Support NeoGAF

[SolidSnakeUS]

If 128 ROPs is true, this thing will certainly have brute force in it's favor over the Titan X and 980 Ti which have 96 ROPs.

I will say, there's an advantage to waiting forever for my order of my GTX 980 Ti to go through, I can probably see how this will be by the time it's announced (if it comes out on the day it's announced that is) and maybe switch to this.

Anyone else think that AMD will release a couple more FreeSync monitors with the release of Fury?

 

[dgrdsv]

If 128 ROPs is true, this thing will certainly have brute force in it's favor over the Titan X and 980 Ti which have 96 ROPs.

128 ROPs for HBM1 bandwidth should be more or less the same comparatively to 96 ROPs of GM200 384-bit GDDR5 bus - 4 ROPs per 1 GB/s on Fiji vs 3.5 ROPs per GB/s on GM200

I'd be stunned if they'd go with 256 ROPs or something.

 

[Wag]

Fury X 4GB. Still, for 4k gaming that 4GB limitation makes me very nervous, HBM or otherwise- considering I'll have the card for at least the next 2 years or so.

 

[Sir Abacus]

If 128 ROPs is true, this thing will certainly have brute force in it's favor over the Titan X and 980 Ti which have 96 ROPs.

You do realize that at 4K120p you're only (only!) pushing just under 1 billion pixels per second. That's two orders of magnitude below what 96 ROPs can push out at 1GHz.

Cards haven't been ROP limited for a decade at least.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

From that article, which I believe will be pretty accurate:

Fiji, and the Fury line of cards which are based on it, feature notable improvements across the board. Performance is obviously significantly improved. Fury X is faster than the R9 290X by a minimum of 54%. Which brings us to the second major improvement. Fury X achieves this performance improvement with a TDP that’s a meager 10W higher. Which makes Fury X 48% more power efficient than AMD’s previous single GPU flagship the R9 290X, which is quite remarkable.

We’ve also been told that since Fiji’s die is measurably bigger than that of Hawaii, it’s considerably easier to cool. Because the heat will be distributed across a larger surface area, which will allow it to dissipate more readily. This is good news, especially considering that AIBs will also be bringing out newer and more effective cooling solutions.

AMD has also managed to significantly improve the area efficiency. We don’t have an official die size for Fiji yet but we do have a fairly good idea about how large this chip is. And what we are able to conclude is that AMD has managed to improve the performance by over 50% with Fiji vs Hawaii. While only expanding the silicon area, i.e. size of the chip, by roughly 25%. Which means that AMD has achieved the holy trifecta of semiconductor engineering. Greater performance, greater power efficiency and greater area efficiency.

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-specs-fiji/

Really exciting. If the Fury X is at least 54% faster than a 290X, where would that put it in relation to a Titan X?

 

[b0bbyJ03]

Really exciting. If the Fury X is at least 54% faster than a 290X, where would that put it in relation to a Titan X?

Quick, someone do the math... we can figure this out together. All we need to do is figure out how much faster the Titan X is compared to the 290x in percentage, then take the result of that number and subtract 54% from it. lets go math gaf

 

[Nachtmaer]

Quick, someone do the math... we can figure this out together. All we need to do is figure out how much faster the Titan X is compared to the 290x in percentage, then take the result of that number and subtract 54% from it. lets go math gaf

Someone over at AT forums already did. It's in the middle of his post.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37467910&postcount=34

 

[Abilidebob]

To me it seems unlikely that they will stick with GCN 1.1 and charge those prices for the cards. Either way, even with 1.2 you're not going to get dx12_1 features. We'll just have to wait and see.

Every site I read about the 300's says that it'll use 1.1
Only the Tonga rebrands will use 1.2.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Quick, someone do the math... we can figure this out together. All we need to do is figure out how much faster the Titan X is compared to the 290x in percentage, then take the result of that number and subtract 54% from it. lets go math gaf

This page may help.

http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/79/amd-radeon-r9-290x-8gb-cf-vs-titan-sli-gtx-980-4k/index.html

 

[AJLma]

From that article, which I believe will be pretty accurate:







http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-specs-fiji/

Really exciting. If the Fury X is at least 54% faster than a 290X, where would that put it in relation to a Titan X?

Between 10-20% faster.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

Someone over at AT forums already did. It's in the middle of his post.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37467910&postcount=34

Between 10-20% faster.

Holy mackerel if true.

 

[FLAguy954]

From that article, which I believe will be pretty accurate:







http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-specs-fiji/

Really exciting. If the Fury X is at least 54% faster than a 290X, where would that put it in relation to a Titan X?

Someone over at AT forums already did. It's in the middle of his post.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37467910&postcount=34

Wow if true about the Fiji Pro. Imagine the performance one could get if you can get two of them in crossfire for the price of a Titan X.

Please be around $500 AMD.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

Wow if true about the Fiji Pro. Imagine the performance one could get if you can get two of them in crossfire for the price of a Titan X.

Please be around $500 AMD.

I'm guessing $750 for the Fury X and $600 for the Fury (Pro). But I did pull these figures out of my arse. Well actually, I think AMD wanted to release at $850 with the Fury X before NV dropped a bombshell with the 980 Ti. But now they are going aggressive on price.

 

[Crisium]

I think $600 would be too much for Fiji Pro. The Pro will likely match 980Ti performance, more or less. With less VRAM, they will find people justifying the 980Ti for a little extra. Now $550 makes both the 980Ti and 980 look questionable (although the 980 already is tbh). That's what I'm going with for Pro. XT will certainly cost more than the 980Ti if it is indeed faster. They have to market that one on pure speed. I doubt they will still target $850 though. $750 seems a decent estimate.

 

[Shai-Tan]

Fury X 4GB. Still, for 4k gaming that 4GB limitation makes me very nervous, HBM or otherwise- considering I'll have the card for at least the next 2 years or so.

One consolation is that the current set of cards isn't powerful enough for 4k (except maybe in sli/xfire)

 

[Patchy]

I don't care how bad AMD are with pushing out drivers.

I don't care how loud they are.

I don't care.

I want one. I refuse to support Nvidia and their disgusting business practices.

 

[finalflame]

I don't care how bad AMD are with pushing out drivers.

I don't care how loud they are.

I don't care.

I want one. I refuse to support Nvidia and their disgusting business practices.

I don't care about the politics, I just care about playing games with the best performance/$.

If AMD can best nVidia in that sense, I'm in.

Otherwise? I couldn't possibly care less, I'll go with the manufacturer that simply gives me the best experience.

 

[Wag]

One consolation is that the current set of cards isn't powerful enough for 4k (except maybe in sli/xfire)

It doesn't matter. If 4GB isn't enough VRAM to last me for the next 2 years or so I won't be able to buy it regardless of how fast it is.

 

[mephixto]

I don't care how bad AMD are with pushing out drivers.

I don't care how loud they are.

I don't care.

I want one. I refuse to support Nvidia and their disgusting business practices.

That's pretty stupid. You can't base a $600~$800 investment based on that. Wait til AMD realease his stuff compare and decide.

 

[RenegadeXV8]

I don't care how bad AMD are with pushing out drivers.

I don't care how loud they are.

I don't care.

I want one. I refuse to support Nvidia and their disgusting business practices.

Single card drivers are fine. If you don't do CrossFire, there's really nothing to worry about. Sure there are rare exceptions (Project CARS) where performance is spotty without a new driver, but you can make the same argument for Nvidia (Witcher 3/Far Cry 4 and Kepler).

If you do CrossFire though, then you will probably have to wait a couple of weeks for GameWorks title profiles.

And there have been a lot of reports about how AMD does not want a repeat of the 290 series reference cooler issues, so loud fans should be a thing of the past hopefully.

I think $600 would be too much for Fiji Pro. The Pro will likely match 980Ti performance, more or less. With less VRAM, they will find people justifying the 980Ti for a little extra. Now $550 makes both the 980Ti and 980 look questionable (although the 980 already is tbh). That's what I'm going with for Pro. XT will certainly cost more than the 980Ti if it is indeed faster. They have to market that one on pure speed. I doubt they will still target $850 though. $750 seems a decent estimate.

Yep I'm expecting $549 for Fiji Pro, $699 for Fiji XT and $749 for Fiji XT-WC. This would also give them a competitive product at every price bracket if the 390X is $399.

Nvidia will probably end up lowering the 980 price by another $50 if Fiji Pro is significantly faster.

 

[King Gilga]

If its sub £500 is as powerful and efficient as it sounds and looks close to as good as that MSI render I'll 100% pick a Fuji pro up instead of the 970 I was planning.

 

[FLAguy954]

Single card drivers are fine. If you don't do CrossFire, there's really nothing to worry about. Sure there are rare exceptions (Project CARS) where performance is spotty without a new driver, but you can make the same argument for Nvidia (Witcher 3/Far Cry 4 and Kepler).

If you do CrossFire though, then you will probably have to wait a couple of weeks for GameWorks title profiles.

And there have been a lot of reports about how AMD does not want a repeat of the 290 series reference cooler issues, so loud fans should be a thing of the past hopefully.




Yep I'm expecting $549 for Fiji Pro, $699 for Fiji XT and $749 for Fiji XT-WC. This would also give them a competitive product at every price bracket if the 390X is $399.

Nvidia will probably end up lowering the 980 price by another $50 if Fiji Pro is significantly faster.

I'm definitely expecting a price drop. If these rumors are true performance-wise, this means that the 980 is one of the most questionable/horrible graphic card releases of the past year perf/$ wise.

 

[nib95]

I don't care how bad AMD are with pushing out drivers.

I don't care how loud they are.

I don't care.

I want one. I refuse to support Nvidia and their disgusting business practices.

I'm with you. I'll even sacrifice a bit of performance or value simply in protest of shady practices. The idea of a company like Nvidia ever having a monopoly over the GPU market frightens me.

 

[inherendo]

Nitro and Fury? Come on AMD...

Fury is apparently an old naming scheme. They are rebadging the last gen with some more ram and shit, so the hbm cards get their own separate naming scheme.

 

[icecold1983]

I'm with you. I'll even sacrifice a bit of performance or value simply in protest of shady practices. The idea of a company like Nvidia ever having a monopoly over the GPU market frightens me.

im not a fan of all of nvidias business practices, but im still gonna buy them if their product offers the best experience.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Stupid question I keep hearing everyone talking about the ram, but has anyone ever ran out of video ram? I mean what happens? Does game not run at that resolution or does it thrash like the old days when you ran of of regular ran.

I'm actually curious because I've never had issues with video ram.

 

[Irobot82]

Stupid question I keep hearing everyone talking about the ram, but has anyone ever ran out of video ram? I mean what happens? Does game not run at that resolution or does it thrash like the old days when you ran of of regular ran.

I'm actually curious because I've never had issues with video ram.

The game hitches while trying to load new data into the RAM while also processing the frames.

 

[Quotient]

Are the new AMD graphics cards going to support DX12?

 

[Doc Holliday]

The game hitches while trying to load new data into the RAM while also processing the frames.

Gotcha!

 

[Bizzquik]

It doesn't matter. If 4GB isn't enough VRAM to last me for the next 2 years or so I won't be able to buy it regardless of how fast it is.

Exactly right.

I've been with AMD now for close to a decade over several cards. I can't believe they are sticking to 4GB on their flagship. I don't care how more efficient the card is, 4GB is 4GB.
...Wonder how the water cooling mechanic will effect Sapphire, XFX, etc when they go to churn out 8GB versions....

 

[icecold1983]

Stupid question I keep hearing everyone talking about the ram, but has anyone ever ran out of video ram? I mean what happens? Does game not run at that resolution or does it thrash like the old days when you ran of of regular ran.

I'm actually curious because I've never had issues with video ram.

4gb is still plenty for the amt of rendering power this card will have

 

[wachie]

To me it seems unlikely that they will stick with GCN 1.1 and charge those prices for the cards. Either way, even with 1.2 you're not going to get dx12_1 features. We'll just have to wait and see.

At this point, 12_1 is as good as 11.1.

Are the new AMD graphics cards going to support DX12?

Even the current AMD graphics cards support DX12. Did you mean 12_1?

Exactly right.

I've been with AMD now for close to a decade over several cards. I can't believe they are sticking to 4GB on their flagship. I don't care how more efficient the card is, 4GB is 4GB.
...Wonder how the water cooling mechanic will effect Sapphire, XFX, etc when they go to churn out 8GB versions....

We will have to wait and see what AMD did in terms of memory management, given their statements it doesnt seem like your current 4GB would be equivalent to the "optimized" 4GB.

 

[Quotient]

Even the current AMD graphics cards support DX12. Did you mean 12_1?

Yes. I am referring to the feature levels, 12_0 & 12_1.

 

[wachie]

Yes. I am referring to the feature levels, 12_0 & 12_1.

Likely but like most things ... we dont know for sure.

 

[RenegadeXV8]

So this is making the rounds at the moment:

 

[Wag]

Exactly right.

I've been with AMD now for close to a decade over several cards. I can't believe they are sticking to 4GB on their flagship. I don't care how more efficient the card is, 4GB is 4GB.
...Wonder how the water cooling mechanic will effect Sapphire, XFX, etc when they go to churn out 8GB versions....

Regardless I've waited this long I might as well wait until the 16th to see how things play out. I'm going to buy new cards anyways and I have a 4k display so that will definitely influence my purchase.

 

[Nostremitus]

Are the new AMD graphics cards going to support DX12?

AMD has supported DX12.0 for a while now... since before DX12 was a thing, really...

The question is whether or not the new one will support 12.1

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

I'm definitely expecting a price drop. If these rumors are true performance-wise, this means that the 980 is one of the most questionable/horrible graphic card releases of the past year perf/$ wise.

The 980 has always been ridiculously overpriced. The new AMD cards (390, 390X, Fury Pro) will make it look an even worse deal whilst the Fury X takes on the 980 Ti and Titan X.

So this is making the rounds at the moment:

Looks so small. Imagine one of these in an ITX case like the Node 804.

 

[Thretau]

I have always wondered what's all this talk about AMD drivers being way worse than Nvidia. I've own cards from both brands and I've never had any issues with either. Am I just lucky? Sure AMD has taken their sweet time with official drivers as of late but they always release beta drivers just like Nvidia does when a big game releases.

Can someone shed some light into this thing that AMD drivers suck somehow?

 

[TigerBrown]

I have always wondered what's all this talk about AMD drivers being way worse than Nvidia. I've own cards from both brands and I've never had any issues with either. Am I just lucky? Sure AMD has taken their sweet time with official drivers as of late but they always release beta drivers just like Nvidia does when a big game releases.

Can someone shed some light into this thing that AMD drivers suck somehow?

It's mostly related to crossfire setups I think. Profiles arrive pretty late, especially for gameworks titles.

 

[SmartBase]

I have always wondered what's all this talk about AMD drivers being way worse than Nvidia. I've own cards from both brands and I've never had any issues with either. Am I just lucky? Sure AMD has taken their sweet time with official drivers as of late but they always release beta drivers just like Nvidia does when a big game releases.

Can someone shed some light into this thing that AMD drivers suck somehow?

In my experience I haven't needed new drivers for every new game if I was only using a single card, the issues arise when multi-GPU users have to wait weeks or months to get the performance scaling that multi-GPU Nvidia users get on day one.

Witcher 3 is a good example, the Crossfire profile was released 10 days after launch and while it gives good scaling the water effects and reflections are now bugged with the latter being a flickery mess.

 

[desu]

So this is making the rounds at the moment:

I hope the AIO watercooler will easily be replacable with a better one from corsair like the i100/110. Would be pretty neat.

 

[wachie]

I have always wondered what's all this talk about AMD drivers being way worse than Nvidia. I've own cards from both brands and I've never had any issues with either. Am I just lucky? Sure AMD has taken their sweet time with official drivers as of late but they always release beta drivers just like Nvidia does when a big game releases.

Can someone shed some light into this thing that AMD drivers suck somehow?

First impression is the last one. Some people might have had bad experiences and that's the only experience they know of. If you look at a lot of AMD threads, you'll still see a lot of "AMD drivers suck ass" comments.

 

[riflen]

Exactly right.

I've been with AMD now for close to a decade over several cards. I can't believe they are sticking to 4GB on their flagship. I don't care how more efficient the card is, 4GB is 4GB.
...Wonder how the water cooling mechanic will effect Sapphire, XFX, etc when they go to churn out 8GB versions....

I'll stick my neck out and say that there won't be 8GB versions of Fiji made by AIB vendors. It's not GDDR5 where you can add chips with higher density, or double the chips and add some interconnects. The vendor would have to modify the interposer, add more HBM stacks and God knows what else. I don't think companies like Sapphire have the expertise for work like that. In fact, I'll go further and say I don't think there's room on the die for more stacks at 28nm. You'll probably have to wait for 16nm and HBM2.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

There's also a reason why DX12 is set to benefit AMD GPU performance hugely, and it's not because AMD have the best drivers..

But in general, the driver issue is overblown slightly.

 

[wachie]

I'll stick my neck out and say that there won't be 8GB versions of Fiji made by AIB vendors. It's not GDDR5 where you can add chips with higher density, or double the chips and add some interconnects. The vendor would have to modify the interposer, add more HBM stacks and God knows what else. I don't think companies like Sapphire have the expertise for work like that. In fact, I'll go further and say I don't think there's room on the die for more stacks at 28nm. You'll probably have to wait for 16nm and HBM2.

Yes, this is the truth.

The 8GB rumor from Fudzilla was bunk from the start, never made sense back then and doesnt make sense now. They now keep insisting that the 8GB Fury card is a dual-GPU card.

 

[joshcryer]

There's also a reason why DX12 is set to benefit AMD GPU performance hugely, and it's not because AMD have the best drivers..

Which is? I can't find anything significant about this.

 

[LilJoka]

Which is? I can't find anything significant about this.

I beleive it's because it's multi threading AMDs single threaded drivers. Giving a performance boost in cpu bottlenecked situations and even some boost in non bottlenecked situations, pretty much like mantle did.

Nvidia drivers are already multi threaded.

 

[Radec]

I'd gladly upgrade my 270x if there would be 370x with water cooling.

 

[riflen]

I'd gladly upgrade my 270x if there would be 370x with water cooling.

No-one's going to offer water cooling for a GPU of such modest ability. You'd have to do it yourself with something like an NZXT Kraken.