Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Do-It-Yourself Upgrade With Arctic's Accelero Xtreme III

AMD Radeon R9 290 Review: Fast And £320, But Is It Consistent?
By , Igor Wallossek

Replacing the Reference Cooler with Arctic's Accelero Xtreme III

The Arctic Accelero Xtreme III, now in its third iteration, can keep pretty much anything cool. This is the type of heat sink and fan combination that kept the overclocked Fermi-based Sparkle GeForce GTX 480 from melting not just itself, but half the computer. It does fit the Radeon R9 290 with minor modifications and can thus serve us as an example of what AMD could have done with this card. We’ll publish the entire upgrade as a guide soon, since it was really, really worth it.

Overclocking Results

We’re using the same gaming loop as before, trying to pinpoint the card's maximum clock rate through a series of small increases. The Arctic Accelero Xtreme III can be controlled via PWM or run with a constant voltage and RPM. The OverDrive applet's new fan control changes the game, though. Maximum fan speed is now bound to the target temperature. It doesn’t make sense to set this target to the 50 or 60 °C that are possible with this cooler just to have it spin slightly faster. That kind of setup is essentially self-limiting due to its (too) good cooling performance. Even under a full load, it’s almost impossible to get the Arctic Accelero Xtreme III to spin at more than 20 to 25 percent by changing the driver settings. This isn’t enough to provide cooling to the voltage converters.

Consequently, we went with the direct connection and a fixed voltage. Even at 7 V, the upgraded Radeon R9 290 is barely louder at prolonged full load than the stock versions are at idle, and the GPU and VRMs stay cool to boot.

Let’s take a look at the benchmark results of the overclocked Radeon R9 290, which turn out to be a big surprise. There’s a 20 percent difference between the original card and the overclocked one. The updated last-minute driver reduces this difference to a still-massive almost-13 percent. Keep in mind that we’re not just talking about a frequency increase, but also more usable performance and less noise. The Arctic Accelero Xtreme III demonstrates nicely what can be achieved with AMD's Radeon R9 290.

Video Comparison between the Reference and Third-Party Cooler

The first two videos show the AMD Radeon R9 290 with the Arctic Accelero Xtreme III at 12 and 7 V, respectively. The third one shows the original stock version of the card.

Bottom Line

If anything deserves an award, it’s the Arctic Accelero Xtreme III third-party cooler that lets AMD's Hawaii-based boards realize their potential. This is how the card could, and should, perform. Why AMD persists with its sub-par cooling solution is really anyone’s guess, especially since these problems have been going on for years. Dumping the issue on its partners can’t really be the solution either, since a graphics card’s reputation is made, or lost, on launch day.

As long as the only reaction to this is a driver update with questionable benefits, the reference graphics cards will always be the cheap solution. This GPU deserves better. As we said before, we’ll post the upgrade guide as its own story, since none of AMD’s partners currently offer their own PCBs and cooling solutions.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 6 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 0 Hide
    HEXiT , 5 November 2013 07:00
    i have an arctic 5870 extreme which is very similar to the arctic coooler you use. problem is that it doesnt cool the vrms effectively and mine peeks at 90'c even though the gpu is running at 45'c at max load. did your cooler show the same anomaly...
  • 0 Hide
    jakjawagon , 5 November 2013 16:27
    Isn't it about time you got videos working on Toms UK again?
  • 0 Hide
    brendonmc , 6 November 2013 16:00
    All said and done, its spectacular performance at a spectacular price. Unbelievable that a card at this price can almost beat the Titan.
  • 0 Hide
    Balderick1974 , 7 November 2013 08:54
    The 290X is faster than the 290, but the 290 is probably better value and not much slower than the 290X. I've read some other review sites and they haven't had these issues so unfortunately Tom's Hardware 290X test cards might be faulty :-(. The Noise puts me off on these cards and the heat, as mentioned here, as it can't be good for the rest of the components in your case. I'm still sticking to my 6990 till it won't play games anymore than upgrade. I have a 660 TI in my Steam (Lounge) PC and that plays everything at nearly max and looks as good as 6990. Again will only upgrade when game won't run any more or look bad due to low settings.
  • 0 Hide
    Balderick1974 , 8 November 2013 00:22
    I think some folks spend more time running benchmarks than actually playing the games and enjoying them. I find the mid range cards the best value for money as the top end card are usually 2 or 3 times more expensive but only 25 - 40 faster (so not the best value). However thanks to these top end cards which help these companies get money back for Research & Development we benefit from the sensible price mid range cards. When I was young I used to get excited about benchmarks and wanted the fastest car I could afford, now that I am nearly 40 I don't care as much and appreciate any spare time I can get to play games.
  • 0 Hide
    HEXiT , 11 November 2013 07:55
    Quote:
    I'm confused .. Here I thought 290X would be faster than 290 .. Hmm

    thers an issue with some of the fancontrols for the r290x amd are sorting the issue, look it up on here, it was discussed this last week.