Why are you downclocking the core so much when watercooled? Is it not stable increasing the memory clock at all?
Have you found the max TC when running two threads yet? That's where I would start. You are using the setx commands right?
Topic: AMD R9 290X? - page 12. (Read 108823 times)
I get 840 / khash with my card ...
that's the 290X? whats your watt at the wall?
I am also interested to know this info. But I believe its the 290 cause 290x can go up to 1mh/s...
This is a 290x Sapphire Bf4 edition water cooled with latest ATI beta drivers Win 8.1 fully patched.
Sorry don't have a W meter will see if I can borrow one.
I have played a little with the clocks, tc and -g but instantly get decreased hash rate.
I am open for suggestions
Maybe Linux or Win 7? I Haven't tried the 290x in win 7 or linux but my 7950 performed the same in Xubuntu 12.04, win 7 and win 8.1
I think those numbers are way off...scrypt mining yield close to 1150kh/s, min 850kh/s with a 290x. The 290 non x shouldn't be much slower, same memory bandwidth slower stock clocks (who runs stock?)
Yea those numbers are way off because I think they are using stock clocks...
1400 KH/s on my 7990 could go alot higher but has cooling problems that only water cooling will fix
760 KH/s on 280x
I get 840 / khash with my card ...
that's the 290X? whats your watt at the wall?
I am also interested to know this info. But I believe its the 290 cause 290x can go up to 1mh/s...
I get 840 / khash with my card ...
that's the 290X? whats your watt at the wall?
I get 840 / khash with my card . Core clock down -12.5% mem std rest of settings same as the guy at overclockers win 8.1 .
Have tried other clocks but can't get a higher hashrate then this.
Does anybody have suggestions for clocks or settings?
Have tried other clocks but can't get a higher hashrate then this.
Does anybody have suggestions for clocks or settings?
Woohoo, anybody have the hash rate for AM R9 290 Scrypt mining?
I think those numbers are way off...scrypt mining yield close to 1150kh/s, min 850kh/s with a 290x. The 290 non x shouldn't be much slower, same memory bandwidth slower stock clocks (who runs stock?)
Where do you see 1150 on scrypt? Settings, please? I haven't had time to tweak more since my last update.
Didn't you post at that ocn thread? The guy there posted some screenshots...
Intensity 20 and two gpu threads with very high thread concurrency. Experiment with that and stock clocks, maybe undervolt. (modded p1 bios seems ideal for this)
I think those numbers are way off...scrypt mining yield close to 1150kh/s, min 850kh/s with a 290x. The 290 non x shouldn't be much slower, same memory bandwidth slower stock clocks (who runs stock?)
Where do you see 1150 on scrypt? Settings, please? I haven't had time to tweak more since my last update.
I don't think he has one, but more or less a guess.
The 7970 gets 750 pretty easy with 2048 cores. If the architecture is similar I'd expect nearly 1100mh/s from the extra 768 cores from the 290x. The extra memory and bandwidth ought to be good for something too, maybe?
I think those numbers are way off...scrypt mining yield close to 1150kh/s, min 850kh/s with a 290x. The 290 non x shouldn't be much slower, same memory bandwidth slower stock clocks (who runs stock?)
Where do you see 1150 on scrypt? Settings, please? I haven't had time to tweak more since my last update.
Weird results for sure.
I think those numbers are way off...scrypt mining yield close to 1150kh/s, min 850kh/s with a 290x. The 290 non x shouldn't be much slower, same memory bandwidth slower stock clocks (who runs stock?)
Has quite a few shaders missing (256), as well. Though, oddly, still has ~500 more than the 280x. Figure it would still do better than the 7970s.
I'm not impressed just yet, hopefully the drivers are just stupid right now? Either way, I don't see how they can cool those things when most all 7970s catch fire at stock clocks.
I think those numbers are way off...scrypt mining yield close to 1150kh/s, min 850kh/s with a 290x. The 290 non x shouldn't be much slower, same memory bandwidth slower stock clocks (who runs stock?)
the 290 (non-x) as well, seems slow... (and higher voltage --> more watts, but no increased performance)
possibly through bad Asics quality (in 290)... or drivers/software is not optimized, yet
it looks to me as if they (both 290x and 290 non-x) throttle down a lot in tests because they get too hot (or run into other driver/bios limitations)
i know this is a 290x thread, still I want to aks a 290 question here, since it fits best I think.
the 290 was "upgraded" with a new driver that raises the fan speed limitation. I wonder how both driver version compare in tests 290 old vs. 290 new vs 290x (quiet vs. über)
possibly through bad Asics quality (in 290)... or drivers/software is not optimized, yet
it looks to me as if they (both 290x and 290 non-x) throttle down a lot in tests because they get too hot (or run into other driver/bios limitations)
i know this is a 290x thread, still I want to aks a 290 question here, since it fits best I think.
the 290 was "upgraded" with a new driver that raises the fan speed limitation. I wonder how both driver version compare in tests 290 old vs. 290 new vs 290x (quiet vs. über)
WTF? Not good news, I was hoping for better performance.
looks like it has the same mining speed as 280x/7970
Asic quality works like that...more heat doesn't always equal more power, it does when you compare vs the same transistors, but not when comparing between cards.
I'm not sure if this is a bug in the software, or whether there is some funky things going on with the card's themselves, but voltages seem to set themselves where they please. My 2 cards have fairly comparable ASICS qualities, one is 78% while the other is 74%. Setting voltage to 1.25v on them = 1.031v for 78% ASIC and 1.063v for the 74% ASIC card. Here's another weird thing I noticed, the card running 1.063v actually pulls 5w less at the wall while hashing at the same settings. Seems like the higher ASIC card actually has more leakage. Increasing clock speed will also increase the GPU's voltage by it's self. Let's say for example: 1.25v set 1000mhz clock = 1.063v after vdroop using gpu-z. Up the clock speed to 1100mhz and now gpu-z measures 1.120v or so. To get back to 1.063v,youll have to lower voltage in GPUTweak to 1.15 for example. Those aren't actual numbers, but you get the gist of it. What's worse is that both cards behave differently!
This is really weird, higher ASIC usually have better quality output and you can lower the voltage lower compare to others and thus saving more energy. At least thats how it works for my 4 GPU...
Yep, higher ASIC should mean less leakage. Who knows.
Hoping to get somewhere with 2 threads today.
Well CGminer is set to keep them at max 80c, so they're both at 78c right now but the 1.063v card is running it's fan 200RPM higher to keep it there so it is giving off a little more heat.
Summary
78% ASIC 1.031V
74% ASIC 1.063V - hotter, draws less power
That is really weird. Most reviews I've looked through indicate that increased heat = increased power draw.
This is weird, unless the GPU is behind the first GPU.....
I'm not sure if this is a bug in the software, or whether there is some funky things going on with the card's themselves, but voltages seem to set themselves where they please. My 2 cards have fairly comparable ASICS qualities, one is 78% while the other is 74%. Setting voltage to 1.25v on them = 1.031v for 78% ASIC and 1.063v for the 74% ASIC card. Here's another weird thing I noticed, the card running 1.063v actually pulls 5w less at the wall while hashing at the same settings. Seems like the higher ASIC card actually has more leakage. Increasing clock speed will also increase the GPU's voltage by it's self. Let's say for example: 1.25v set 1000mhz clock = 1.063v after vdroop using gpu-z. Up the clock speed to 1100mhz and now gpu-z measures 1.120v or so. To get back to 1.063v,youll have to lower voltage in GPUTweak to 1.15 for example. Those aren't actual numbers, but you get the gist of it. What's worse is that both cards behave differently!
This is really weird, higher ASIC usually have better quality output and you can lower the voltage lower compare to others and thus saving more energy. At least thats how it works for my 4 GPU...
Yep, higher ASIC should mean less leakage. Who knows.
Hoping to get somewhere with 2 threads today.
Well CGminer is set to keep them at max 80c, so they're both at 78c right now but the 1.063v card is running it's fan 200RPM higher to keep it there so it is giving off a little more heat.
Summary
78% ASIC 1.031V
74% ASIC 1.063V - hotter, draws less power
That is really weird. Most reviews I've looked through indicate that increased heat = increased power draw.
It looks like a full time job making that card to work properly.
Card screams for water block or custom air cooling.
Tomorrow is presentation of R9-290...
Card screams for water block or custom air cooling.
Tomorrow is presentation of R9-290...
Hohoho, waiting for the news.. you pre-ordered one???
Jump to: