AMD Radeon Fury X Series | HBM, Small Form Factor And Water Cooling | June 16th

dr_rus said:
AMD Radeon Fury X 3DMark performance

AMD-Radeon-Fury-X-3DMark-FireStrike.jpg


I'd say that we're looking at another price drop on a 980 soon and 970 possibly. The rest of the line will probably stay as it is.



It will cache a lot of data into VRAM if it's available but it can just as well work without this.
Click to expand...

Goddamn, the 970/980 are both getting smoked. These are all still rumors though.

Dammit, next week can't come soon enough.
 
Coulomb_Barrier said:
According to WCCF, because the die for the Fury GPUs is so large, it has a much bigger contact area to dissipate heat so its easier to cool = good for overclocking.

Despite the rumour tag, this all sounds pretty logical to me.
Click to expand...

Strikes me as specious logic. The 290 series have fairly large dies,and those get very toasty. As always it depends on the tdp and the cooler.
 
Larogue said:
Glad I skipped the 970, cause I was so close to get one. Going Fury this time.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of you will be shocked at the price of the cheapest Fury card.

These cards are going to be expensive to manufacture as these GPUs are the very first products on market to feature HBM tech. Plus an expected limited stock means they'll likely command an added premium.

tuxfool said:
Strikes me as specious logic. The 290 series have fairly large dies,and those get very toasty. As always it depends on the tdp and the cooler.
Click to expand...

Could well be but:

1. The Fury die is the biggest AMD has designed
2. The 290 series were never water cooled, so the overclocking limit on the Fury X at least may be slightly higher than its older cousins

But yeah, I'm not expecting anything extraordinary tbh.
 
Basically, if it rivals in performance, you best hope it's $100 less than the thing it's going up against. I really want AMD to come back into the market gun-blazing and make things way more interesting. I do hate that a lot of tech though can be hidden behind Nvidia with some of their Gameworks stuff and even Physx.
 
SolidSnakeUS said:
Basically, if it rivals in performance, you best hope it's $100 less than the thing it's going up against. I really want AMD to come back into the market gun-blazing and make things way more interesting. I do hate that a lot of tech though can be hidden behind Nvidia with some of their Gameworks stuff and even Physx.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking it more than rivals the 980/980ti since why else would Nvidia coincidentally unleash their a week before AMD?
 
FLAguy954 said:
Goddamn, the 970/980 are both getting smoked. These are all still rumors though.

Dammit, next week can't come soon enough.
Click to expand...

If I had 33% more SPs than the competition and I wasn't keeping up clock for clock I'd wonder why my graphics card is scoring so low. AMD better hope this thing can overclock into the stratosphere with AIO liquid or it better be sold for dirt cheap.
 
I was considering this, but seeing those benchmarks it doesn't look to be any better than the 980 ti. Only chance I buy it now is if it's significantly cheaper, which I really don't know if they're willing to do.
 
I think I'm going to end up with a r9 390 unless Nvidia can drop something worthwhile in that hole between 970 and 980. Especially if wccftech.com is right about it being $330.
 
jwhit28 said:
I think I'm going to end up with a r9 390 unless Nvidia can drop something worthwhile in that hole between 970 and 980. Especially if wccftech.com is right about it being $330.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's very likely, there isn't a huge gap in performance between the two cards. The only new card I could see happening is a 960 Ti, since there's an enormous gulf between the 960 and 970.
 
Code: 
[url=http://imgur.com/TBZ1sTy][img]http://i.imgur.com/TBZ1sTym.png[/img][/url]
[url=http://imgur.com/M8wvC0k][img]http://i.imgur.com/M8wvC0km.png[/img][/url]
[url=http://imgur.com/S1uNLlb][img]http://i.imgur.com/S1uNLlbm.png[/img][/url]
 
If performance is just as good, I'll likely get this card. Seeing the way Kepler performance took a nosedive makes me more confident in AMD's architecture.

7970 and aftermarket 290s OC'd very well, I expect Fury to be no different in that regard
 
PlayALLtheGames said:
Fuck, duh! Totally absent minded.

Then I'll need a board that supports CrossFire. Think I'll just jump on the 980 Ti.
Click to expand...

A single fury is still faster than a single Ti based on that benchmark though. It was never going to destroy it like the CF does.

Looking forward to seeing these finally release. My 5770 just broke so I'm due an upgrade, though I can probably get away with a 390 / 970.
 
Considering how long some people have had these cards, do you think there will be a shit load of supply off the bat for these or will they sell out immediately? Also, since I don't have a G-sync monitor yet, I'm afraid of what to do with a monitor :(.
 
SolidSnakeUS said:
Considering how long some people have had these cards, do you think there will be a shit load of supply off the bat for these or will they sell out immediately? Also, since I don't have a G-sync monitor yet, I'm afraid of what to do with a monitor :(.
Click to expand...
I expect by this fall there will be a good number of gaming options for freesync/gsync displays. The MG279Q and PG279Q are coming, there's the Acer predator, an ultrawide Acer coming as well, and other stuff.

I'm just going to choose my graphics card based on value and then later this year pick my monitor based on which video card I have. There's also the chance Nvidia will adopt adaptive sync through DP down the line... and no chance AMD adopts the gsync module. :lol
 
opticalmace said:
I expect by this fall there will be a good number of gaming options for freesync/gsync displays. The MG279Q and PG279Q are coming, there's the Acer predator, an ultrawide Acer coming as well, and other stuff.

I'm just going to choose my graphics card based on value and then later this year pick my monitor based on which video card I have. There's also the chance Nvidia will adopt adaptive sync through DP down the line... and no chance AMD adopts the gsync module. :lol
Click to expand...

I hope they adopt Adaptive Sync in a G-sync monitor. Or do you think Nvidia would never allow the companies to make the monitors if it has FreeSync built in as well? I'd have to wait for one that is both G-sync and Freesync before I buy a new monitor, sadly :(.
 
If those are real numbers then it's impressive, but we need to see the cost. Also keep in mind folks, there are two cards; Fury and R9 390. The Fury X is in line with the Titan X and the R9 390 is along the lines of the GTX 970/980.

I don't care who's camp I'm in as long as my stuff runs and runs well. Still, that 4GB VRAM is a mistake for a card that is being targeted for 1440p/4k.

Guess we'll see what happens next week.
 
Shadowhaxor said:
If those are real numbers then it's impressive, but we need to see the cost. Also keep in mind folks, there are two cards; Fury and Fury X. The Fury X is in line with the Titan X and the Fury is along the lines of the GTX 970/980.

I don't care who's camp I'm in as long as my stuff runs and runs well. Still, that 4GB VRAM is a mistake for a card that is being targeted for 1440p/4k.

Guess we'll see what happens next week.
Click to expand...

I think 1440p will be way less effected than 4K, but yeah, 4GB is not much. Unless it's fast enough to process, hold, then dump and cycle over... unless I'm an idiot in what I just said lol.
 
Shadowhaxor said:
If those are real numbers then it's impressive, but we need to see the cost. Also keep in mind folks, there are two cards; Fury and Fury X. The Fury X is in line with the Titan X and the Fury is along the lines of the GTX 970/980.

I don't care who's camp I'm in as long as my stuff runs and runs well. Still, that 4GB VRAM is a mistake for a card that is being targeted for 1440p/4k.

Guess we'll see what happens next week.
Click to expand...

Fury XT = AMD's Titan
Fury Pro = AMD's 980 Ti

390X will be competing with 980
 
Shining Sunshine said:
I just need Skylake release date damnit.

My next PC will finally come together.
Click to expand...

Its looking likely that Skylake isn't the game changer we were waiting for since it's missing AVX-512. It'll either be Zen (AMD) or Cannonlake. By then 4xx will be out and DDR4 at a reasonable price as well as Sata Express SSDs.

Heck 4K IPS @ 120hz might exist by then!
 
Seanspeed said:
Cant a fair few do it at 4k?
Click to expand...

I know Star Citizen can, so can GTA V with all the features maxed out. This is what concerns me. Games will only take more advantage of VRAM. ATI keeps saying that HBM memory will be better managed, but we have yet to see evidence of that.

I just don't think 4GB will be enough @ 4k HBM or not in the near future.
 
Captain Chaos said:
Wow at the size of that card. Its a game changer.

Looking forward to next week thats for sure, spread betted on AMD a couple of weeks ago when price went down to 221 (2.21 a share)
Click to expand...

The size on that particular card include the thing which is attached to the left side ot it.

We really should wait for the AC edition before making any assumptions on the size of the card. A watercooled Titan X would be much smaller than it is as well. Comparing a WC edition to an AC card makes little sense.
 
Edit: Nevermind.

I'm hoping for some good overclocks. My 7950 stock is at 933mhz but I OC it to 1100 and it works like a beast.
 
Irobot82 said:
Edit: Nevermind.

I'm hoping for some good overclocks. My 7950 stock is at 933mhz but I OC it to 1100 and it works like a beast.
Click to expand...

That's a nice overclock. My 7970 GE becomes slightly unstable at 1100, so I run it at 1050/1500. I'm hoping the Fury cards aren't too expensive - if they are, I wonder if a 390X will be a worthwhile upgrade...
 
opticalmace said:
I expect by this fall there will be a good number of gaming options for freesync/gsync displays. The MG279Q and PG279Q are coming, there's the Acer predator, an ultrawide Acer coming as well, and other stuff.

I'm just going to choose my graphics card based on value and then later this year pick my monitor based on which video card I have. There's also the chance Nvidia will adopt adaptive sync through DP down the line... and no chance AMD adopts the gsync module. :lol
Click to expand...

Speaking of Freesync, AMD is planning on implementing Freesync over HDMI in the future.
 
dr_rus said:
The size on that particular card include the thing which is attached to the left side ot it.

We really should wait for the AC edition before making any assumptions on the size of the card. A watercooled Titan X would be much smaller than it is as well. Comparing a WC edition to an AC card makes little sense.
Click to expand...

No Titan X can never be as small because of how much space GDDR5 Vram modules take up. HBM is stacked on top of itself, requiring far less space on cards using it.
 
dr_rus said:
The size on that particular card include the thing which is attached to the left side ot it.

We really should wait for the AC edition before making any assumptions on the size of the card. A watercooled Titan X would be much smaller than it is as well. Comparing a WC edition to an AC card makes little sense.
Click to expand...

That doesn't change the PCB length. A watercooled Titan X will always be 3 inches longer than a watercooled Fury.
 
Hmm interesting numbers, now just need to see two key parts; performance in games, price. Very curious. Hopefully we get a lot of 4K gaming benches here to see if there's a significant impact due to the memory.
 
michaelius said:
As long as you don't need dual link ( 1440p or 1080p@144Hz) because then you need active adapter and they don't cost $2 or ever $20
Click to expand...

I just had a look at what an active adapter costs, and holy shit. I just bought a new BenQ 144hz with Dual DVI and it'll be near useless in few years without an expensive adapte if this becomes the norm :(
 
AP90 said:
Star Citizen I believe.
Click to expand...
He said "right now".

Wag said:
I know Star Citizen can, so can GTA V with all the features maxed out. This is what concerns me. Games will only take more advantage of VRAM. ATI keeps saying that HBM memory will be better managed, but we have yet to see evidence of that.

I just don't think 4GB will be enough @ 4k HBM or not in the near future.
Click to expand...
They said their current memory management is ass. And that there were some pretty obvious ways to "fix" it. We will see if and how they did that.

Coulomb_Barrier said:
According to WCCF, because the die for the Fury GPUs is so large, it has a much bigger contact area to dissipate heat so its easier to cool = good for overclocking.

Despite the rumour tag, this all sounds pretty logical to me.
Click to expand...
This is stupid logic.

The larger area is inconsequential if the transistor density remains the same (or goes higher). Those "journalists" at wccf are fools.
 
Coulomb_Barrier said:
No Titan X can never be as small because of how much space GDDR5 Vram modules take up. HBM is stacked on top of itself, requiring far less space on cards using it.
Click to expand...

The HBM module size is pretty big and not that much smaller than chip+GDDR5 area on current cards. The main size savings on Fiji are coming from a greatly reduced power circuitry which as it seems was used to drive GDDR5 clocks mostly and is not needed for running on much lower frequencies HBM stacks.

RenegadeXV8 said:
That doesn't change the PCB length. A watercooled Titan X will always be 3 inches longer than a watercooled Fury.
Click to expand...
Watercooled - sure. But the cooler on the air cooled version may be quite a lot bigger than the board itself.
 
snickothemule said:
Word going around that the fan in is a Scythe Gentle Typhoon. This thing should be very quiet.
Click to expand...

Code: 
[url=http://imgur.com/R5pKhXO][img]http://i.imgur.com/R5pKhXOm.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://imgur.com/6YBm29t][img]http://i.imgur.com/6YBm29tl.jpg[/img][/url]
 
The Llama said:
I was hoping for a little better performance than that, but assuming the pricing is good, they'll sell a lot of these.
Click to expand...
At that performance level, it has to be priced lower than 980Ti to sell. Nvidia's mindshare premium can easily overcome small price/perf deficits.

Also I hope that was the aircooled version benched.
 
Renekton said:
At that performance level, it has to be priced lower than 980Ti to sell. Nvidia's mindshare premium can easily overcome small price/perf deficits.

Also I hope that was the aircooled version benched.
Click to expand...

It also depends on OCing headroom, we can already see what happens in that chart when you OC a 980 Ti. If the Fury X is already clocked almost as high as it can go, a simple OC that even a reference 980 Ti can handle will already defeat it.

One thing's for sure, AMD can't go pretending they have control of pricing and having the WC model sell for $800, that's suicidal. Nvidia established the baseline price point for Fury X at around $650, maybe they can flirt with $700 for the WC version and $600 for the AC version to try and flank the 980 Ti. The $1000 Titan X is untouchable for them at this point and they shouldn't even try.

AMD basically is in an untenable situation with the Fury X, being 6 months late from when they originally planned to launch it has left it between a rock and a hard place since it has 4 GB of VRAM and the letters HBM didn't magically make it faster than the Titan X and 980 Ti. They can try to price it aggressively to chase Nvidia, imagine if the WC Fury X was $600 to undercut the 980 Ti, but they have to at least maintain price parity so they don't get embarrassed. The big battle will be between the cut-down Fury Pro and the 980, if they set that one's price to $500 it will basically end the existence of the 980, no one will want a 980 period. People will either buy a 970 to get most of 980's performance for $170 less, get the $500 Fury Pro, or get the $650 980 Ti. AMD has a chance to make a big inroad right in the heart of Nvidia's lineup with the Fury Pro killing the 980, let's see if they are smart with this opportunity or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AMD announces FSR4, available “only on Radeon RX 9070 series”
News Hardware  2 3 4 5 6
283
26K
Bry0 replied
AMD Radeon 9070XT review thread
News Analysis Review  17 18 19 20 21
1K
52K
SolidQ replied
LTTP: Hellblade 2 (Xbox Series X)
16
151
Kvally replied
LTTP: The Outer Worlds (Xbox Series X)
39
720
Thebonehead replied
Leak: AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT priced at $600
Rumor Hardware  2
50
6K
llien replied
Top Bottom