AMD R9 290X?

[Feneusens]

Nice, waiting for more info for R9 290 cards..... wattage

I'm getting 360w at wall for the whole system.

Did you undervolt??

[scyth3]

Nice, waiting for more info for R9 290 cards..... wattage

I'm getting 360w at wall for the whole system.

Did you undervolt??

It was at stock voltage.

[carly200]

Still waiting for more info about the non x...

Nice, waiting for more info for R9 290 cards..... wattage

It's 2x7870s (2560 SPUs) on a single card that's all you need to know.  

The most power efficient card is the new 7990 (4096 SPUs) with 2x 8pin power. (effectivly 2x7970s with the power of a single 7970!)

although this is slightly off-topic

which is "the new" 7990? is it named 7990 or does it have a new name?
is it more efficient thatn 7950s?

maybe if the answer does not fit here, you could reply here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=315620.msg3526542#msg3526542

[BitcoinHeroes]

Nice, waiting for more info for R9 290 cards..... wattage

I'm getting 360w at wall for the whole system.

Nice... how much hash you are getting?

[carly200]

Hi scyth,

would you mind sharing detailed information about your system? Board/CPU, etc.?

[BitcoinHeroes]

Hi Melody,

would you mind sharing detailed information about your system? Board/CPU, etc.?

I think you asked the wrong person, it is scyth3 that you are asking.

[Gator-hex]

Still waiting for more info about the non x...

Nice, waiting for more info for R9 290 cards..... wattage

It's 2x7870s (2560 SPUs) on a single card that's all you need to know.  

The most power efficient card is the new 7990 (4096 SPUs) with 2x 8pin power. (effectivly 2x7970s with the power of a single 7970!)

although this is slightly off-topic

which is "the new" 7990? is it named 7990 or does it have a new name?
is it more efficient thatn 7950s?

maybe if the answer does not fit here, you could reply here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=315620.msg3526542#msg3526542

The new 7990 has the same name, you can only really tell it apart from the old one by the number of PCI-E Power connectors and that it's 2x wide instead of 3x wide. The old one has 3x 8-pin power, the new one has 2x 8-pin power.

Yes it's more efficient than a 7950 by a long way, heck even 2x 7850s are more power efficient than a 7950.  

[polarhei]

It will perform ~15% better on mining overall. ASICS perform ~500% better than GPUs overall. GPUs have long since become irrelevant in the bitcoin mining world. Even if major manufacturers were to add a specific SHA256 function to GPUs, the fact that the only thing ASICS do is SHA256 means that GPUs will never be relevant in the bitcoin mining world again. GPUs are, afterall, basically designed for graphics...

For bitcoin mining. In litecoin mining they are still great and make much more profit.

and the Hawaii will be even more usefull for scrypt jane (YACoin, YBCoin, ZCCoin, J-Coin, Copperbars, etc.) hashing because it has 4 GB RAM, which means its a smaller hashrate drop with every N factor change than the cards with less memory and CPUs. I will definitely get one.

Handling the flag-ship is no easy due to noise even using the typical design.

I used to purchase one HD7970, It is not acceptable unless I use liquid to maintain that. The Hawaii, well, I think I will need to modify many things to use that one. It is not just simple problem but my case that I currently use bitcoin mining contracts to follow up.

[yurtesen]

If your card is working great can you please post the output of MemtestCL. it's kind of like a memory test for GPU

https://simtk.org/project/xml/downloads.xml?group_id=385

Both my Sapphire R9 290X with Elpida Memory chips throw lots of errors

The errors are in      Random blocks Test
Random blocks: 985 errors (0 ms)

Code:

Test iteration 6 on 128 MiB of memory on device 0 (Hawaii): 0 errors so far
        Moving Inversions (ones and zeros): 0 errors (0 ms)
        Moving Inversions (random): 0 errors (16 ms)
        Memtest86 Walking 8-bit: 0 errors (31 ms)
        True Walking zeros (8-bit): 0 errors (16 ms)
        True Walking ones (8-bit): 0 errors (15 ms)
        Memtest86 Walking zeros (32-bit): 0 errors (78 ms)
        Memtest86 Walking ones (32-bit): 0 errors (63 ms)
        Random blocks: 985 errors (0 ms)
        Memtest86 Modulo-20: 0 errors (171 ms)
        Logic (one iteration): 0 errors (0 ms)
        Logic (4 iterations): 0 errors (0 ms)
        Logic (local memory, one iteration): 0 errors (16 ms)
        Logic (local memory, 4 iterations): 0 errors (0 ms)

You will always get errors because the original memtestcl is broken... you should use the fixed one from svn.
http://devgurus.amd.com/message/1281389#1281389

[scyth3]

Nice, waiting for more info for R9 290 cards..... wattage

I'm getting 360w at wall for the whole system.

Nice... how much hash you are getting?

Best I could get stable was 843kh/s using the settings from a few posts back. You can get more with higher clocks, but its not stable.

[scyth3]

Hi scyth,

would you mind sharing detailed information about your system? Board/CPU, etc.?

Low end single core CPU in a mobo with a lot of slots. Mining components not a high end desktop.

[carly200]

The most power efficient card is the new 7990 (4096 SPUs) with 2x 8pin power. (effectivly 2x7970s with the power of a single 7970!)

The new 7990 has the same name, you can only really tell it apart from the old one by the number of PCI-E Power connectors and that it's 2x wide instead of 3x wide. The old one has 3x 8-pin power, the new one has 2x 8-pin power.

Yes it's more efficient than a 7950 by a long way, heck even 2x 7850s are more power efficient than a 7950.  

more efficient in Hash/Watt? I never found any numbers that suggest its more efficient... got any reference?

[goxed]

If your card is working great can you please post the output of MemtestCL. it's kind of like a memory test for GPU

https://simtk.org/project/xml/downloads.xml?group_id=385

Both my Sapphire R9 290X with Elpida Memory chips throw lots of errors

The errors are in     Random blocks Test
Random blocks: 985 errors (0 ms)

Code:

Test iteration 6 on 128 MiB of memory on device 0 (Hawaii): 0 errors so far
        Moving Inversions (ones and zeros): 0 errors (0 ms)
        Moving Inversions (random): 0 errors (16 ms)
        Memtest86 Walking 8-bit: 0 errors (31 ms)
        True Walking zeros (8-bit): 0 errors (16 ms)
        True Walking ones (8-bit): 0 errors (15 ms)
        Memtest86 Walking zeros (32-bit): 0 errors (78 ms)
        Memtest86 Walking ones (32-bit): 0 errors (63 ms)
        Random blocks: 985 errors (0 ms)
        Memtest86 Modulo-20: 0 errors (171 ms)
        Logic (one iteration): 0 errors (0 ms)
        Logic (4 iterations): 0 errors (0 ms)
        Logic (local memory, one iteration): 0 errors (16 ms)
        Logic (local memory, 4 iterations): 0 errors (0 ms)

You will always get errors because the original memtestcl is broken... you should use the fixed one from svn.
http://devgurus.amd.com/message/1281389#1281389

aahh okay, thanks a lot. No wonder memtest did not show any errors on my 6970 .

[Gator-hex]

more efficient in Hash/Watt? I never found any numbers that suggest its more efficient... got any reference?

Both. You need only look at the manufacturers figures for both watts and number of SPUs to see it's more efficient.

I have no idea why they didn't just call the new (Nov 2013) 7990 the R9 299X...

unless they have another more powerful GPU in reserve for later.

[Corenin]

more efficient in Hash/Watt? I never found any numbers that suggest its more efficient... got any reference?

Both. You need look at the manufacturers figures for both watts and number of SPUs to see it's more efficient.

I have no idea why they didn't just call the new 7990 the R9 299X

Manufacturer figure isn't accurate usually...

[carly200]

nobody got real number? hash @ watt?

[ivanlabrie]

nobody got real number? hash @ watt?

Read the whole thread man, I posted real numbers with a link to an overclock.net thread with screenshots.

[FreedomCoin]

nobody got real number? hash @ watt?

Read the whole thread man, I posted real numbers with a link to an overclock.net thread with screenshots.

Yeah man.. read 14 pages :-P

From what ive read the card is too new and cannot scrypt mine very well yet. Luckily its power usage seems to be its best feature.

I am waiting for the price to drop.

[ivanlabrie]

nobody got real number? hash @ watt?

Read the whole thread man, I posted real numbers with a link to an overclock.net thread with screenshots.

Yeah man.. read 14 pages :-P

From what ive read the card is too new and cannot scrypt mine very well yet. Luckily its power usage seems to be its best feature.

I am waiting for the price to drop.

At $400 a piece it's rather cheap (R9 290 non x).
It does 884kh/s confirmed and I'm sure it can do more, drawing less than 300w.

[carly200]

nobody got real number? hash @ watt?

Read the whole thread man, I posted real numbers with a link to an overclock.net thread with screenshots.

Yeah man.. read 14 pages :-P

From what ive read the card is too new and cannot scrypt mine very well yet. Luckily its power usage seems to be its best feature.

I am waiting for the price to drop.

i read the whole thread, and your post, was the only number around. everybody else was just writing "i read" "i think" "it must be"...

so i am looking for more answers that are backed like yours. unfortunateley yours where very "testing" and I cannot figure what numbers acually run stable through the night at what hast @ watt

if you got stable values, could you please post yours in the wiki?  https://litecoin.info/Mining_hardware_comparison