Top
80°

AMD's R9 295X2 Makes Smooth 4K Gaming a Reality, But

I admit, $1000 is a lot of money to spend on a graphics card. Even if you're determined to stay on the bleeding edge of gaming technology, spending the same amount on a GPU that would otherwise buy you an entire system can be difficult to justify. Comparatively speaking, though, AMD's R9 295X2 is actually pretty good value. Until recently the card went for $1500, before AMD dropped the price to $1000. For that you get two R9 290X GPUs on one dual-slot card, together with a neat and highly efficient all-in-one watercooling system. That it makes it one of the quietest and fastest dual-GPUs out there. It even tops the performance of Nvidia's Titan Z, which goes for an eye-watering $3000.

Read Full Story >>
gamespot.com
The story is too old to be commented.
MRMagoo1231558d ago

Jesus the price of the video cards are stupid lol you could get 2 next ps4s or Xbone for that one card. Bet it still can't get a locked 60fps on dead rising 3 tho stupid capcom.

Bodge1557d ago

These high priced GPU's are really meant for workstation machines, and the occasional idiot that buys it for gaming.

HeWhoWalks1557d ago

I wouldn't call anyone an idiot for buying these cards for gaming, especially at higher resolutions and/or with multiple monitors. NVIDIA Quadro cards are much more practical for workstation PCs.

Eonjay1557d ago

Marketed for PC enthusists. They will sell. It isn't something that has the potential to acheive mass market penetration thought. Most people will look at that price and look for another option. You don't have to spend $1k on a GPU in order to game (thank goodness.)

Gamer7771557d ago

You been more polite and said that "these high priced GPUs are mean't mostly for graphics design and for very high end PC enthusiast".

XBLSkull1557d ago

I'd love to have this card but my r9 290x is plenty for me in all reality.

Reddzfoxx1557d ago

This is marketed for gaming. If it was for workstations it would be a Firepro.

justlikeme1557d ago

Don't hate on the rich just b/c you can't afford it. I bet if you had the money to buy one you would buy one too.

UltraNova1557d ago

For 1000 dollars this should be good for at least 5-6 years down the road no need to upgrade again during that time. Thing is you need a $500-700 CPU to avoid bottlenecking this beast.

Volkama1557d ago

The R9-295x isn't a workstation card, or particularly geared to graphics design. Those cards generally stack GPU compute (the Titan line does fall into this category).

The R9-295x targets the gamer that pays to stay cutting edge, either for 4k gaming or for hobbyist benchmarking. And there is genuinely a market for that.

porkChop1557d ago

These aren't workstation GPUs and would be pretty terrible for that. These are meant for PC enthusiasts.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1557d ago
karlowma1557d ago

There's always a skewed price for enthusiast components.

nVidia has the Titan, AMD has this.

Intel has Haswell-E; the i7-5960X is over $1K.

DDR4 memory is 2x the price of DDR3.

None of it is necessary, but there will always be the "gotta have it" crowd.

traumadisaster1557d ago

Stupid? Do you vacation? Do you have other nice things in your life? $200 shirt or jeans, boat? House or car? Real life has real upgrades if you have a real career.

MRMagoo1231557d ago

None of the above actually except for a well paying job.

ARESWARLORD1557d ago

Nice card but two rich for my blood. Will stick with my r9 280x crossfire set up. It cost me about the same as a xbox for the 2 cards so not super crazy.

ps4fanboy1557d ago (Edited 1557d ago )

Does a game actually exist on PC that offers 4k textures etc etc? I mean if a game hasn't got 4k assets , then all you are doing is making a less resolution count gaming assets bigger ,like maybe taking a 1080p movie and upscaling to 4k , it will maybe look sharper but it won't add detail that isn't already there.

Do you get me?

traumadisaster1557d ago

No sir. Completely wrong.. I've been 4k gaming for over a year and a half and any game from 10 years ago looks a lot better. So crisp and detailed, just take any game and drop the resolution to 800x600 and you will say its ugly. Then put it back in 1080 and it looks great again. Same with 3840x2160 looks unreal, then put it back down to 1080 and you can't look at it.

Paprika1557d ago

Running games from 10 years ago at 4k isn't really the big appeal, having a rig that can play the witcher 3 or destiny at 4k 120fps is why you would want a rig this expensive. Otherwise, consoles are worth it for the cheap factor alone. Might aswel go all or nothing on PC IMO.

Can you even run new games that good looking at 4k, 120fps? Even with these specs?

starchild1557d ago

Yeah, sorry, that's completely wrong. Playing a game at 4k means that the native resolution is 4k, the same as if you had a movie at native 4k. A higher native rendering resolution helps to resolve more detail and also lessens all forms of aliasing, so the result is a much more detailed and clean presentation of the graphics.

Volkama1557d ago (Edited 1557d ago )

Imagine a first person game that has a pillar, and that pillar has a 1080p texture covering the surface.

If you walk right up to that pillar so that it fills your 1080p screen then you get 1 for 1 pixel mapping for that texture. It's the most detailed it can look. On a 4k screen you get the same detail, because that is all there is.

Now take a few steps back from that pillar, so that you can see some more of the scene. On your 1080p screen the wall no longer has that 1 for 1 mapping, so a lot of that texture detail is smooshed away by necessity. But on a 4k screen you can retain 4x as much detail as the textured surface takes up less screen space, because you have 4x more pixels displaying it.

DougLord1557d ago

Amen! You will see some benefits, and you will also see some issues like with UI. But it probably won't be till the next ES that some crazy madder puts out a 4k texture pack that weighs in at 100 gb and needs 12GB of Vram to run

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1557d ago
ps4fanboy1557d ago

So just like a 4k movie running on a 4k screen on a 4k player(most likely a streaming service)...
The player and the TV enabled 4k device are wasted unless you have 4k content , same goes for games I suspect?

traumadisaster1557d ago

No. You really need to see it to understand. If you have access to a computer drop the resolution down and compare, you will see even old games look unreal. If you had experienced the last 15 years of monitor increases you would have seen 800x600 then 1280x720 and so on until we are here and each increase has been so much better. Just no way for you to see that on youtube though.

starchild1557d ago

That's the problem with some people that only have a 720p or 1080p TV and get all their ideas about these things from low quality internet videos, they really have no personal experience to draw from so they jump to all kinds of erroneous conclusions.

Volkama1557d ago

You also underestimate upscaling, just because it is a dirty word around gaming forums.

Pretend that upscaling is literally as simple as stretching an image. So 1 red pixel would become a square of 4 red pixels, in order to make the image fit the 4k screen.

In that case it is true that you have gained no detail at all, but even then you have gained improved image quality. Get close to a 1080p screen and you can see the gaps between pixels. Get close to the 4k screen and those gaps have all but disappeared. That's a measurable improvement in image quality. You can argue about whether it is perceivable over distance, but you cannot argue that the quality is the same.

Now consider that upscaling on any display worth buying is a lot more sophisticated that what I have just described. Upscaling will parse the colours to work out better gradients in the image, it will tidy up lines and noise, and in many cases it will reference a database of similar images and textures so that it can literally do what upscaling apparently never does; add detail.

Yes native 4k would be better. But you must be able to understand that an upscaled 4k image will offer improvement over a native 1080p display?

Or don't imagine it. Find a 4k display and see it for yourself.

iistuii1557d ago

Trouble is even with this card some games would stutter & struggle. It's not the power of the hardware, it's the games that are not being optimized. I've got a GTX780 & games like Battlefield 4 are great, but then there's the Dead Risings & watchdogs of this world that are just un optimized crap whatever card you've got.

Show all comments (29)