KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
Partners of Advanced Micro Devices this week started a new round of Radeon R9 290-series price-cuts. Traditionally, companies start to drop prices of graphics adapters in the U.S. and then do the same in other parts of the world.
This week the U.S.-based Newegg store drop prices of Radeon R9 290X graphics cards (2816 stream processors, 176 texture units 64 raster operating pipelines, 512-bit memory bus, 4GB GDDR5 onboard) from Diamond Multimedia and Gigabyte Technology to $279 after $20 mail-in rebate (MiR), whereas Radeon R9 290X from MSI and PowerColor can be purchased for as low as $299 and $309, respectively, after $30 mail-in-rebate.
The same store offers Radeon R9 290 graphics adapters (2560 SPs, 160 TUs, 64 ROPs, 512-bit memory interface and 4GB of GDDR5 onboard) from XFX, Sapphire and HIS for as low as $229 (after $30 MiR), $239 (after $20 MiR) and $249 (after $29 MiR), respectively.
Previously, the lowest price of the Radeon R9 290X graphics cards at Newegg was $299 after $30 MiR, whereas the most affordable Radeon R9 290 was priced at $269. The new prices clearly indicate that the AMD Radeon R9-series family of graphics cards have become more affordable than around a month or two ago.
Earlier this month AMD said that the channel still contains excessive amount of the current-generation Radeon inventory. The company promised not to introduce any new products during the quarter and concentrate on selling through the existing graphics adapters. Therefore, it is not surprising that stores have lowered their prices of the Radeon R9 hardware once again.
“From Q1 to Q2, I think the largest improvement will be around the channel health,” said Lisa Su. “We have had this channel problem for a couple of quarters, and it is important for us to correct that. We definitely reduced some inventory in Q4, and we will take significant action to reduce that inventory in Q1, and that will give us an opportunity to return to a more normal desktop channel business.”
The situation with the prices of the Radeon R9 290-series graphics cards in the U.K. remains stable, but it is highly likely that in the coming weeks retailers will cut prices of the high-end AMD graphics cards.
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru Says: AMD’s new generation high-end graphics cards are at least three months away. It will be very interesting to see the price of the Radeon R9 290-series offerings in March or April. It is possible that the R9 290 will cost less than $200, whereas the price of the R9 290X will drop to something like $229…
Probably to temp 970 users to get a refund and buy a 290X. Abd it’s working for me at least
Why may I ask? Yes it doesn’t have 4gb, but its performance is still well above the 290x. There aren’t really many situations you need the full 4gb anyways
If the R9 290 drops to under $200 I’m picking up 2 more of them and doing tri-cf with them if its going to show a noticeable difference.
wrong.
in 1080p 290<970<290X<980
and on higher res AMD will perform even better.
What AMD should be pushing is Crossfire as two R9 290’s offer staggering frame to $ performance in crossfire, more so with a further price cut.
what about R9 270x ect ? they still average 200 $ D: so now i don’t feel the need of a 2nd R9 270x when i can get for those price a 290 or 290x =/
Hell, all you need is one more!
Actually the 290X and 970 are head to head. There’s no very clear winner. I reach 4GB VRAM in a couple of games on my 970.
more like
290<290x<970<980
Do we get this in the uk too? my 270x crapped out on me and I want to stay team red
Ill stick with my 280x crossfire until the 300 series is released. I’m yet to play a game that gave me problems. BF4, etc. run great. AMD has greatly improved on their drivers, and crossfire generally works for most big company games.
Don’t count out 280x crossfire. Their pretty cheap, and I’ve had no problems with all the top games such as Bf4.
Running four and even three is a waste if gaming. The return vs cost isn’t worth it.
Did both of you just work that bullshit up or is there actually fact to it?
Read any review and you’ll see, I can’t offer you anything more factual than that.
BUT BUT! MY e-PENIS!
Your fanboyism is showing greatly.
…he said, posting from an amd powered computer…
no, the 4 gigs ARE there. and they ARE accessible, theyre just dont perform aswell as the other 3.5 under stress. It means little to nothing in games today, but will cause some problems down the road.
Yeah it sucks, but people are making nvidea out to be liars by saying that it only has 3.5 gigs of ram
his order was in price not performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spZJrsssPA0&feature=youtu.be
For those who asking for review
>>http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga/4
Most of the games 970 outperform 290x. And here is the another link that shows the same result.
>>http://www.pcworld.com/article/2837828/graphics-card-slugfest-amd-and-nvidias-most-powerful-gaming-hardware-compared.html
The 970 and 290x trade blows depending on the game. There’s no clear winner at 1080p
They did lie about the specs, as there’s only 1.75MB of L2 cache and 56 ROPs. The 3.5GB thing wasn’t the only issue.
Erm that is an overclocked 970… overclocked from 1ghz to 1.2 base and 1.4 boost… and you are comparing against stock 290x… niice… how about we compare a 290x lightning with that 970 for a change? Compare stock to stock and oc to oc… otherwose it is useless. And yes in stock it looks like this: 290<970<290x<980. And nothing changes with all oc'ed actually an oced 290 draws closer to the 290x but still is justunder 970 and 970 draws closer to 290x while 980 distances itself a bit more from 290x…
Both link you sent,
compared highly clock 970 (970FTW=>1216MHz, 970 Ref => 1050MHz)
with 290X Ref.
What are you expected ? =/
I prefer benchmark from newer title and good optimization game. (Not to mention Omega Driver from AMD)
Civ:BE
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5781/2/civilization-beyond-earth-review-tested-with-21-gpus-test-results-1920×1080-full-hd
COD:AW
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5760/2/call-of-duty-advanced-warfare-review-tested-with-21-gpus-test-results-1920×1080-full-hd
Shadow of Mordor
http://us.hardware.info/reviews/5762/2/middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-review-tested-with-21-gpus-test-results-1920×1080-full-hd
Far Cry 4
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5806/3/far-cry-4-review-tested-with-21-gpus-incl-frame-times-test-results-1920×1080-full-hd
DA:I
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/dragon_age_inquisition_vga_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,7.html
in 1080p max setting 970 > 290X only 1 title.
Yah I agree. But on newer title 290x always outperforms 970.
Wrong answer. Where did you pull that info from, your ass? The 970 is faster than the 290x in most games including CoD: AW, Assassins Creed: Unity, Far Cry 4 and Crysis 3. The 290x wins in Hitman: Absolution, Ryse and Shadow Of Mordor. All very recent games, so to say “But on newer titles 290x always outperforms 970.” Is wrong and a dumb thing to say. You can verify my claims by checking the recent Digital Foundry article comparing these GPU’s
Can u read “newer title” ?
Digital Foundry article… Really ??
May be this link I gonna give is from your ass then. Haha. I love this kind of attitude
Civ:BE
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5781/2/civilization-beyond-earth-review-tested-with-21-gpus-test-results-1920×1080-full-hd
COD:AW
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5760/2/call-of-duty-advanced-warfare-review-tested-with-21-gpus-test-results-1920×1080-full-hd
Shadow of Mordor
http://us.hardware.info/reviews/5762/2/middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-review-tested-with-21-gpus-test-results-1920×1080-full-hd
Far Cry 4
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5806/3/far-cry-4-review-tested-with-21-gpus-incl-frame-times-test-results-1920×1080-full-hd
DA:I
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/dragon_age_inquisition_vga_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,7.html
in 1080p max setting 970 > 290X only 1 title.
cool beans. only im talking about the Vram, not the amount of l2 cache. if thats the issue that bothers people, then let them say that not some variation of a “3.5/4” statement