A WHQL driver is usually 2 months old since WHQL tests take some times (the need to repeat each test for each supported devices).

Uhm, no. WHQL test usually takes 5 days.

ah damn, was hoping this might be the 'division' driver with some FPS tweaks... i got the game running pretty solid, but I'd still like to see some driver level tweaks to it

Uhm, no. WHQL test usually takes 5 days.

Multiply per the number of the supported devices. You got 1-2 months.

Yeah, same here. When i got this card it was around 7k and now 8.3k. AMD improved GCN cards so much. Looking at the scores your card would probably score 100-200 more if we ware using same clocks due faster CPU on your part.

@ 1100Mhz Core & 1450Mhz (so an extra 50Mhz on each), it pushed the score to 8251. And that's with the previous driver, not this one I believe. Problem is my GPU is never stable beyond 1050Mhz & 1400Mhz respectively. Even though it managed the Firestrike test with no issues. http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7963977

Small increase in 3dmark firestrike here also. Not bad this driver set. On win7 aswell as on win10.

mmmmm Fox22 I don't know if you are doing something wrong but those drawcalls are low compared to my R9 290.. Comparison 1 is 16.3.2 comparison 2 is 16.3.1 http://www.3dmark.com/compare/aot/127031/aot/122811# Also our versions of windows seem to differ as well, Mine is 64-bit Windows 10 (6.3.10586) (Pro) And yours is: 64-bit Windows 10 (10.0.14295)

You have a higher score because your CPU has a higher IPC.

nVidia signs their own drivers within few hours.

signed drivers are not WHQL drivers. Nvidia CANNOT WHQL their own drivers, no one can.

So do these come with the "Enable AMD CrossFire for DirectX 9/10/11 and OpenGL applications that have no associated application profile" option, or do I still have to use an old CCC or early beta version of the Crimson software so I can use that feature?

Costs 50 euros more, and for 550€ i could get a gtx 980 ti on ebay. I bid on one last night and backed out last second, didn't want to spend anymore than i was going to for the nano. I think all gpus as of now are overpriced, even the r9 390 compared to when i purchased mine, but i just don't want to pay over 60€ to get the same. Nano is smaller, cute and lighter, and offers new tech and most likely won't bend my pci e slot like a 1kg fury with its heatsink.

Read this first at least. That 175W power envelope seems way to restrictive. It needs the fan set to 100% (where it's LOUD) and PowerTune to +50 just to barely stay on 1GHZ average (with lows to 990).

@ 1100Mhz Core & 1450Mhz (so an extra 50Mhz on each), it pushed the score to 8251. And that's with the previous driver, not this one I believe. Problem is my GPU is never stable beyond 1050Mhz & 1400Mhz respectively. Even though it managed the Firestrike test with no issues. http://www.3dmark.com/fs/7963977

You could try to flash your card with the right BIOS in this archive: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8025211/79xx%20%26%20280%20Stilt%20BIOS.7z It's an archive of BIOSes modded by The Stilt for Tahiti based cards. Use the BIOS with the same ID of the one of your card and you should be fine. Keep vRAM at BIOS freq and overclock the GPU only. This is a result of my 7970 back in june 2015 with modded BIOS (Q9550 rig) http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2647251 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2831117

Good News: Got a alltime high 3DMark score 🙂 Bad News: Need for Speed has serious micro stuttering not seen in 16.3.0 🙁

You could try to flash your card with the right BIOS in this archive: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8025211/79xx%20%26%20280%20Stilt%20BIOS.7z[Spoiler] It's an archive of BIOSes modded by The Stilt for Tahiti based cards. Use the BIOS with the same ID of the one of your card and you should be fine. Keep vRAM at BIOS freq and overclock the GPU only. This is a result of my 7970 back in june 2015 with modded BIOS (Q9550 rig) http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2647251 http://www.3dmark.com/fs/2831117[/Spoiler]

Thanks for trying to help, but I've already discussed this with PrMinisterGR who modded the BIOS for me that I'm currently using. You see my Gigabyte HD7970 OC (Revision 1.0) was an overclock beast when it was first released and I had bought it. Just a simple BIOS Mod, increase the voltage, and BAM overclock it to speeds which yield massive performance gains. However, after about a year I had to return it to warranty as there was a fan issue. I got a free replacement and it was Revision 2.0, logically you'd think Rev 2.0 would have improvements. However between those two revisions (in that 1 year time), Gigabyte re-branded my videocard and named it the Gigabyte 7970 Ghz Edition, and voltage locked my 7970 OC Edition with hardware voltage resistors. So trust me when I say this, no matter WHAT voltage the BIOS tells my videocard to take, even if the BIOS and Applications report otherwise, the GPU is not receiving more than 1.175 Volts I believe (which is the default for my card). The only way to fix the problem is to use soldering and remove one the voltage resistors on the GPU and I don't want to risk that. Which automatically pushes the voltage to 1.25v I believe from what I've read a long time ago. Basically *^#@ Gigabyte. :3eyes: EDIT: Even though there are those that used to report that BIOS Mods worked, it was proven to be false countless times, here are examples: http://www.overclock.net/t/1294856/cant-increase-voltage-gigabyte-7970-windforce-3x-gv-r797oc-3gd/170#post_19984276 http://www.overclock.net/t/1294856/cant-increase-voltage-gigabyte-7970-windforce-3x-gv-r797oc-3gd/170#post_20001128 http://www.overclock.net/t/1294856/cant-increase-voltage-gigabyte-7970-windforce-3x-gv-r797oc-3gd/190#post_21204061 There was a thread showing exactly what needs to be removed hardware wise (resistor on the board) for the card to unlock its voltage, but I can't find that thread now.

I use a mode bios to min ref 7970 1.2v 1200/1650 whit edit cl on mem no high score here in firestrick it is 94XX but i kan not overclock whit this driver :wanker:

Thanks for trying to help, but I've already discussed this with PrMinisterGR who modded the BIOS for me that I'm currently using. You see my Gigabyte HD7970 OC (Revision 1.0) was an overclock beast when it was first released and I had bought it. Just a simple BIOS Mod, increase the voltage, and BAM overclock it to speeds which yield massive performance gains. However, after about a year I had to return it to warranty as there was a fan issue. I got a free replacement and it was Revision 2.0, logically you'd think Rev 2.0 would have improvements. However between those two revisions (in that 1 year time), Gigabyte re-branded my videocard and named it the Gigabyte 7970 Ghz Edition, and voltage locked my 7970 OC Edition with hardware voltage resistors. So trust me when I say this, no matter WHAT voltage the BIOS tells my videocard to take, even if the BIOS and Applications report otherwise, the GPU is not receiving more than 1.175 Volts I believe (which is the default for my card). The only way to fix the problem is to use soldering and remove one the voltage resistors on the GPU and I don't want to risk that. Which automatically pushes the voltage to 1.25v I believe from what I've read a long time ago. Basically *^#@ Gigabyte. :3eyes: EDIT: Even though there are those that used to report that BIOS Mods worked, it was proven to be false countless times, here are examples: http://www.overclock.net/t/1294856/cant-increase-voltage-gigabyte-7970-windforce-3x-gv-r797oc-3gd/170#post_19984276 http://www.overclock.net/t/1294856/cant-increase-voltage-gigabyte-7970-windforce-3x-gv-r797oc-3gd/170#post_20001128 http://www.overclock.net/t/1294856/cant-increase-voltage-gigabyte-7970-windforce-3x-gv-r797oc-3gd/190#post_21204061 There was a thread showing exactly what needs to be removed hardware wise (resistor on the board) for the card to unlock its voltage, but I can't find that thread now.

I know that problem with Gigabyte cards, I've bought 3 of them 😀. The ghz edition after a month won't work at 1000MHz (default on core) and I've downclocked it. Those BIOSes are not about clock, but about vRAM latency. Give it a try 🙂

I know that problem with Gigabyte cards, I've bought 3 of them 😀. The ghz edition after a month won't work at 1000MHz (default on core) and I've downclocked it. Those BIOSes are not about clock, but about vRAM latency. Give it a try 🙂

I'm tempted to test later today :P any articles or threads dedicated to what you're talking about? Sounds very interesting. Because better latency with RAM improves performance significantly in some cases, so it would be interesting to see the result with vRAM & better latency 😉 I just increased my Core from 1050Mhz to 1060Mhz and got: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11436171 I haven't used the MOD Bios you mentioned yet though. I'll test it tomorrow when I wake up :banana: Worst case scenario I'll just use the BIOS Switch. Edit I'm reading about the "Stilt" BIOS, and according to threads I found they're designed for Bitcoin Mining, not for gaming. Apparently on the 290x it increases performance to upto 50% in mining, with lower temperatures too. But it decreases gaming performance by 50% according to that one thread. So the person using it was switching between the Default BIOS & Stilt version and restarting his PC depending on whether he was gaming or mining.

I'm tempted to test later today :P any articles or threads dedicated to what you're talking about? Sounds very interesting. Because better latency with RAM improves performance significantly in some cases, so it would be interesting to see the result with vRAM & better latency 😉 I just increased my Core from 1050Mhz to 1060Mhz and got: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11436171 I haven't used the MOD Bios you mentioned yet though. I'll test it tomorrow when I wake up :banana: Worst case scenario I'll just use the BIOS Switch.

Be careful. Last benchmark you got 92xx graphics score and now you got 90xx, so look into that. For instance, i get 96xx and you should be at that range.

Be careful. Last benchmark you got 92xx graphics score and now you got 90xx, so look into that. For instance, i get 96xx and you should be at that range.

That's; 92xx @1100/1450 (which is not stable for normal usage) vs 91xx @1060/1400 (which seems stable thus far). Normally my score has been: 899x @1050/1400 and that's for the past few months. On the latest drivers I've finally hit the 90xx mark. On 16.3.1, the previous driver, I had 9002 @ 1050/1400

I'm reading about the "Stilt" BIOS, and according to threads I found they're designed for Bitcoin Mining, not for gaming. Apparently on the 290x it increases performance to upto 50% in mining, with lower temperatures too. But it decreases gaming performance by 50% according to that one thread. So the person using it was switching between the Default BIOS & Stilt version and restarting his PC depending on whether he was gaming or mining.

I've pmd you. I've read everything about his work and on Tahiti is a different story. 290 has recently gained the right timing tunings by backporting the 390 ones and I ensure you they give you a boost: http://www.overclock.net/t/1564219/modded-r9-390x-bios-for-r9-290-290x-updated-02-16-2016 I bet a coffee you will get some improvement if you flash the right one. (ID must match the original BIOS of you card). Give me your paypal and stop esitate 🤓

Asynchronous Shaders Evolved + New Feature in AMD 16.3.2 Drivers : Quick Response Queue (QRQ) More here -> My space in Guru3d

I've pmd you. I've read everything about his work and on Tahiti is a different story. 290 has recently gained the right timing tunings by backporting the 390 ones and I ensure you they give you a boost: http://www.overclock.net/t/1564219/modded-r9-390x-bios-for-r9-290-290x-updated-02-16-2016 I bet a coffee you will get some improvement if you flash the right one. (ID must match the original BIOS of you card). Give me your paypal and stop esitate 🤓

Damn wish I could have played with 390 bios on my 290 crossfire before I sold it for my fury x. Thats quite a boost.