I don't understand the glowing reviews for the 390 series, considering the enormous price difference between those and the 290 cards.
Why would anyone buy a 390 for 350€ when the faster 290X can be had for 330€ or the similar performing 290 can be found for as little as 270€?
And the 390X's 450€ price is nothing short of obscene. 120€ for more VRAM and a minimal boost in the clocks (so minimal that it's practically non-existent, considering how many - if not most - 290X cards were already using those clocks).
The 390 cards are a terrible deal, compared to the 290 models.
Same thing with the other 300 offerings. 150€ for the 370 with a 16 CU Pitcairn, while the 270X with the full 20 CU Pitcairn and higher clocks can be found for 145€.
R360, a cut-down Bonaire with 12 CUs can be found for minimum 115€, while the 260X with the full 14CUs Bonaire and same 2GB GDDR5 costs around 110€.
The only new SKU with somewhat increased value is the 380 over the 285 because of the increased base clocks, but even there we could already find higher-clocked 285 cards with the same 980MHz, for the same 210€.
Perhaps the prices in the USA are drastically different, but for an European these reviews make no sense to me.
Are they only testing the 390 series against those rare and old 290/290X units with the horrid stock coolers that no one bought?
Why exactly would AMD send review samples to review sites that sling shit at AMD at every opportunity? Would YOU do that with your product?
