This is the case for reference designs, i wouldnt expect that custom designs will suffer from noise and heat issues, as an example, 770 GTX reference temp under load is 80c, i have 770 gtx Gigabyte OC windforce3 andi have never seen the GPU temp reaching 65.

    290 for now is the best bang for the buck, gr8 job AMD, and for us, it means another price cut from Nvidia which is the best part in these competitions.
  • yeeeeman - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    I think there is too much critic made on the subject of noise. You get a water block and the problem is solved. And you also pay less money for this combo, than what you would've pay'd for a GTX780.
    But, the thing that really strikes back from this review, is the unused potential of the 290X. Just imagine how it would run unlimited by its cooling system. I think it could hold its own against the comming 780Ti from nVidia.
    And, we should stimulate AMD, because if it weren't for them, nVidia wouldn't ever dropped their prices. Now, they are even releasing the full GK110 core, at a smaller price than Titan.
  • TheJian - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    So how many people you think there are running water? Also how much does that add to the cost of my shiny new hot card? Newegg isn't likely to be shipping water cooled cards by the millions...LOL. You are aware this is a REF NV card tested too right?

    Tomshardware seems to think noise and heat and how it runs IN GAMES after a period of time is an issue:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-...
    "On the R9 290X we received from AMD, and in the seven games we tested, a 40% fan speed is good enough to average about 874 MHz. But when you’re actually gaming on a hot card (and not just benchmarking a cold one), our two-minute Metro: Last Light test suggests you’ll be spending more of your time in the upper-700 MHz range. In fact, in some titles, you’ll dip under 1000 MHz before even getting out of the menu system and into the action (Arma and BioShock).

    You could call that questionable marketing. After all, the only way you’ll actually see a sustained 1000 MHz is if you either let the R9 290X’s fan howl like a tomcat looking for action or play platform-bound games."

    How fast will these be after running a few hours in game? Or even 1hr? Most won't purchase water for any gpu so they'll be dealing with it as it is or with a better fan at some point (assuming OEM's get them soon):
    "AMD’s scheme undoubtedly suffers a lack of clarity, and after piling praise onto the R9 290X’s value story, I now have to hope that Nvidia doesn’t follow AMD down this muddy little rabbit hole."

    I hope they don't follow AMD and release a driver tomorrow doing the same crap too. But if I was them that is EXACTLY what I'd do in response along with videos everywhere explaining this should not be done, "but we have to do the same crap the other guys pull to beat us and when pulling this crap, you can clearly see there is no reason for us to drop prices agian" :) Or something like that...LOL. I really think AMD is going to be hurt by people buying the first rev and complaining all over forums about their silent PC (or nearly noise free) sounding like a jet engine now. Also as toms points out, are people really going to get the full perf while playing for longer than COLD periods that reviews bench under? A lot of people game for HOURS and they noted it slowing down even in menus before even playing the actual game. How does this card affect the rest of the temps in your PC during hours of playing? How does a gpu temp of 94 affect the PC vs. 81 for NV? I'll take 81 thanks.
  • 1H4X4S3X - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    Does anyone remember Ryan Smith's review of the even louder GTX 480?
    Anyone who can't see the bias is blind himself.
  • Drunktroop - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    You treat FurMark as a more meaningful/real-life test than Crysis 3?
  • silverblue - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    Shh.

    The simple fact is, whilst incredibly fast, this baby needs modding with a better cooling solution. Early adopters are usually hit the hardest, so I'd recommend waiting until customised cards hit the shelves. A GTX 780-style cooler would be very interesting indeed.
  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    Which is actually why we threw in the GTX 480 in our charts for this one, to offer some perspective. The GTX 480 is quieter than the 290.
  • chizow - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    And certainly you must account for the possibility that expectations and tolerances change over time right? Read the 580 review and you will see he says it is basically "Fermi Done Right", setting the new standard for high-end temps and cooling. The 580 design put a ring on the fan to reduce the whine on the fan, so to go back to something as shrill and annoying is easily understood as taking a step in the wrong direction.
  • chizow - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    To add to that, there was a time 60mm and 80mm high RPM fans were the norm on CPU coolers, no longer, I could never stand for one of those high-pitched coolers again now what we are spoiled with 120mm/140mm CPU fans or multiple fans on radiators.
  • Drunktroop - Tuesday, November 5, 2013 - link

    I think you should be ready for noise when the maker is not willing to disclose power figures?

    Too bad Hawaii for SFF gaming is a no-go.
    From performance perspective it is unbeatable.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now