why would he mean fiji competing with the normal 980? fiji should be competing with 980ti
you are the one confusing the names
390x or fiji? I think everyone is getting confused with the model numbers as I see multiple references that interchange the 390x codename for fiji, which is not accurate.
Best case scenario is 390x is GCN 1.2 like tonga and is made in GF. Then it will by slighly faster than GTX980.
If its only Hawaii GCN 1.1 made in GF instead TSMC then no it will be slower than GTX980 in 1920x1080 and 2560x1440
Well, Trinidad if nothing else would seem to be a straight rebrand. Besides the CF bridge, the die itself looks exactly the same as the current Curaçao die.
The Tonga board looks identical as well, with the 380X being exact same layout (V314 v1.2) as the MSI R9 285 (V314 1.0) but with different trace routing.
Too bad there's no board shots of the 390X.
Honestly, AMD needs to hire more people to sit in forums and troll Nvidia all day long over everything. Feels like it works for Nvidia....
Was about to to throw in the towel and order that gigabyte 980ti as hearing how some here hype it up and it's potential performance seems top notch. But alas I'll wait for amd's reveal as the card can no longer be preordered. But the stickler is do I need a card this powerful when I only game at 1080p? I'm looking to upgrade from a 770. I need suggestions because while I can purchase these top end cards it might not be worthwhile.
AMD may yet surprise us with the R9 390/X and R9 380. If they come up with something beyond just a new stepping, I'll be pleasantly surprised. But if not, then AMD will have to cut prices drastically from the leaked figures to get anyone to buy their rebrands. The added RAM might justify an extra $50 or so (even though it will be completely worthless in 90% of applications) - but that still means maybe $349 for the R9 390X and $299 for the R9 390. At those prices, AMD is still going to have trouble making a profit. The air-cooled Fury Pro, assuming what we've heard so far is accurate, might be a competitive product at $499 or so - but will AMD be making money on it at that price level, given the apparent expense and yield issues of first-generation HBM?
I wouldn't do it at all for that rez. Grab a 970 and overclock it to 1.5Ghz (or 290X for $270). Great 1080P stop-gap until Pascal. Everyone is different but if you are gaming on a tiny 22-23" 1080P monitor, I'd strongly consider a lower end card and say a monitor upgrade. Not necesarily this model but just giving you an idea that today you can buy a $300 27" 2560x1440 IPS model. I personally would much rather get a larger sized, higher PPI monitor than buy a $690 USD 980Ti Gigabyte G1 and game on a small-sized 1080P monitor with VSR.
I beg to differ, they were dishonest in the beginning, they very well knew all the issues the card had, yet, they chose to hide the fact on what they had to do to get the crippled card out.
It took users to find the issues, even those "strange" results were in fact seen in some reviews.
You can bet that if AMD's new card played the same tricks with the fury, people would be all up in arms, and they would be mad that the facts were not out at the time of purchase.
The boards are not the same... in the middle to the right of the memory chips
No, the hypothetical GTX 970 Ti would still have three disabled SMM units, so it would have 1664 shaders ("CUDA cores") compared to the GTX 980's 2048. This is what the reviews first indicated that the GTX 970 was supposed to be, before forum members dug deeper and found out about the L2 cache, ROP, and memory bandwidth castrations.
Nvidia seems to have learned their lesson from the backlash on this; the GTX 980 Ti just cuts out two SMMs from the Titan X, while the L2 cache, ROPs, and memory bandwidth remain fully intact.
Guy doesn't even know about bridgeless Crossfire, lol.
I am not sure about the board; even the chips are not the same.If you look at the Rev 1.0 board, those components aren't populated. They just removed the pads in the 1.2 board. There are a few other changes (ie the couple new/moved fan headers, the slightly widened PCB) but the layout of the components and even their naming is the same between the two.
I wouldn't be surprised if you bought a MSI 285 right now if it wouldn't have the 1.2 version of the PCB.
If anything, the current situation shows that NV screwed up by not gimping 980 ti ENOUGH. It's too good in comparison to Titan X...the same thing would have applied to gtx 970 if they hadn't gimped it enough. The only issue that I or anybody should have with the 970 is how the card was described in marketing materials, clearly its performance has been more than adequate for its price.
Everybody wins except Titan X owners with the 980 Ti. The 970's only problem is a potential future worry that it's got a weakness that makes it prone to Kepler syndrome.
I'm really disappointing that all of the "new" graphics are basically rebagaged 200 series cards.
I don't see how AMD can compete with basically old cards with very very slight overclocks to make them a bit more competitive.
I was expecting a significant change and 20nm cards that are based on semi-new architecture that can easily beat Nvidia's 900 series cards, but no, we had to wait over 6 months AFTER Nvidia released the 900 series to get the same fracking 200 series cards!
This is really disappointing, especially since the Fury card is pretty much neck and neck with Nvidia's Titan X and so much later. By the time it releases over 3 months later.
It's clear to me that people have 0 objectivity when looking at these things.AND more shaders 2560 vs 2816
Where did you get this idea?I was expecting a significant change and 20nm
It's clear to me that people have 0 objectivity when looking at these things.
Gtx 960 was widely heralded as a success despite a 10% improvement over the 760.
R9 290x successor doubles vram, adds more shaders, higher clockspeeds, lower power consumption, but is a failure because "lol clearly a rebrand!" doesn't matter what the chip actually does the 390x is a failure just because. Switch the brand name and it's a massive success though.
BTW, just wanted to point this point out: Notice how the objective PC gamers ARE comparing after-market 980Ti to a Fiji card, but NV owners would rarely do the same with after-market 7970/7970Ghz/R9 290/290X against NV's products over the last 3.5 years. Pretty obvious to spot the non-objective buyers who constantly ignored the existence of after-market GCN cards over the last 3.5 years.
that's exactly why we should be angier-- the masses don't know better, and they abused that.
also, based on NVidia's prior behaviors in this matter, we have no reason to think that code will stay in the driver implementation. For all we know, in a year's time for certain games they'll move the things to that VRAM explicitly to slow the card down