no custom PCBs for R9 Fury Nano

[zMeul]

source: http://www.expreview.com/42696.html via http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/anton-shilov/amd-will-not-allow-partners-to-modify-specs-of-radeon-r9-nano/

 

The only thing that AMD’s partners will be allowed to modify is the cooling system of the product. Producers of graphics adapters will not be able to increase clock-rates of their Radeon R9 Nano or significantly adjust printed-circuit boards.

Custom versions of AMD Radeon R9 Nano will have to preserve form-factor of the graphics card and should be compliant with mini-ITX standards. Thermal design power of partner’s Radeon R9 Nano graphics cards will have to be the same as TDP of AMD’s version.

---

there you have it, AIB partners aren't able to make completely customized versions of the Fury Nano

the only thing that they can modify, and at this point I wonder what can it be since mini-ITX specs must be respected, is the cooling - put a waterblock on it? but then you'll get the exact same thing as the Fury X

what you see is what you'll get:

 

---

something I noticed, and I suspect it has to do with the lock-ins: except Sapphire, no one else (main vendors) picked up the R9 Fury nor the R9 Nano

ASUS, GigaByte, MSI and XFX only sell the Fury X

I suspect it's because they can't be bothered to create a custom cooler that works for the R9 Fury and can't use it on the Nano, at least

ASUS has the Strixx R9 Fury and the R9 Nano

[don_svetlio]

Well - a blower design? I would love a blower nano

[Sparviero]

Why does AMD keep shooting themselves in the foot. Let the vendors get kray-kray. The water block makers must be happy.

[Fetzie]

...

It'd be a water-cooled Fury with a possibly smaller footprint, could be useful in conjunction with a PCI-E riser-card for a flat SFF case.

[Misanthrope]

I'd like to think that they know people might not be familiar enough with the design vs previous designs and such, but no really, we've had ITX cards for a while now this is just fucking nonsense AMD.

[zMeul]

Well - a blower design? I would love a blower nano

if you look at it, AMD's design pretty much works similarly to a blower design, pushing air outside of the case

[Prysin]

source: http://www.expreview.com/42696.html via http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/anton-shilov/amd-will-not-allow-partners-to-modify-specs-of-radeon-r9-nano/

 

---

there you have it, AIB partners aren't able to make completely customized versions of the Fury Nano

the only thing that they can modify, and at this point I wonder what can it be since mini-ITX specs must be respected, is the cooling - put a waterblock on it? but then you'll get the exact same thing as the Fury X

what you see is what you'll get:

 

this is good news... better custom coolers = more likely to reach the 1GHz max clock rather then hitting TJMAX all the time.

[don_svetlio]

if you look at it, AMD's design pretty much works similarly to a blower design, pushing air outside of the case

But blowers are sexy - i secretly fap to them. . .  pretend you didn't read that

[zMeul]

It'd be a water-cooled Fury with a possibly smaller footprint, could be useful in conjunction with a PCI-E riser-card for a flat SFF case.

smaller footprint that what? Fury X? but the PCB is pretty much identical - I would bet EK's Fury X waterblocks would fit Nano

[zMeul]

this is good news... better custom coolers = more likely to reach the 1GHz max clock rather then hitting TJMAX all the time.

you haven't read the post properly ...

AMD isn't allowing anyone to surpass their rated TDP, their aren't allowed to raise clocks .. at all!

[PineappleHolidays]

AMD pls

[StareX]

Says*

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

I have a feeling a custom board with insane vrms and all that stuffs might make the nano pretty fast 

[SPAS-ID]

WHY ?!

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

HOF nano

 

Heh, that'll be illegal and only found in the black market

[Misanthrope]

this is good news... better custom coolers = more likely to reach the 1GHz max clock rather then hitting TJMAX all the time.

 

.....I still fail to see the "good" part about that....

[matjojo]

amd pls

[zacRupnow]

Title... "...AMD sais"

[Tomsen]

Jesus guys, it is not like the fury x doesn't exist..

The fury x is at exactly the same pricepoint. Same chip.

EDIT: cleared it up

[Prysin]

you haven't read the post properly ...

AMD isn't allowing anyone to surpass their rated TDP, their aren't allowed to raise clocks .. at all!

let me clarify

 

AMD has stated that the rated TOP CLOCK SPEED OF 1000 MHz IS UNLIKELY TO BE ATTAINED DURING HEAVY WORKLOADS.

 

REALISTIC CLOCK SPEEDS SHOULD BE AROUND 800-900 DUE TO THERMAL LIMITATIONS!!!!!

 

 

 

CUSTOM COOLERS WOULD MAKE SURE THAT THIS TDP WOULD BE CONTAINED. MEANING AMD IS SIMPLY SAYING "OUR COOLER CANNOT DO THE JOB, SO WE WILL LEAVE IT TO SOMEONE ELSE TO FIX IT"

Edited September 1, 2015 by Godlygamer23
Lowered font size.

[Briggsy]

AMD stated this is a dual-flagship launch between the Nano and FuryX, and both are reference design only. Therefore, the only logical response is to:

[CTR640]

[Prysin]

GLORIOUS

 

+1 internet sir

[Lazmarr]

WHY ?!

Perhaps this has something to do with SK Hynix? Not really sure though, maybe they aren't allowed to change anything that can directly affect the HBM and perhaps shorten its life span?

[WereCat]

Honestly.

If AMD allowed custom Fury Nano and AIB partners would go full out with it then that would be shooting themselves into foot too.

Why?

Fury Nano is expensive as hell to make because it requires some serious bining so it is in a very low supply. Also HBM is in a very low supply.

It would be a waste to let AIB partners make this into a Fury X as Nano is meant to be very low power and form factor.

AMD should instead let AIB partners make custom Fury X and I think they will but not until HBM will increase in supply.