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.
Yeah, they screwed up. Do you want to know how to solve this issue? It's pretty simple. Include a DP to HDMI 2.0 adapter with the card. What is there to complain about now?
Yeah, they screwed up. Do you want to know how to solve this issue? It's pretty simple. Include a DP to HDMI 2.0 adapter with the card. What is there to complain about now?
I still hope no the HDMI 2.0 thing is a case of PR being mis-informed or something. We'll find out soon...
It has HDMI 2.0.
Where are we getting the story that Fury X does not?
Yeah, they screwed up. Do you want to know how to solve this issue? It's pretty simple. Include a DP to HDMI 2.0 adapter with the card. What is there to complain about now?
Creating a DisplayPort to HDMI 2.0 adapter is not a trivial problem. This has been requested for a long time, and no one has figured it out yet, despite several attempts. Even if such a product does eventually exist, it is likely to be substantially less reliable than native HDMI 2.0 support. It won't be included with the Fury cards, and will probably cost well over $100. And it is quite possible that an adapter like this would introduce lag to the signal.
It has HDMI 2.0.
Where are we getting the story that Fury X does not?
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.
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 vitriol coming from you is very telling. I personally dont understand why you even care.
That list of 4k TVs is inaccurate. I have a 2015 Samsung 4k UN48JU6700FXZA. It supports HDMI 2.0, full 60Hz 4:4:4 input. Curved screen. Nice set, I use it as my PC display. That's why I need a card with HDMI 2.0 support. I really could care less if the card has HDCP 2.2 support because I just want to game on it at 60Hz.
If pure FPS is what you want at a higher resolution, nothing from Nvidia does better than Fury at 4k res. So who's being a fanboy really? For what it is worth, i have a UHD TV and for some time now, and i would have loved for proper support to be there. It isn't. Nor is it on Nvidia, well fully as i would like for my TV. If you don't care for UHD playback, all you need is an adapter which should be here soonish. Higher FPS is higher FPS. As of last year, there were manufacturers working on making adapters which would do 4k-60hz.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.
Some penny-pinching accountant no doubt wanted to save them $1.77 per card.
Nvidia does better than Fury at 4k res
Could you possibly ask that someone for a reference as i haven't seen much about it?Someone told me HDMI 2.0 is embedded on the gpu not a 1.77$ part you can soldier to the PCB.
That list of 4k TVs is inaccurate. I have a 2015 Samsung 4k UN48JU6700FXZA. It supports HDMI 2.0, full 60Hz 4:4:4 input. Curved screen. Nice set, I use it as my PC display. That's why I need a card with HDMI 2.0 support. I really could care less if the card has HDCP 2.2 support because I just want to game on it at 60Hz.
If pure FPS is what you want at a higher resolution, nothing from Nvidia does better than Fury at 4k res. So who's being a fanboy really? For what it is worth, i have a UHD TV and for some time now, and i would have loved for proper support to be there. It isn't. Nor is it on Nvidia, well fully as i would like for my TV. If you don't care for UHD playback, all you need is an adapter which should be here soonish. Higher FPS is higher FPS. As of last year, there were manufacturers working on making adapters which would do 4k-60hz.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/35-ca...-1-2-hdmi-2-0-adapter-there-manufacturer.html
Take your own advice.
Someone told me HDMI 2.0 is embedded on the gpu not a 1.77$ part you can soldier to the PCB.
Psst., HDMI 2.0 varies... 8 bit, 10 bit and even 12-bit. That lot at UHD consortium all deserve a farking flogging. They were originally supposed to launch discs/ products at end of 2014, but now they will only do so by end of this year. They've caused much grief all around for manufacturers and consumers as well...HDMI vs DP Comparison:
HDMI 2.0 -- 4K/60 8-bit 4:4:4
DP 1.2a -- 4K/60 30-bit 4:4:4 with Adaptive-Sync Support (optional)
DP 1.3 -- 4K/120 24-bit 4:4:4 and 30-bit 4:4:4 for 4K/96
Could you possibly ask that someone for a reference as i haven't seen much about it?
relax man , no one even knows this yet, don't get in trouble.
The mans upset he just sold his Phillips display port monitor to a relative and was very enthused about Fury.
Now lets get back on topic boys.
Myself, and several others now, have tried to explain this to you. You simply don't understand the tech, as you don't own a 2015 4k display that's capable of 4:4:4 @ 60Hz.
The Fury X is only capable of running at 30Hz on 90-95% of the 4k televisions on the market, due to said televisions not offering a display port. Not now, and not in the future.
They only way to get a 2160p image at 60Hz with 4:4:4 sub chroma is to drive it through HDMI 2.0, for those specific televisions (again, 90-95%).
AMD missing this fact or whatever the reasons were that drove the decision, has fallen into a major error, one that precludes those of us who are in the market for a next-gen card or two from every buying the Fury X. It also affects the "living room" Nano, as it apparently also does not support HDMI 2.0.
I can't make it any more simple that that, I hope you understand now why so many in the thread are upset.
You mean nvgpu? Seems like a reliable source...
but nothing official yet.