[Rumor (Various)] AMD R7/9 3xx / Fiji / Fury

[MrTeal]

No it doesn't. By leaving out HDMI 2.0, they remove any possibility of it being used for 4k TV's and any possibility of HDMI to dual link DVI. They basically alienated anyone who uses a Korean panel or anyone wanting to use this as a 4K HTPC machine (what the hell is even the target audience for the Nano?), which is plenty of people who would be on the market for the Fury (myself included).

If they want to push forward with newer display connection technology, fine! but they didn't! all they did was remove a still widely used connector, and didn't replace it with one that some video cards have already had for a year or more, that would have given backwards compatibility with duallink DVI. doesn't make any goddamned sense at all. I really wanted to get a fury, but now I can't, because I'm running an Overlord X270OC which is DVI only. For a company that's already reeling, cutting out possible customers this way is the dumbest thing I can imagine.

It's really rather funny, since the biggest knock against including DL-DVI is that the connectors take up a huge amount of space on the back of the card and obstruct airflow. With Hawaii about 2/3 of the backplate is obstructed, and if AMD wanted to include two (or three) DP outputs in addition to HDMI and DL_DVI almost the entire back would have been blocked off.

For Fury X though, who cares? The entire second half of the bracket is just a blank plate; there would have been plenty of room for the standard stacked two DL-DVI connectors in addition to four ports on there now.

I can understand not updating to HDMI2.0. I don't think it's the right move but that would have required tweaking that block from Hawaii/Tonga and if cutting it pulled in schedule or something, fair enough. Not including a DVI port is just silly though.

 

[looncraz]

I don't need HDMI 2.0, i need dual link DVI, which HDMI 2.0 would have given me had they included it.

You don't need HDMI 2.0 for DL_DVI, nor do you need to wait.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ..._dual_link_displayport-_-12-996-113-_-Product

Go right from DisplayPort to DL-DVI :thumbsup:

Reviews for the particular example I gave you are mixed, but there are plenty of~$100 adapters with perfect ratings.

 

[looncraz]

It's really rather funny, since the biggest knock against including DL-DVI is that the connectors take up a huge amount of space on the back of the card and obstruct airflow. With Hawaii about 2/3 of the backplate is obstructed, and if AMD wanted to include two (or three) DP outputs in addition to HDMI and DL_DVI almost the entire back would have been blocked off.

For Fury X though, who cares? The entire second half of the bracket is just a blank plate; there would have been plenty of room for the standard stacked two DL-DVI connectors in addition to four ports on there now.

I can understand not updating to HDMI2.0. I don't think it's the right move but that would have required tweaking that block from Hawaii/Tonga and if cutting it pulled in schedule or something, fair enough. Not including a DVI port is just silly though.

ATi had a lovely habit of creating connection-blocks attached to a smaller, proprietary, connector on the card.

I owned many of these (including later and earlier versions ) and it was a very effective method of saving space. AMD should seriously consider going this route again. The adapter can be 2.5" wide and a full-slot height for all anyone will care, so long as they get a massive variety of outputs.

They could provide DVI-D, HDMI, DP, and any other acronym their evil hearts may desire :twisted.

 

[Sequences]

AMD gets blamed because some of you chose to buy a DVI-only monitor? Way to pigeonhole yourselves.

 

[hawtdawg]

They're bigger but you really have to pay for them and not really known as a consumer product. I have a couple panny plasmas but still like my 1440p monitor better.

better in what way? I like 1440p for desktop use, but the second i turn the lights off and play a game with anything dark in it, I want to [redacted] punch the damned thing.


You've been warned multiple times about inappropriate language. Knock it off.

-Elfear

 

[hawtdawg]

You don't need HDMI 2.0 for DL_DVI, nor do you need to wait.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ..._dual_link_displayport-_-12-996-113-_-Product

Go right from DisplayPort to DL-DVI :thumbsup:

Reviews for the particular example I gave you are mixed, but there are plenty of~$100 adapters with perfect ratings.

the 100 dollar active ones are the only ones that actually work, yet they add input lag and wont let me overclock. This is not a solution.

 

[hawtdawg]

AMD gets blamed because some of you chose to buy a DVI-only monitor? Way to pigeonhole yourselves.

I know! Why would i buy a brand-new monitor with the most common high bandwidth video connection in existence! I'm such an idiot! Clearly Im at fault, and not AMD for releasing the only video card in the last 15 years without a DVI port. At least they gave us some already outdated display ports and an HDMI port that was eclipsed a year and a half ago! Looking to the future!

 

[Despoiler]

I know! Why would i buy a brand-new monitor with the most common high bandwidth video connection in existence! I'm such an idiot! Clearly Im at fault, and not AMD for releasing the only video card in the last 15 years without a DVI port. At least they gave us some already outdated display ports and an HDMI port that was eclipsed a year and a half ago! Looking to the future!

The DVI standards group is disbanded. All of the big players said they were dropping legacy connections back in 2010. It's 2015.....

 

[Azix]

I know! Why would i buy a brand-new monitor with the most common high bandwidth video connection in existence! I'm such an idiot! Clearly Im at fault, and not AMD for releasing the only video card in the last 15 years without a DVI port. At least they gave us some already outdated display ports and an HDMI port that was eclipsed a year and a half ago! Looking to the future!

is this DVI thing really a problem? Dual link dvi seems more complicated but HDMI to DVI has been around forever. I remember getting an adapter with my hd 3870 in the old days. That I expect to be included by some like xfx.

 

[SK10H]

AMD gets blamed because some of you chose to buy a DVI-only monitor? Way to pigeonhole yourselves.

There are plenty of resources on the web on why people chose a DVI only monitor. It doesn't take too much time to know the benefit.

Given AMD current market share, they are not in a position to pick and choose who they want to sell to. They may be better off with 2 mini dp, 1 hdmi, 1 DL-DVI, 1 mini dp ->dp adapter for every fury x if there's enough space on the bottom slot.

 

[hawtdawg]

is this DVI thing really a problem? Dual link dvi seems more complicated but HDMI to DVI has been around forever. I remember getting an adapter with my hd 3870 in the old days. That I expect to be included by some like xfx.

exotic? it was the connection of choice for any monitor higher than 1080p up until pretty recently. The fact that AMD would make a video card to drive high resolutions, and then alienate tons of people with 1440p and 1600p monitors while they're struggling to stay afloat is just mind boggling.

 

[Eymar]

The active DP to DVI-D adapter monoprice seems new and only $15 (only one review though): http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042801&p_id=12783&seq=1&format=2

 

[Rvenger]

Looking at that picture, any idea if I can use my own fan for the radiator? I'd rather put a nice Corsair SP120 on there.

Being that is a Gentle Typhoon as the stock fan. An SP120 is about 20x worse than the Gentle Typhoon.

 

[MrTeal]

ATi had a lovely habit of creating connection-blocks attached to a smaller, proprietary, connector on the card.

I owned many of these (including later and earlier versions ) and it was a very effective method of saving space. AMD should seriously consider going this route again. The adapter can be 2.5" wide and a full-slot height for all anyone will care, so long as they get a massive variety of outputs.

They could provide DVI-D, HDMI, DP, and any other acronym their evil hearts may desire :twisted.

There's the thing, there's no need with Fury X to save space or omit connectors. The card is fully water cooled, you can fill the whole double slot bracket with connectors. No need for adapters.

 

[hawtdawg]

The active DP to DVI-D adapter monoprice seems new and only $15 (only one review though): http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042801&p_id=12783&seq=1&format=2

I sincerely doubt it's functional. For starters it's not powered by anything. Monoprice also has a history of having no idea what they're selling. (120hz 1600p monitor for example). the active adapters also add input lag and dont allow for overclocking

 

[exar333]

Excuse me, do not twist my words. I didn't say it belongs anywhere. I had said it still is predominantly a geekdom/mancave activity. Until you find evidence to suggest PC gaming has moved to the living room, don't be claiming such as facts.

Feel free to google and find all sorts of articles on exactly this topics. I will say again, it is ignorant to say no one games in the living room. HTPCs have been around forever and Steam machines are being marketed for this very thing. Stop being so silly...

I am not sure why you are so emotional on the subject? TVs and displays are both valid options for 4K gaming. I (for one) prefer dedicated displays but know a number of people who I consider friends who do game on the same TV as their console or their only TV (for movies, etc.). Please tell me they are 'wrong' to do so and somehow their opinion doesn't matter?

You do everything but provide a reason why the most recent HDMI spec wasn't included with Fury. Total fail...

I will say one last time, the lack of HDMI 2.0 is 'acceptable' for me but apparently others have a REALLY hard time putting themselves in other people's shoes. With as hard as AMD is pushing 4K with Fury, and it seems a GREAT card for it, they shouldn't be creating any hurdles for adoption. HDMI in 2015 is a no-brainer. Add to this that AMD has announced Freesync to support HDMI down the road as well, this confirms that HDMI Freesync matters to them as well. 1.4 in Fury is puzzling...

If movies are your thing, then 2.0 will not be as big of an impact. For those looking for a 60fps gaming, they will have to either get a supported display or go the NV route. Adapters could help here, but we would need more time to confirm, and thats probably not going to help 'joe gamer' with $$$ looking for 4K and his buddies just say to go with NV...

 

[Eymar]

I sincerely doubt it's functional. For starters it's not powered by anything. Monoprice also has a history of having no idea what they're selling. (120hz 1600p monitor for example). the active adapters also add input lag and dont allow for overclocking

Well, might just want to keep up with this thread to see if it works or not: http://www.overclock.net/t/1560656/fury-x-no-dvi-port/20. DVI ports maybe going away with Pascal too, so might need to invest in adapter sooner or later.

I used the active DP>DVI-D adapter for when I had to use surround on single Titan with 120hz 1080p monitor and didn't notice any lag (never saw the adapter screen lag with other two, but I'm not the best person to ask with regards to lag).

 

[chimaxi83]

I'm sure the 10's of people that HDMI 2.0 is a MUST for will skip this card. Problem solved.

 

[Silverforce11]

I will say again, it is ignorant to say no one games in the living room. HTPCs have been around forever and Steam machines are being marketed for this very thing. Stop being so silly...

Again. I never said such things. Where did you find me saying no one games in the living room?

Your original statement was that "PC gaming has moved to the living room, period".

I reject that until there's EVIDENCE to say otherwise.

I'm not justifying anything with Fury. I am justifying how wrong it is to assume PC gamers have moved to the living room.

One only have to pay attention to gaming sites and "rig pics" to see PCs are still predominantly a desk activity, mouse & keyboard.

 

[looncraz]

There's the thing, there's no need with Fury X to save space or omit connectors. The card is fully water cooled, you can fill the whole double slot bracket with connectors. No need for adapters.

Only on the water-cooled version. The air cooled, standard Fury, version has the issue of needing to transport as much heat as the R9 280X or maybe even the 290, but on a MUCH smaller card. You don't want a 7.5" PCB being elongated to 11" just for cooling D:

That said, I've long wished they would use a breakout connector like the old days. My 6870 (or was it my 7870XT?) or some other prior card only had one DVI output, one HDMI, and one or two mini-DP which I've never used, so I had to use a HDMI->DVI-D adapter (worked perfectly fine @1080). AMD could 'easily' create a card that could support 2xDVI, 2xHDMI, 3xDP and still have just a single row for all of the connections.

 

[looncraz]

The active DP to DVI-D adapter monoprice seems new and only $15 (only one review though): http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042801&p_id=12783&seq=1&format=2

He needs dual-link DVI, that is single link.:'(

 

[Eymar]

It's dual-link by description:
"It conforms to the DisplayPort 1.2a standard and supports DVI Dual Link output to resolutions up to 2560x1600p @60Hz"

Does it work, that's the question and the lone review also says it should work: "Bought these to hook up Korean IPS 2560x1440 monitors. These monitors from Korea are extremely finicky and the sellers say they should not be used with any converters or adapters. These adapters work perfectly to convert the DVI signal to Displayport and maintains the resolution at 1440p."

 

[Sequences]

I know! Why would i buy a brand-new monitor with the most common high bandwidth video connection in existence! I'm such an idiot! Clearly Im at fault, and not AMD for releasing the only video card in the last 15 years without a DVI port. At least they gave us some already outdated display ports and an HDMI port that was eclipsed a year and a half ago! Looking to the future!

There are plenty of resources on the web on why people chose a DVI only monitor. It doesn't take too much time to know the benefit.

Given AMD current market share, they are not in a position to pick and choose who they want to sell to. They may be better off with 2 mini dp, 1 hdmi, 1 DL-DVI, 1 mini dp ->dp adapter for every fury x if there's enough space on the bottom slot.

My old TV had 1 or 2 HDMI, 1 DVI, and the old analogue ports. My current monitors have DP, DVI, and VGA. . I'm sure DVI has many advantages and I'm not arguing against DVI. But to buy a monitor with only 1 input port and expect future hardware releases to be compatible can only end badly, as you have just experienced. Given the variety of monitors out there with multiple port support, I'd say it is a bit your own fault.

 

[csbin]

AMD Radeon R9 Nano is a tiny, HBM super-powered video card


http://www.tweaktown.com/news/46049/amd-radeon-r9-nano-tiny-hbm-super-powered-video-card/index.html

 

[LTC8K6]

AMD Radeon R9 Nano is a tiny, HBM super-powered video card


http://www.tweaktown.com/news/46049/amd-radeon-r9-nano-tiny-hbm-super-powered-video-card/index.html

Not sure about the purpose of that article...