this is because amd cant make stuff work on direct X. it has nothing o do with actual hardware specs. this is the fault of amd, not benchmarks.
why dont you instead complain that amd get up to modern gaming standards. we shouldnt have to downgrade the rest of the industry (yes these benchmark sites are part of the industry) to meet a low standard of a specific company.
the problem isnt really that the 295x2 is so weak.
how exactly is AMD's new Hawaii XT GPU even outdated? or any of last 2 - 3 gen AMD's chips for that matter.
those synthetic benchmarks are obviously forgeted up anyways... tell me how the Nvidia Titan Z is below the R9 295x2 when it should be far superior? passmark benchmarks seem to generally biased against AMD, and dual-gpu cards are just completely messed up. just seems like a poorly-optimized synthetic benchmark
its that amd wants to claim last gen hardware should be top tier and price as such.
tell me about it. you can get an R9 290 for $370 (went as low as $320 recently) nowadays, which is on par with the GTX 780 (at $500). R9 290X for $450, which is just like 5% percent behind the GTX 780 Ti ($700), matches at 4k resolution due to superior bus width and VRAM amount. dont even get me started on lower-end cards lol
hey while we are at it did you know a gtx 295 can keep up with an r9 280x
it even beats the 660 in benchmarks lol
old graphic cards are weird
bullstuff
older cards tend to run clocks higher and easier. they just lack memory.
newer cards just keep adding cores and memory. its much less power and heat hungry.
GTX 295 has FAR lower clocks than most modern cards
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-295/specificationsyeah i mean 300 watts to get the forgeter running lol
lol you think thats a lot for a dual-GPU card?
i was reading that nvidias 800 series are going to be much less power needing.
the new re-released 750ti's use that same tech.
yes, maxwell architecture, supposedly will be the first to be built in 20nm