What about AMD's R9 Series (280x, 290x) on our Hackintoshes?. Further explanation.

[trs96]

There's an important article on the R9 290 and 290X that you should read if you need to
have a relatively quiet GPU for your build. If you'll be using this for gaming exclusively
the noise will not likely be an issue for you when you buy one of these with the
reference cooler. It's by Chris Angelini from Tom's Harware.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-290-driver-fix,3666.html

Here's a brief summary:

"The bad news is that I really couldn't imagine buying an R9 290 equipped with AMD's reference cooler, particularly in light of today's update that adds even more fan speed and noise. The good news is that I now have higher hopes for third-party 290s. With Catalyst 13.11 Beta 9.2, our Sapphire RadeonR9 290is just as fast as Asus'Radeon R9 290X, tested on the previous page. If we could just get our hands on more aftermarket cooling solutions, I'm pretty sure we could chip away at the most compelling reasons not to buy these boards today." Originally posted on Tom's Hardware 11-7-13

 

[comma1234]

I tested Asus R9 270X last couple hours. I can only say that this card working perfect OOB, recognized as 7xxx. I tired many apps and didn't saw any errors. Only error have with HD content in iTunes, but that is unique problem. I was happy after LuxMark benchmark with 1533 points and believe or not my card was automatically low multiplier and back to idle temperature. So I can say that graphic power management on this card working nice. I had a lot problems in past with couples asus nvidia cards(like GTX 650,660,670) with gr.pow.managment) so ppl I can recommend this card for hackintosh.

https://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/R9270XDC2T2GD5/

Great news. I was looking at this card too. Was the iTunes error related to HDCP? Glad to hear the power management works.

 

[Procyon]

There's an important article on the R9 290 and 290X that you should read if you're going
to buy one of these with the reference cooler. It's by Chris Angelini from Tom's Harware.

There's another important article on the R9 290X that you should read if you are going to buy one with a reference cooler. It's written by Thomas Ryan of SemiAccurate.

A brief summary:
While the noise the R9 290X produced was palpable in a quiet room when I began playing Battlefield 4 with the sound system at the level that I dialed in previously the fan noise was imperceptible to me and in no way impacted my game play experience. If that level of noise had bothered me though, I would have taken the same approach whether the noise was coming from my girlfriend or my GPU by turning the volume up on my speakers.

 

[trs96]

There's another important article on the R9 290X that you should read if you are going to buy one with a reference cooler. It's written by Thomas Ryan of SemiAccurate.

A brief summary:
While the noise the R9 290X produced was palpable in a quiet room when I began playing Battlefield 4 with the sound system at the level that I dialed in previously the fan noise was imperceptible to me and in no way impacted my game play experience. If that level of noise had bothered me though, I would have taken the same approach whether the noise was coming from my girlfriend or my GPU by turning the volume up on my speakers.

Guess I forgot to qualify a target audience for that post #41. Here's what the headline should have said:

If you are a gamer you can simply ignore this as it doesn't pertain to you at all
If you are an audio or video professional take note of this

​

Some that work with audio and video will be considering these new Radeon cards for their builds.
I'm not a gamer but I work in post production and need a really quiet computer to do my work.
A card that puts out 56db of noise or more is not an option. There are some Nvidia cards that output
a little more than half that much noise that are better choices for quiet computing.

Thanks for pointing out my omission Procyon. There are two sides to every coin !

 

[dter]

I just finished installing a new Gigabyte R9 280x, with Mavericks, without much incident (GE=No). It's recognized as a 7xxx and seems to be working fine. However, the benchmarks for the card are way below expectations. Unigine Heaven is ~25 fps, while under Windows it's over 60. I've tried several different frame buffers in AtiConfig with no real changes.

Any ideas about how to improve the performance of this card? Seems like it should be comparable (if not exactly the same) to a 7970. But my previous card was a GTX 285, so I don't have much experience with ATI cards in a hackintosh...

 

[trs96]

I just finished installing a new Gigabyte R9 280x, with Mavericks, without much incident (GE=No). It's recognized as a 7xxx and seems to be working fine. However, the benchmarks for the card are way below expectations. Unigine Heaven is ~25 fps, while under Windows it's over 60. I've tried several different frame buffers in AtiConfig with no real changes.

Any ideas about how to improve the performance of this card? Seems like it should be comparable (if not exactly the same) to a 7970. But my previous card was a GTX 285, so I don't have much experience with ATI cards in a hackintosh...

This post by Tony http://www.tonymacx86.com/graphics/115593-amd-radeon-hd-7970-shows-firepro-d700-10-9-mavericks.html

Will explain some of the poor results in benchmarks. Hope it changes by .1 or .2 Mavs updates.

 

[tlm182]

hmmm being that Apple is now running nvidia cards in all its machine, is it possible that we won't even see a graphics driver for the RX series cards? Why would Apple support what it doesn't use?

 

[dter]

This post by Tony http://www.tonymacx86.com/graphics/115593-amd-radeon-hd-7970-shows-firepro-d700-10-9-mavericks.html

Will explain some of the poor results in benchmarks. Hope it changes by .1 or .2 Mavs updates.

Thanks for the info. In my case at least, the problem seems related to my using a DSDT that isn't patched for AMD cards. After an initial Mavericks install, and booting from the multi beast USB (no DSDT yet), all my benchmarks are right where they should be. It's only after using the DSDT from the database that the performance tanks.

I may try to patch the DSDT just to see if it addresses the problem. But I'm actually upgrading my machine to a UEFI board and DSDT-free install this week, so might not get a chance to try that fix.

 

[kaefer]

I got my R9 270X couple of days ago (it's the Gigabyte Radeon R9 270X WindForce 3X OC, 2GB GDDR5).

Finally got the time to get it in my build....

And I have to say I'm really impressed....I just plugged it in the PCI-E Slot (and of course to the PSU), connected via DVI, booted and worked! Nothing to do for me!
Only side-effect: I'm unable to "see" anything before the desktop has fully booted. But if I need to get to the UEFI or see the boot loader I can simply plug the monitor to the HD 4600.
(Board: GA-Z87MX-D3H, i7 4770k, Fusion Drive with 120 GB SSD and 1 TB HDD)
Only thing: When connecting with DisplayPort I get a strange resolution on my FullHD monitor....usually I'm 1920x1080 but with DisplayPort I have only this options: 1920x1200, 1600x1000 or 1280x800. HDMI not tested, because my monitor doesn't have it (Fujitsu P23T-6 IPS).

Comparing the LuxMark results:
Intel HD 4600: 131
R9 270X (clocked 1100MHz): 1562
i7 4770K: 355
all three combined: 1386 (interesting)

 

[gromalle]

I got my R9 270X couple of days ago (it's the Gigabyte Radeon R9 270X WindForce 3X OC, 2GB GDDR5).

booted and worked! Nothing to do for me!

Only side-effect: I'm unable to "see" anything before the desktop has fully booted.

Same card (GV-R927XOC-2GD), same result but without any side-effects.
I use UEFI boot with Clover r.2236 UEFI bootloader.

Just installed 10.9 with this card (Internal graphics (HD4000) == disabled in bios), everything works natively: