[Various]Radeon Fury X and Radeon Fury coming

[Enigmoid]

If Fury uses a decent amount less power than the 980Ti, then a 6/8pin setup should give Fury plenty of room.

980ti is listed at 250W but we have 75W slot + 75W 6-pin + 150W 8-pin or 300W total available to the Ti card.

So, Ti theoretically already has some power overhead.

But there is literally no other way to get 250W.

75W slot + 2x 6-pin = 225W
75W slot+ 1x8-pin = 225W

Slot + 1x6-pin + 1x8-pin is the only way to get 250W and it overshoots to give 300W.

The fact that Fury is 75W slot + 2x 8-pin (375W total) is indicative of the potential to use a lot of power, significantly more than the 980 Ti as the adaptors have a lot of headroom (295x2 has 2x 8 pin but uses quite a bit more power than 375W).

 

[chimaxi83]

Fiji (from the pics leaked) also has a water pump and probably a 120mm fan. NO idea how much power that takes though. I assume it isn't marginal though.

It's definitely marginal. Using my voltage/fan controller, there is a power difference of about 50 watts in my system with a real pump and 10 low speed fans, from lowest speeds to highest speeds. A closed loop cooler and fan will use much less.

 

[LTC8K6]

I wouldn't use the ATX12V Spec as concrete power consumption guide/measurement. Just look at the R9 295X2, it only had two 8-pin PEG connectors and still pulled close to 500w alone under load. Also, I have two 8-pin PEG connectors on my Lightning, and I have also pulled around 500w from my card with 1.6v applied to core.

Some mfgs realized that...

https://i1.wp.com/pcdiy.asus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ARES-III-PCB-VRM-1.jpg

 

[Cloudfire777]

Just in case someone missed it and the previous thread was closed, I`m reposting it here along with new information (OP also updated)

Hardwareluxx:

• Fury X:
• Slower than GTX 980Ti
• Water cooler made by CoolIT
• Confirmed to have 4GB HBM
• PSU of 700W is recommended

Sweclockers:

• Radeon Fury post poned because of bad yields (did not specify what had bad yields but will guess HBM).
• Radeon Fury X is 17cm in length

• Radeon Fury X will be launched as an alternative to GTX 980Ti whatever that means
• GTX 980Ti was launched to make it difficult for AMD to succeed with Fury cards
• Radeon Fury X was originally planned to launch at a high price (but lower than Titan X) but GTX 980Ti have made them changed plans and AMD is now preparing to launch the card at around $600 with low profit/margin to have a chance against GTX 980Ti

 

[LTC8K6]

But there is literally no other way to get 250W.

75W slot + 2x 6-pin = 225W
75W slot+ 1x8-pin = 225W

Slot + 1x6-pin + 1x8-pin is the only way to get 250W and it overshoots to give 300W.

The fact that Fury is 75W slot + 2x 8-pin (375W total) is indicative of the potential to use a lot of power, significantly more than the 980 Ti as the adaptors have a lot of headroom (295x2 has 2x 8 pin but uses quite a bit more power than 375W).

I already posted that...

What is the point of using a lot of power in a card that's supposed to use a lot less power?

 

[Despoiler]

Just in case someone missed it and the previous thread was closed, I`m reposting it here along with new information (OP also updated)

Hardwareluxx:

• Fury X:
• Slower than GTX 980Ti
• Water cooler made by CoolIT
• Confirmed to have 4GB HBM
• PSU of 700W is recommended

Sweclockers:

• Radeon Fury post poned because of bad yields (did not specify what had bad yields but will guess HBM).
• Radeon Fury X is 17cm in length

• Radeon Fury X will be launched as an alternative to GTX 980Ti whatever that means
• GTX 980Ti was launched to make it difficult for AMD to succeed with Fury cards
• Radeon Fury X was originally planned to launch at a high price (but lower than Titan X) but GTX 980Ti have made them changed plans and AMD is now preparing to launch the card at around $600 with low profit/margin to have a chance against GTX 980Ti

You are here by renamed to WCCloudTech.

 

[flopper]

seems the watercooler AMD use dont leak at all.
Tight real tight seal.
Navy sealed Fury.

 

[Face2Face]

Just in case someone missed it and the previous thread was closed, I`m reposting it here along with new information (OP also updated)

Hardwareluxx:

• Fury X:
• Slower than GTX 980Ti
• Water cooler made by CoolIT
• Confirmed to have 4GB HBM
• PSU of 700W is recommended

Sweclockers:

• Radeon Fury post poned because of bad yields (did not specify what had bad yields but will guess HBM).
• Radeon Fury X is 17cm in length

• Radeon Fury X will be launched as an alternative to GTX 980Ti whatever that means
• GTX 980Ti was launched to make it difficult for AMD to succeed with Fury cards
• Radeon Fury X was originally planned to launch at a high price (but lower than Titan X) but GTX 980Ti have made them changed plans and AMD is now preparing to launch the card at around $600 with low profit/margin to have a chance against GTX 980Ti

I have a tough time believing this. This is should be expected from NVIDIA or any company looking to expand market share. I have a hard believing AMD would be that incompetent to not expect this.

 

[Cloudfire777]

$600 is a pretty good price I must say. I feel bad for AMD to sell it at supposedly low margin though. Water cooling + HBM probably cost a pretty penny to use. Not sure what to think about it.
Will be interesting to see benchmarks from it and if hardwareluxx was told correct information regarding performance.

Since yields are low I guess even though only Fury X will launch, this card might get sold out quick due to low inventory so anyone looking to buy one should prep up and have the CC ready.

 

[Vesku]

I have a tough time believing this. This is should be expected from NVIDIA or any company looking to expand market share. I have a hard believing AMD would be that incompetent to not expect this.

Exactly, everyone knew a 980 Ti would be coming. A $50-100 discrepancy in where AMD thought it would be priced just means they'll have to make an adjustment to their own launch price.

 

[LTC8K6]

I think the price of the 980Ti was a surprise to most people.

It's not hard to believe it surprised AMD.

Combine the release date, the performance, and the price, and I can see AMD being a bit stunned.

Is it true?

I don't know, but it's certainly believable.

 

[Cloudfire777]

I have a tough time believing this. This is should be expected from NVIDIA or any company looking to expand market share. I have a hard believing AMD would be that incompetent to not expect this.

Thats what Sweclockers say. I`m just reposting other sources. We must remember that Sweclockers have been pretty reliable in the past. They said AIB`s told them this information

You are here by renamed to WCCloudTech.

haha

 

[Erenhardt]

$600 is a pretty good price I must say. I feel bad for AMD to sell it at supposedly low margin though. Water cooling + HBM probably cost a pretty penny to use. Not sure what to think about it.
Will be interesting to see benchmarks from it and if hardwareluxx was told correct information regarding performance.

Since yields are low I guess even though only Fury X will launch, this card might get sold out quick due to low inventory so anyone looking to buy one should prep up and have the CC ready.

You are getting too excited for no reason. Like a flag, weaving whichever direction the wind blows.
Every single post, no matter how unlikely, without any sources, you take as granted and make a whole conclusion about something we really know nothing apart from few pictures of the shroud...

Relax. This card will come out. It will have performance measured in FPS or score in 3Dmark, and will cost money. That is granted.

Stop the silly oscilloscope, going from huge let down, to omg its going to be amazing, and everything in between. I have a real concerns about your mental health. Relax...

I think the price of the 980Ti was a surprise to most people.

It's not hard to believe it surprised AMD.

Combine the release date, the performance, and the price, and I can see AMD being a bit stunned.

Is it true?

I don't know, but it's certainly believable.

LOL what? Everyone with any sense knew that 980ti will be close to titanx in performance, the same story as 780ti and titan. Pricing is not even close to good - it is bad from every single angle other than from Titanx point of view.

2 Days off for the personal attacks. Keep it up and you will be back in July.

-Rvenger

 

[MrTeal]

$600 is a pretty good price I must say. I feel bad for AMD to sell it at supposedly low margin though. Water cooling + HBM probably cost a pretty penny to use. Not sure what to think about it.
Will be interesting to see benchmarks from it and if hardwareluxx was told correct information regarding performance.

Since yields are low I guess even though Fury X will launch, this card might get sold out quick so anyone looking to buy one should prep up and have the CC ready.

They'll make a lot more money on a $600 Fury X than they will on a $300 290X. Board costs will likely be pretty comparable or cheaper, and the water cooler will be somewhat of a cost adder but not an insane one. The full retail box H80i is pretty much always available for $80-90 shipped and often less, so it's extremely doubtful the added cost over a vapor chamber and blower is even $50. HBM/interposer/larger die will be big added costs, but not that much more.

 

[LTC8K6]

LOL what? Everyone with any sense knew that 980ti will be close to titanx in performance, the same story as 780ti and titan. Pricing is not even close to good - it is bad from every single angle other than from Titanx point of view.

You took that out of context. I said "Combine the release date, the performance, and the price"

Very few expected that combination, imo.

I thought Ti would be close, but not almost identical in performance.

I doubt anyone predicted the near tie between the Ti and the Tx.

With an average performance deficit of just 3%, GeForce GTX 980 Ti is for all intents and purposes GTX Titan X with a different name.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review/18

 

[Cloudfire777]

They'll make a lot more money on a $600 Fury X than they will on a $300 290X. Board costs will likely be pretty comparable or cheaper, and the water cooler will be somewhat of a cost adder but not an insane one. The full retail box H80i is pretty much always available for $80-90 shipped and often less, so it's extremely doubtful the added cost over a vapor chamber and blower is even $50. HBM/interposer/larger die will be big added costs, but not that much more.

Maybe you are right but I dont know man. I wonder how fast a company get their investment in engineering a new chip and GPU back and turn it in to profit. Lower margins means more sales required though.

You are getting too excited for no reason. Like a flag, weaving whichever direction the wind blows.
Every single post, no matter how unlikely, without any sources, you take as granted and make a whole conclusion about something we really know nothing apart from few pictures of the shroud...

Relax. This card will come out. It will have performance measured in FPS or score in 3Dmark, and will cost money. That is granted.

Stop the silly oscilloscope, going from huge let down, to omg its going to be amazing, and everything in between. I have a real concerns about your mental health. Relax...

Oh please stop with the pathetic attacks.
Its called being an enthusiast. Why shouldnt I or anyone believe the recent news? Its two credible sites speaking to industry insiders at Computex, not a random chinese site posting a random graph

Someone gotta keep the forum alive

 

[tviceman]

My dream scenario that is not likely impossible.

AMD Fury X is 60% and AMD Fury is 30% faster than Titan X

AMD Fury X price point is $750

AMD Fury price point is $600

If this sound like trolling, it really isn't. There should be no reason why the GTX 980ti should be more than $500 just because the Titan X is an overprice piece of garbage.

Would be great for gamers if "Fury X" is closer to thehotsung8701A's numbers AND comes in at a closer to $650 price point.

If it crushes Titan X it might actually be worth considering, even as a late 28nm part.

Silly season is in full effect. Let this sink in nice and slow: No single GPU will beat Titan X by 60% this year. No single GPU will beat Titan x by 25% this year. The heavy, and most likely, indications is that Fury won't be able to "beat" Titan X at all. I think best case scenario is win some lose some. But Titan X is irrelevant for now for any "gamers." 980 TI is going to rock it out and likely have better OC abilities with custom AIB cards.

And here's the real kicker: with the 2x8 pin connector, it's obvious Fiji is going to be a power hog. It looks more and more like water cooling isn't just a great new feature, it was REQUIRED. And that does not bode well for overclocking. If Hawaii is any indication, Fiji is going to have less OC headroom and a massively ballooning TDP vs. Titan X overclocking. An given than massively overclocked 980 TI's are inbound, Fiji is going to have a hard time against 980 TI's once all the lines are drawn.

 

[Illyan]

This launch seems reminiscent of the 6950/70 launch. They were hyped up to be AMD's return to the super high end only to end up a few % +/- from nvidia's counter high end. At least everytime AMD missteps they seem to come out with a rockstar of a card not long after, 2900/3870 -> 4800s, 6900s -> 7900s. Of course we could still be blown away by Fiji, here's hoping.

 

[tential]

I already posted that...

What is the point of using a lot of power in a card that's supposed to use a lot less power?

Here is what I think happened. First Nvidia is smart and didn't make the reference 980ti clocked high enough to need more power. However after market will have a different story. Fury x is on water as reference design and is designed with all perf already milked since and doesn't play the marketing game as well. What will happen is people will quote reference 980Ti power consumption and after market/oc perf when it comes out. And people will judge amd on their reference design and ignore 980ti power usage increase when oced and the 980ti will be the better card by the market. Realistically both will be equal imo (when you weigh pros cons of each card maybe a slight lead to each vendor based on how you value their services. Amd will win out for me most likely since gameworks, dsr, price, and other reasons should have me picking up fury but who knows.

 

[Zstream]

I'm glad I purchased two 24 inch 1920*1080 monitors. I don't have to worry about such rumors

My 270 is chugging along nicely

 

[Cloudfire777]

Silly season is in full effect. Let this sink in nice and slow: No single GPU will beat Titan X by 60% this year. No single GPU will beat Titan x by 25% this year. The heavy, and most likely, indications is that Fury won't be able to "beat" Titan X at all.

And here's the real kicker: with the 2x8 pin connector, it's obvious Fiji is going to be a power hog. It looks more and more like water cooling isn't a great new feature, it was REQUIRED. If Hawaii is any indication, Fiji is going to have less OC headroom and a massively ballooning TDP vs. Titan X overclocking. An given than massively overclocked 980 TI's are inbound, Fiji is going to have a hard time against 980 TI's as well.

I cant help but feel this too.

Hardwareluxx said this and I`m not sure what it means. Are they hitting the power roof with current clocks for Fury? Is that what they mean?

AMD is still trying to optimize higher clock rates and is making adjustments to the driver's performance. Performance related to power consumption is therefore likely to be a critical issue for "Fiji".

 

[tviceman]

I cant help but feel this too.

Hardwareluxx said this and I`m not sure what it means. Are they hitting the power roof with current clocks for Fury? Is that what they mean?

Of course it's what that means. It's exactly what it meant when the reference 290 came out. "Tweaking the bios" is nothing more than clocking the card higher than initially expected. They are in the labs testing out various clocks vs. their yields vs. power consumption and trying to find the best compromise for the situation because things have changed vs. two weeks ago. The card is done and ready. The drivers are probably ready. If they had a for sure winner on their hands, they would have launched by now.

I fully expect 980 TI to be virtually tied with Fiji, maybe lose by 1-2% stock vs. stock. But I also expect 980 TI to win by about 10% and draw 150-200 less watts when overclocking both cards to the max.

 

[AnandThenMan]

AMD could easily play the sandbag game as well, don't release the water cooled versions until the GTX980Ti Uber Blaster HyBoost Warp Bubble cards are released.

If they had a for sure winner on their hands, they would have launched by now.

What possible reason would there be for AMD to wait?

 

[tviceman]

AMD could easily play the sandbag game as well, don't release the water cooled versions until the GTX980Ti Uber Blaster HyBoost Warp Bubble cards are released.

I don't think that is a choice with Fiji. 2x8 pin on a new single GPU sounds like water is pretty much a necessity unless they want to go with a 2 fan open air cooler which isn't practical on a 17cm card.

 

[Riceninja]

the reality amd faces with regards to nvidia's market share and more importantly, mindshare, is that this fury card needs to be either:

1) same performance/OC ability as 980ti for 20% cheaper ($549), or
2) same price as 980ti but 20% more performance across the board (making it the undisputed fastest single card, full stop, and accounting for any GW bias that can be cherry picked to compare)

seems drastic and quite the uphill battle, but anything less would be the 290x/970 situation all over again.

i think amd can pull off 1), but it would be in a bad spot financially. i dont think amd can pull off 2) however, given hardware limits. since amd's PR guys have been quite snarky in the recent months but absolutely silent after the 980ti reveal, i don't think amd is feeling all that confident either.

and for all the guys harping on about power, please, if i spend $650 on a gpu i'm not worried about 100w difference in power consumption.