Latest News Posts

Social
Latest Forum Posts

AMD’s GTX 760 Killer? MSI Radeon R9 285 Twin Frozr IV Review
Bookmark and Share

AMD Radeon R9 285 Graphics Card
Print
by Rob Williams on September 2, 2014 in AMD-Based GPU

It may be a year late, but with its Radeon R9 285, AMD claims that it’s come up with the perfect recipe for taking on NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 760 – a card that hasn’t seen much of a price drop since its release. Featuring an updated GCN architecture, the R9 285 is an interesting card even outside of its elected battle, so let’s check it out.

Introduction

At this point, it’s no secret that NVIDIA’s next generation GeForce cards are going to be announced soon, and that’s a fact that AMD didn’t want to waste any time capitalizing on. The result of that ambition comes to us in the form of the Radeon R9 285, a card that the company announced during its “30 Years of Graphics & Gaming” event, held two weeks ago.

It’s not uncommon for a GPU vendor to release a new card model in advance of a competitor launch, but this time, things are a little different. You see, the R9 285 isn’t merely a speed-bumped product, or one that’s painfully tweaked to somehow fit inside the normal lineup just because one needs to be there for the sake of quick headlines.

Instead, the R9 285 is the first card to feature the next iteration of AMD’s Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture. Its core is called “Tonga” (Pro), named after the Kingdom of Tonga, an archipelago in the South Pacific Ocean.

AMD Radeon R9 285 Graphics Card

To understand why Tonga, and its future derivatives are important, it’s best to look back to NVIDIA’s launch of Maxwell earlier this year. The first series to be built around Maxwell was GeForce GTX 750, and to say that I was impressed with it (the Ti in particular) would be an understatement. What we had was a ~$150 GPU option that could handle all of today’s games at 1080p resolution and with decent detail levels. As NVIDIA’s GTX 800 (or 900, as it’s rumored to be called) series will also be based around Maxwell, it’s easy to understand why AMD would want to give us a taste of what it has to come.

Let’s take a moment to explain some of what AMD’s promising with its latest GCN architecture. At the forefront, the memory architecture has been vastly improved, promising up to a 40% boost in bandwidth even with a smaller bus width. In a particular example, the R9 285 (256-bit) is shown to peak at just over 40GB/s @ 5500MHz, while the R9 280 (384-bit) @ 5000MHz peaks at just under 30GB/s. That’s without question a very considerable gain.

AMD Radeon R9 285 Functional Diagram

There are also new 16-bit floating-point and integer instructions that emphasize lower power use in compute and media processing, something that can also dramatically improve transcoding performance when compared to the competition. Another promised boost is with tessellation; AMD says that we could expect a 2~4x improvement in throughput, becoming more effective as the tessellation factor is increased.

Some of the other improvements include parallel instruction processing between the SIMD lanes, an improved compute task scheduler, and a pre-scalar that improves high ratio downscaling quality. Overall, not a lot here that affects gaming specifically, but great enhancements overall.

To gain a better understanding of exactly where the R9 285 fits into AMD’s current lineup, we can make use of this table:

AMD Radeon Series Cores Core MHz Memory Mem MHz Mem Bus TDP
Radeon R9 295X2 5632 1018 8192MB 5000 512-bit 500W
Radeon R9 290X 2816 1000 4096MB 5000 512-bit 250W
Radeon R9 290 2560 947 4096MB 5000 512-bit 250W
Radeon R9 280X 2048 <1000 3072MB 6000 384-bit 250W
Radeon R9 285 1792 <918 2048MB 5500 256-bit 190W
Radeon R9 280 1792 <933 3072MB 5000 384-bit 200W
Radeon R9 270X 1280 <1050 2048MB 5600 256-bit 180W
Radeon R9 270 1280 <925 2048MB 5600 256-bit 150W
Radeon R9 265 1024 <925 2048MB 5600 256-bit 150W
Radeon R7 260X 896 <1100 2048MB 6500 128-bit 115W
Radeon R7 260 768 <1000 1024MB 6000 128-bit 95W
Radeon R7 250X 640 <1000 1024MB 4500 128-bit 95W
Radeon R7 250 384 <1050 1024MB 4600 128-bit 65W

When I wrote about the R9 285 not long after its announcement, I put it underneath the R9 280 in this table. The reason for that was simple: The specs told me to. However, paper specs don’t take into consideration architectural enhancements, so clock-for-clock, the R9 285 could be as fast, or a tad faster, than the R9 280.

MSI Radeon R9 285 Twin Frozr IV

As you’ll see on the results pages, the MSI Radeon R9 285 Twin Frozr IV edition we were supplied with is in fact a bit faster than the R9 280 – at least, against Sapphire’s Dual-X version of the R9 280. For comparison’s sake, the reference R9 280 peaks at 933MHz, whereas Sapphire’s version capped at 950MHz. The reference R9 285, by contrast, peaks at 918MHz, while our MSI sample bumps that to 973MHz.

Where the biggest difference lays – not counting the architecture change, of course – is with the total memory. The R9 280 has 3GB of GDDR5 on tap, while the R9 285 has to settle with 2GB. That’s something that our results will prove won’t matter much, or at all, for most people.

The picture of the MSI card above was thieved from the company’s website, and it’s actually of its R9 270X Twin Frozr IV. The cards do look the exact same, however, with both its cooler and ports (2x DVI, 1x HDMI, and 1x DisplayPort). As I’m currently inundated with content, I took the easy way out this time with regards to the photography.

With that all said, let’s get a move on and pit the R9 285 against all of the cards that surround it in AMD’s and NVIDIA’s respective lineups.


  • xOptix78

    Thankfully this thing doesn’t make my 280X “obsolete” as the model number might suggest (280, 280X, 285, etc).

    With this new architecture it’ll be interesting to see what NVIDIA comes back with and when.

    • http://techgage.com/ Rob Williams

      AMD should have just called it the 370X or something. Of course, I guess NVIDIA did stick to the 700 series when it unveiled Maxwell, so…

  • The Focus Elf

    I respect the Editor’s Choice award, but I am not putting anything as dumb-sounding as a Frozr in anything. It sounds like a kids breakfast cereal.

    • http://techgage.com/ Rob Williams

      I thought similar things each time I wrote it. The card is great though, nonetheless :P

      • The Focus Elf

        You pay a premium for these cards, can’t they afford the “e”? Or even an “n?” SMH.

  • Casecutter

    I think when you say the 760 released a $250 that a little misnomer as not many went for that they all went 10-15% higher being Custom OC’s. So far 285’s which are all customs have been $250 on Egg no price premium that I’ve seen. The 760 hasn’t ever truly had any meaningful price movement. Nvidia set the MSRP of that GK104 at the lowest boundaries on those little smurf boards they could muster, and today they (and AIB) truly can’t work that price lower without cutting into margins. I perceive the GK104 production is fully vetted so today they see mainly 770’s. Being they don’t get all that many true “geldings”, they see it not worth fusing off the Cuda count to keep those higher clocked 760 variant going… Better to sell them 770’s at $275 and up. Nvidia will keep the 760 but there will be less and less of the AIB custom OC, and the move the original spec stuff on more low cost PCB’s. On those you might see lower prices but by that point it won’t be a factor. Nvidia is just going to leave the gate open and the let the 760 go to pasture, its held a good place.

    • http://techgage.com/ Rob Williams

      “that’s a little misnomer as not many went for that they all went 10-15% and even higher being Custom OC’s”

      That’s the case for most GPUs – even AMD’s. This seems to be a nice exception.

      “Did we ever see the 760 ever truly had any meaningful price movement”

      Not really. Like we discussed before, NVIDIA has really been able to price what it’s wanted. I did take a look at an EVGA GTX 760 a few months ago that was $250, though, and as far as I’m aware it was available for that price for a while before that.

      Ultimately, with the mine craze over (I think?), I hope the next generation can be a little more normalized with regards to pricing. It’s especially be interesting to see how NVIDIA’s 980/970 will fare once they drop.

Advertisement