Official Fury X specs

[bryanW1995]

And our estimates were around right! 600mm2. Good to see AMD not afraid to do monster GPUs like nV. Considering AMD/ATI has always competed with smaller chips with nV's gigantic GPUs and coming awfully close or exceeding them, this is a recipe for disaster for green team.

Huh? That is just a more recent issue for AMD. For many years, ATI pushed large/larger gpu dies

9700 pro
x1950xtx
2900xt

The first 2 worked out pretty well, the 3rd one...not so much.

 

[bryanW1995]

No HDMI 2.0 or DVI. That alienates quite a few people out there with Korean IPS panels.

I'll update to freesync in the future so is not a big deal because have to use displayport.

But is a bummer for those that want to use a 4K TV.

Is that even an issue? I had to buy a dp cable for my 2713hm last year, I think it was $4.99 shipped from newegg.

 

[n0x1ous]

Is that even an issue? I had to buy a dp cable for my 2713hm last year, I think it was $4.99 shipped from newegg.

Yes its an issue - the adapters do not support anything past 2560x1600 @ 60hz and those cost $100.

most Korean owners have 1440p @96hz or higher which these adapters cannot keep up with. And a lot of enthusiasts purchased the cheap Korean 1440p models because at the time, they were the only ones that could do greater than 60hz with the exception of the Overlord.

 

[DiogoDX]

The Fiji GPU bears the inscription "Made in Korea". This is Globalfoundries?
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/06/DSC02004.jpg

This is probably for the package. The chip is made by TSMC.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9387/amd-radeon-300-series

This is in line with that old rumor of Synapse Design >350mm(tonga) e >500mm(fiji)

 

[Mako88]

No DP to HDMI 2.0 active converters until at least Q4, and they will introduce lag and cost at least $100. So why bother? I have a Samsung 2015 4k 48" display with HDMI 2.0 4:4:4 input. If the Fury doesn't support 2.0 I'll have to go with Nvidia again.

Same, Sammy 48JU7500. Such an awesome display, but apparently AMD didn't get the memo lol...

 

[bryanW1995]

Yes its an issue - the adapters do not support anything past 2560x1600 @ 60hz and those cost $100.

most Korean owners have 1440p @96hz or higher which these adapters cannot keep up with. And a lot of enthusiasts purchased the cheap Korean 1440p models because at the time, they were the only ones that could do greater than 60hz with the exception of the Overlord.

Yeah, I was behind on that technology, just got (somewhat) up to speed.

Seems like a curious choice by amd to not offer hdmi 2.0. And, by curious I mean "stupid". Fury X looks to be solid in so many other respects, why screw that up on something so small? Some penny-pinching accountant no doubt wanted to save them $1.77 per card.

 

[parvadomus]

nvm already posted

 

[Wag]

I really wanted to go AMD this round too. No matter how good the card is, if it doesn't have HDMI 2.0 I can't buy it.

 

[crashtech]

Might be a bit of an Achilles heel, I for one am paying attention to the connector issue now.

 

[Eymar]

I really wanted to go AMD this round too. No matter how good the card is, if it doesn't have HDMI 2.0 I can't buy it.

Yup, stupid decision not to include it. Even if 90% of people will never use hdmi 2.0, just the fact it's supported is a major buying factor. That being said, I'm OK with a dongle\cable to get hdmi 2.0 support via DP (as I've had to use active DP>DVI for 290x and eyefinity and it work pretty well) and probably not buying a 4k TV anytime soon, but still pretty stupid.

 

[.vodka]

Huh? That is just a more recent issue for AMD. For many years, ATI pushed large/larger gpu dies

9700 pro
x1950xtx
2900xt

The first 2 worked out pretty well, the 3rd one...not so much.

Good point.

Still, ATI under AMD's name and after R600's failure started off with a absolutely tiny RV670 at 192mm2 and are now after some years of that creeping up, at ~600mm2 for Fiji.

Nice to see them back to thinking big... until the next node where these figures will get quite smaller for both sides of the fence at first.

 

[Headfoot]

Yup, stupid decision not to include it. Even if 90% of people will never use hdmi 2.0, just the fact it's supported is a major buying factor. That being said, I'm OK with a dongle\cable to get hdmi 2.0 support via DP (as I've had to use active DP>DVI for 290x and eyefinity and it work pretty well) and probably not buying a 4k TV anytime soon, but still pretty stupid.

Is no HDMI 2.0 actually confirmed or speculation? Seems strange they'd have it in Carrizo but not Fiji

 

[tential]

I'm honestly so mad about hdmi 2.0 I don't know where to begin. I mean there isn't an aspect of this card I don't like but that's so massive of a mistake it's not even a joke. I really want to get a 980ti right now

 

[Mako88]

I'm honestly so mad about hdmi 2.0 I don't know where to begin. I mean there isn't an aspect of this card I don't like but that's so massive of a mistake it's not even a joke. I really want to get a 980ti right now

I'm irritated by it, but it's not like the 980Ti is garbage, so I'm thankful to at least have it as my correct choice.

I would have preferred dual Fury X cards though, mainly because the hybrid AIO cooling is basically free. Instead I'll now have to pay for two 980 Ti Hybrid cards from EVGA, which is $200 higher than dual Fury Xs.

Frustrating, but I keep reminding myself that it's just $200 and not to get too upset. Besides, the Fury X is likely OC'd already by AMD just to score well in benchmarks so there may not be much headroom left...while all 980 Ti Hybrids have another 200Mhz or more left to tap into.

Not the end of the world, but a real miss by AMD. They seem to still be as clueless as ever when it comes to what consumers want/need.

 

[xthetenth]

Why are we acting like the Fury X is clocked crazy high when we already know the stock clocks are 1050 MHz, which is barely over what the stock 290X runs?

 

[.vodka]

It could clock crazy high even being denser than Hawaii. The GPU is made at GloFo, not TSMC, saw this in one of the many threads here a day or two ago.

The rest of the board is built for crazy high clocks and cooled for crazy high clocks. I hope reviews the 24th cover this aspect.

 

[x3sphere]

It could clock crazy high even being denser than Hawaii. The GPU is made at GloFo, not TSMC, saw this in one of the many threads here a day or two ago.

The rest of the board is built for crazy high clocks and cooled for crazy high clocks. I hope reviews the 24th cover this aspect.

It's not made at GloFo?

Anandtech says otherwise anyway... look at the chart, TSMC: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9387/amd-radeon-300-series

 

[.vodka]

Then it was a rumor that was kept being told after the 300 series launch (being Fiji the only actual new silicon) and stupid of me for believing it. I'd take what AT's article says rather than forum speculation/educated guessing which is what we've been doing for the past year on these cards launching today and soon.


Hm, that makes things different then. Still with such an overbuilt board, there's hope for high clocks. On TSMC itself, GM204/200 are made on TSMC's 28nm and they go to >1.5GHz, that goes down to the architecture itself.

Raja at the reveal the other day talked about improved GCN for power efficiency and other stuff, maybe they fixed whatever was in GCN 1.0/1.1/1.2 that was keeping the design from clocking high. That with the overclocker's dream remark, makes me hopeful of seeing Fiji clocking high on air or water. We'll see.


Yeah, Anand's table tells Fiji is GCN 1.2, but they could've tweaked the design starting with Tonga as a base, having the opportunity. It is new silicon after all.

 

[garagisti]

Or for AMD apparantly.

Again, read my post from above. Nvidia's cards are reportedly also not HDCP 2.2 compliant as per some users who have already tried it (980). That i read on AVSforum, and well what lack of HDCP 2.2 means is no UHD disc playback. If you're not going to have UHD disc playback, then you may as well work it cheaper with Fury (air), or Fury X and get an adapter whenever available. In either case, with whatever card, you will not have UHD disc playback at its ideal 12-bit etc.

If it is mostly for gaming, and if you have a monitor, then Fury is slightly better as it gets better FPS (well as per AMD and that includes some game"barely/ doesn't"work titles). Me? I think i'll see the prices and try to cut my losses. I think 290/390 if the gap is a bit much to Fury, so as to tide me over and then buy again when properly compliant cards are on offer next year from either of the two.

 

[Mako88]

Again, read my post from above. Nvidia's cards are reportedly also not HDCP 2.2 compliant as per some users who have already tried it (980). That i read on AVSforum, and well what lack of HDCP 2.2 means is no UHD disc playback. If you're not going to have UHD disc playback, then you may as well work it cheaper with Fury (air), or Fury X and get an adapter whenever available. In either case, with whatever card, you will not have UHD disc playback at its ideal 12-bit etc.

If it is mostly for gaming, and if you have a monitor, then Fury is slightly better as it gets better FPS (well as per AMD and that includes some game"barely/ doesn't"work titles). Me? I think i'll see the prices and try to cut my losses. I think 290/390 if the gap is a bit much to Fury, so as to tide me over and then buy again when properly compliant cards are on offer next year from either of the two.

Again, you are missing the point entirely.

I don't give a shit about watching 4k Blu-ray Discs, a year from now, on any Ati or Nvidia card.

This is about the thousands of us that have 2015 4k televisions that CAN do 4:4:4 @ 60Hz at 4k....via a nice perfect little HDMI 2.0 port, and game at that rez, today.

It has nothing, at all, to do with HDCP 2.2.

The Fury X doesn't support any 4k television currently on the market at a Hz level above 30Hz. And that is a massive massive failure.

Stop justifying, stop rationalizing, stop fanboying. This is a fuck up. Period.

And this is coming from multiple people in this thread who were EXCITED to buy this card, myself included. It's a colossal error, a bitter disappointment, and there is no excuse. I would personally FIRE the group of individuals that made that decision if I were Su.

Pack your desks into a box and get out. Because you're too damn stupid to work here.

That being said, the 980 Ti is a great card that when overclocked delivers all of the performance of the Fury X, if not more. It just blows that the AIO version of the card is $100 higher. Which sucks for us, the consumers.

I feel bad for AMD, for the smart people there that had nothing to do with this mistake. One step forward, two steps back, always.

 

[JDG1980]

This is about the thousands of us that have 2015 4k televisions that CAN do 4:4:4 @ 60Hz at 4k....via a nice perfect little HDMI 2.0 port, and game at that rez, today.

It has nothing, at all, to do with HDCP 2.2.

The Fury X doesn't support any 4k television currently on the market at a Hz level above 30Hz. And that is a massive massive failure.

Especially since the small form factor of the Fury X and Fury Nano cards seems to be designed for set-top-box-style PCs, and hybrid HTPC/gaming configurations. Not to mention Project Quantum.

It's hard to imagine that they didn't realize this effort would be handicapped terribly by not having HDMI 2.0. I doubt their engineers were stupid enough to make that decision, so it was probably the world's worst marketing division at work once again.

 

[nvgpu]

http://videocardz.com/56728/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-reviewers-guide

http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2015/06/AMD-Radeon-R9-Fury-X-FS-ultra-4k.png

http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2015/06/AMD-Radeon-R9-Fury-X-3DMARK.png

AMD is struggling against the GTX 980 Ti despite all the HBM hype, pretty embarassing.


Threadcrapping is not allowed. This is an AMD forum, keep Nvidia out of it.
Markfw900

 

[pj-]

Almost took the bait.

Nice try

 

[Mako88]

Especially since the small form factor of the Fury X and Fury Nano cards seems to be designed for set-top-box-style PCs, and hybrid HTPC/gaming configurations. Not to mention Project Quantum.

It's hard to imagine that they didn't realize this effort would be handicapped terribly by not having HDMI 2.0. I doubt their engineers were stupid enough to make that decision, so it was probably the world's worst marketing division at work once again.

The poor Nano crowd doesn't even know this yet. They're so excited, dreaming of the HTPC rigs they're going to make in that thread, and they have no clue that the 4k TV they're targeting won't work with that particular card.

It's mindboggling, but again, I would terminate the individual or individuals that allowed this to happen if I were Su, if she even understands the error herself. Probably not a gamer herself, which is no crime, but I'd get to the bottom of it and eliminate the people who were entrusted to make that decision.

 

[DDH]

Again, you are missing the point entirely.

I don't give a shit about watching 4k Blu-ray Discs, a year from now, on any Ati or Nvidia card.

This is about the thousands of us that have 2015 4k televisions that CAN do 4:4:4 @ 60Hz at 4k....via a nice perfect little HDMI 2.0 port, and game at that rez, today.

It has nothing, at all, to do with HDCP 2.2.

The Fury X doesn't support any 4k television currently on the market at a Hz level above 30Hz. And that is a massive massive failure.

Stop justifying, stop rationalizing, stop fanboying. This is a fuck up. Period.

And this is coming from multiple people in this thread who were EXCITED to buy this card, myself included. It's a colossal error, a bitter disappointment, and there is no excuse. I would personally FIRE the group of individuals that made that decision if I were Su.

Pack your desks into a box and get out. Because you're too damn stupid to work here.

That being said, the 980 Ti is a great card that when overclocked delivers all of the performance of the Fury X, if not more. It just blows that the AIO version of the card is $100 higher. Which sucks for us, the consumers.

I feel bad for AMD, for the smart people there that had nothing to do with this mistake. One step forward, two steps back, always.

What 2015 4k tv do you have?


I doubt its anything like what you describe. You seem to be overreacting, intentionally. Luckily enough there is a nvidia subforum for you to grace.

Especially since the small form factor of the Fury X and Fury Nano cards seems to be designed for set-top-box-style PCs, and hybrid HTPC/gaming configurations. Not to mention Project Quantum.

It's hard to imagine that they didn't realize this effort would be handicapped terribly by not having HDMI 2.0. I doubt their engineers were stupid enough to make that decision, so it was probably the world's worst marketing division at work once again.

Well not really. Here is a list of 4k capable tvs. 92 in total, the number which also includes HDMI 2.0 is 11, and of those 11 two support DP1.2.

So the claim that not including HDMI 2.0 is the greatest mistake in the history of mankind is a storm in a tea cup.



I am really interested to know what 4k TV you have mako.

The poor Nano crowd doesn't even know this yet. They're so excited, dreaming of the HTPC rigs they're going to make in that thread, and they have no clue that the 4k TV they're targeting won't work with that particular card.

It's mindboggling, but again, I would terminate the individual or individuals that allowed this to happen if I were Su, if she even understands the error herself. Probably not a gamer herself, which is no crime, but I'd get to the bottom of it and eliminate the people who were entrusted to make that decision.

The vitriol coming from you is very telling. I personally dont understand why you even care.