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

Unknown Soldier said:
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.
Click to expand...
Based on existing GPU bracket prices (e.g. G10) I think it is $50 is the highest they can go for WC version, unless it has major spec or bin differences.
 
dr_rus said:
Watercooled - sure. But the cooler on the air cooled version may be quite a lot bigger than the board itself.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant when you said this
dr_rus said:
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...
http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=12G-P4-2999-KR
A water-cooled Titan wont be smaller, that's one race Nvidia wont be able to compete.

If the water-cooled is a reference model and is AMD's flagship, then it makes absolute sense to compare it with Nvidia's flagship.
 
wachie said:
Irrelevant when you said this

http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=12G-P4-2999-KR
A water-cooled Titan wont be smaller, that's one race Nvidia wont be able to compete.

If the water-cooled is a reference model and is AMD's flagship, then it makes absolute sense to compare it with Nvidia's flagship.
Click to expand...

You do understand that this card is two times smaller than a regular Titan X card, right?

What I'm saying is that it makes no sense to compare a watercooled Fiji to an aircooled Titan X or 980Ti. To a WC 980Ti - sure, Fiji is likely to be shorter. But that WC edition might not be what they'll launch against 980Ti price point.
 
wachie said:
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.
Click to expand...



I think i read something about the Fiji XT only using 10 watts more than Hawaii XT

If that is the case, it means almost the same amount of juice going to a much bigger area.
Should be easier to cool per mm2.

On the other hand,
this depends on the power figure i just mentioned being accurate.
One of the benefits of HBM is that it draws less power than GDDR5, which means more of the total power budget sits at the core now, and what's left of it, goes to the HBM, which is a lot closer to the core than GDDR5 chips are.

So thats another thing to have to take into account when comparing power/heat.
 
IchigoSharingan said:
Do you OC the memory clock too? Or mess with the power limit?

I tried OCing mine just 25 mhz and it would cause Witcher 3 to crash hard.
Click to expand...

Herne said:
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...
Click to expand...

Thanks I was very happy with the OC. So the RAM is elpida, so it doesn't overclock as well as Hynix. I believe my current settings are 1100/1350 and I have the power limit to +20%. I want to say I also pushed my card up to 1250/1400 but I think things got a little weird around there.

Found my old 3D Mark score. It was 1125/1500 but I remember playing at 1125/1450 stable and I upped my voltage some. Now mostly I just stick to 1100/1350.
This also says my default clock was 925.
 
My 290X doesn't get much hotter than 55 c when i play games, im using an a Arctic Accelero Xtreme III air cooler to cool it.

DBT85 said:
We don't know if water is the only option or not yet.
Click to expand...

According to sweclockers, the partners will not be allowed to change the reference design of the flagship card at all, meaning WC only.
 
Devildoll said:
According to sweclockers, the partners will not be allowed to change the reference design of the flagship card at all, meaning WC only.
Click to expand...

That's odd. Why would they want to limit their vendors in that way?

Irobot82 said:
Thanks I was very happy with the OC. So the RAM is elpida, so it doesn't overclock as well as Hynix. I believe my current settings are 1100/1350 and I have the power limit to +20%. I want to say I also pushed my card up to 1250/1400 but I think things got a little weird around there.

Found my old 3D Mark score. It was 1125/1500 but I remember playing at 1125/1450 stable and I upped my voltage some. Now mostly I just stick to 1100/1350.
This also says my default clock was 925.
Click to expand...

Like I said, nice! My card is unfortunately starting to act up as of late, running hotter than it used to even just sitting on the desktop (it used to sit idle at 36 degrees, now it's typically 41-45), going up to 75 degrees or more when I watch videos, online or not, which is insane. The new cards can't come soon enough.
 
Herne said:
That's odd. Why would they want to limit their vendors in that way?



Like I said, nice! My card is unfortunately starting to act up as of late, running hotter than it used to even just sitting on the desktop (it used to sit idle at 36 degrees, now it's typically 41-45), going up to 75 degrees or more when I watch videos, online or not, which is insane. The new cards can't come soon enough.
Click to expand...

I had that trouble once, I took it apart and used this thermal paste on it then put it back together. Works like a champ.
 
Devildoll said:
According to sweclockers, the partners will not be allowed to change the reference design of the flagship card at all, meaning WC only.
Click to expand...

Are they normally reliable? Only info is pouring out of every site that thinks it can get the hits right now and its not all lining up.

I see no reason why a 120mm x 30mm rad would be the only option for cooling a Fury X when a 3 fan config could do the job too. It's not like its being shown with a 140mm or a 240mm radiator that's 60mm thick which might start to make things more of a problem.
 
Unknown Soldier said:
Here's the complete out-there rumor of the day:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/45835/amd-radeon-fury-rumored-limited-30-000-units-2015/index.html

Only 30,000 Fury X in 2015 due to poor HBM1 yields. I don't even know what's going on anymore in this world. This rumor is either completely ridiculous or AMD really is doomed. Take your pick.
Click to expand...

Is 30K units low?, but it won't surprise me, with new tech low supply and yield problems are common. Hope is just a rumor.
 
mephixto said:
Is 30K units low?, but it won't surprise me, with new tech low supply and yield problems are common. Hope is just a rumor.
Click to expand...

For the remainder of 2015? That works out to only 5000 units per month, seems VERY low. Admittedly I don't know what sales for >$500 GPU parts are like, but I'm sure it's way more than that globally.
 
We've heard these "yields are bad" rumors every time before new GPUs are introduced. Who would know how many GPUs AMD can make besides AMD and TSMC? It's not really information that's spread around widely. This isn't a new node even, they make these things on very mature 28 nm node and assumedly even older noder for the interposer.
 
Unknown Soldier said:
Here's the complete out-there rumor of the day:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/45835/...015/index.html

Only 30,000 Fury X in 2015 due to poor HBM1 yields. I don't even know what's going on anymore in this world. This rumor is either completely ridiculous or AMD really is doomed. Take your pick.
Click to expand...
If it's true it explains the price of the card.
Though, at the same time, these 'peak' cards don't really ship many units anyway so that might be close to the demand for this card!
 
x3sphere said:
For the remainder of 2015? That works out to only 5000 units per month, seems VERY low. Admittedly I don't know what sales for >$500 GPU parts are like, but I'm sure it's way more than that globally.
Click to expand...

I would imagine that sales of high end gaming GPUs are actually a really small, low volume high margin sort of deal. In this community it might not seem that way, but really this place is kinda outside of the norm. I'd imagine that the enthusiasts who actually build their own PC's is already a fairly small niche, and even then most of them would have mid-range cards.

I'm curious if anyone has stats about enthusiast PC part sales.
 
Oh wait, I overlooked that the article was talking about the Fury X only.

That actually makes sense. Fury Pro is likely going to be the part to buy, much like the Titan X is irrelevant to most people with the 980 Ti out now. Low yields on the flagship part means they'll have a lot more Fury Pros to sell.
 
Mr.Mike said:
I would imagine that sales of high end gaming GPUs are actually a really small, low volume high margin sort of deal. In this community it might not seem that way, but really this place is kinda outside of the norm. I'd imagine that the enthusiasts who actually build their own PC's is already a fairly small niche, and even then most of them would have mid-range cards.

I'm curious if anyone has stats about enthusiast PC part sales.
Click to expand...

The only "reliable" source I can think is the the Steam hardware survey.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
 
There is currently zero evidence that Hynix is having HBM yield issues. AMD themselves stated a week ago that there are no production or technology issues related to HBM.

I imagine the 30k number is limited to the watercooled part, as it's definitely a niche product similar to the Titan X.
 
x3sphere said:
Oh wait, I overlooked that the article was talking about the Fury X only.

That actually makes sense. Fury Pro is likely going to be the part to buy, much like the Titan X is irrelevant to most people with the 980 Ti out now. Low yields on the flagship part means they'll have a lot more Fury Pros to sell.
Click to expand...
In the same rumor, Fury Pro is delayed further than Fury X (WC).
 
x3sphere said:
For the remainder of 2015? That works out to only 5000 units per month, seems VERY low. Admittedly I don't know what sales for >$500 GPU parts are like, but I'm sure it's way more than that globally.
Click to expand...

mephixto said:
The only "reliable" source I can think is the the Steam hardware survey.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
Click to expand...

The $700 780 Ti manages to be 0.35% of all video cards there, which doesn't seem like a lot until you realize the total number of Steam users was over 125 million as of Feb 2015. Of course not all 125 million Steam users click Yes when asked to participate in the Steam Hardware Survey, but that's still a whole lot of 780 Ti's.

Of course the various Titans don't chart at all in the SHS, so I guess around $1000 is when the number of enthusiasts really starts to drop off. I predict the 980 Ti will soon chart as well on SHS.
 
Unknown Soldier said:
Here's the complete out-there rumor of the day:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/45835/amd-radeon-fury-rumored-limited-30-000-units-2015/index.html

Only 30,000 Fury X in 2015 due to poor HBM1 yields. I don't even know what's going on anymore in this world. This rumor is either completely ridiculous or AMD really is doomed. Take your pick.
Click to expand...

Sounds in line with what I heard earlier. Anyway, we can't say if that's a small or a big number until we know the price of the thing.
 
dr_rus said:
You do understand that this card is two times smaller than a regular Titan X card, right?

What I'm saying is that it makes no sense to compare a watercooled Fiji to an aircooled Titan X or 980Ti. To a WC 980Ti - sure, Fiji is likely to be shorter. But that WC edition might not be what they'll launch against 980Ti price point.
Click to expand...
Strawman. (980Ti wasnt even in the discussion)

If AMD launches a WC Fiji at a lower price-point than an AC Titan, then it makes perfect sense to compare them. And this is exactly what all the reviewers will (rightly) do.

Nvidia is more than welcome to launch their WC version of the Titan.

Devildoll said:
I think i read something about the Fiji XT only using 10 watts more than Hawaii XT

If that is the case, it means almost the same amount of juice going to a much bigger area.
Should be easier to cool per mm2.

On the other hand,
this depends on the power figure i just mentioned being accurate.
One of the benefits of HBM is that it draws less power than GDDR5, which means more of the total power budget sits at the core now, and what's left of it, goes to the HBM, which is a lot closer to the core than GDDR5 chips are.

So thats another thing to have to take into account when comparing power/heat.
Click to expand...
Again, we dont know the TDP figures since HBM throws a wrench into most approximations. I was simply commenting that a "bigger die = easier to cool" logic doesnt take into account a lot of other critical things like transistor density and power draw.
 
wachie said:
Strawman. (980Ti wasnt even in the discussion)

If AMD launches a WC Fiji at a lower price-point than an AC Titan, then it makes perfect sense to compare them. And this is exactly what all the reviewers will (rightly) do.

Nvidia is more than welcome to launch their WC version of the Titan.
Click to expand...

980Ti is the exact same card as Titan X in its dimensions and pretty much the same in performance as well. You may consider that next time you'll be telling us what's in the discussion.
 
dr_rus said:
980Ti is the exact same card as Titan X in its dimensions and pretty much the same in performance as well. You may consider that next time you'll be telling us what's in the discussion.
Click to expand...
lol, keep moving the goalposts. The discussion was this.
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...
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...
Whether you like it or not, a WC Fiji will get compared to an AC Titan.
 
A nice collection of fresh rumors from VC.

AMD Radeon Fury X (Fiji XT) only with water cooling, Fury (Fiji PRO) delayed (Sweclockers)

According to SweClockers, AMD Fury (the slower Fiji-based model) is still not ready for launch. Unlike Fury X, which is said to launch only with water-cooling solutions, Fury non-X will be available with custom boards and custom cooling solutions.

The reason for the Fury non-X launch delay could be related either: low yields of Fiji silicon (Fiji PRO is cut-down part), or AIB partners being in the process of developing their own custom boards. Or maybe both reasons.

Last but not least, they said there are no air-cooled Fury X cards planned (only water-cooled).
Click to expand...

AMD Fury X to launch at June 18th, reviews week later (Fudzilla)

Fudzilla claims that Radeon Fury X will not ‘launch’ at E3 PC Gaming event. Instead, on June 16th Richard Huddy, who will be hosting the event will only give us a glimpse of the new card. The actual launch would take place two days later (that’s where more information would be released, maybe specs?). But that’s not all, reviews would not be posted sooner than June 24th.
Click to expand...
Sweclockers are reliable so that delay about the PRO version doesnt sound too promising.
 
wachie said:
lol, keep moving the goalposts. The discussion was this.


Whether you like it or not, a WC Fiji will get compared to an AC Titan.
Click to expand...

Again, 980Ti is the exact same card as Titan X. You should let this sink into your though a bit before trying to grasp at straws calling me "strawman".

I don't give a fuck what will be compared to what. I'm just saying that this makes no sense. If you like to perform meaningless tasks feel free to continue.
 
dr_rus said:
Again, 980Ti is the exact same card as Titan X. You should let this sink into your though a bit before trying to grasp at straws calling me "strawman".

I don't give a fuck what will be compared to what. I'm just saying that this makes no sense. If you like to perform meaningless tasks feel free to continue.
Click to expand...
Anyone who remotely even follows PC graphics will know this, so you dont have to remind me. I was pointing out the goalpost moving and the mental gymnastics in play about "IT'S NOT FAIR!" bit. It's clear for everyone to see.

King Gilga said:
If they delay the pro they've lost me.
Click to expand...
Yes, that will also be the card that will sell more. Maybe something like a 70-30 split between the PRO and XT and they dont have enough PROs? Or could be related to sending it late to their board partners since that would require some time for board design as well.
 
wachie said:
A nice collection of fresh rumors from VC.




Sweclockers are reliable so that delay about the PRO version doesnt sound too promising.
Click to expand...

Sweclockers was wrong on various 980 Ti rumors... they said it was coming after summer. They also said it was a full chip just with less RAM, but in reality ended up being slightly cut down.

So dunno, I don't think they're any more credible than WCCFtech.
 
x3sphere said:
Sweclockers was wrong on various 980 Ti rumors... they said it was coming after summer. They also said it was a full chip just with less RAM, but in reality ended up being slightly cut down.

So dunno, I don't think they're any more credible than WCCFtech.
Click to expand...

Too many people buy every rumor. I knew there was no way Titan X would have as many shaders as the 980Ti. I never thought it for a second. It made sense that they'd effectively "switch" the shader counts that they did in Titan and 780Ti since it left a sour taste in the mouths of some Titan owners.

Titan og 2688 ; 780Ti 2880
Titan X 3072 ; 980Ti 2816

Don't believe everything. They posted multiple articles of 3072 shader 980Ti.
 
Tallshortman said:
http://wccftech.com/amd-fury-30k-units-2015-air-liquid-cooling/

Their source says the rumor is a load of shit. I don't think tweaktown has been a more reliable source though I haven't kept up with the rumor mill in a while so we'll see.

But yeah 30,000 units sounds like a complete BS number just from a financial perspective. AMD would be very close to bankruptcy if their R&D yielded so little revenue by the end of the year.
Click to expand...

Oh cool, the rumor sites are dueling now. TT vs. wccf, woo! This has been a fun rumor day guys, plus my 980 Ti shipped from Newegg too!
 
x3sphere said:
Sweclockers was wrong on various 980 Ti rumors... they said it was coming after summer. They also said it was a full chip just with less RAM, but in reality ended up being slightly cut down.

So dunno, I don't think they're any more credible than WCCFtech.
Click to expand...
Yes, they were wrong on the shader count but they were also the first one reporting on the 980Ti's existence. Plus they got a lot of other things right.

I wouldnt put them with those jokers at wccf.
 
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
150
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