AMD - A New Era In PC Gaming

[Deletive]

So given how AMD and Nvidia normally market dual GPU cards, does this actually only have 2GB HBM?

Given directx 12, it's actually 8gb.

 

 

Added to OP.

 

 I keep hearing Fury (non x) is a 3584 core unit, did AMD call the non x a fully enabled chip too? 

[Bouzoo]

Added to OP.

A new thread is up so yeah  :lol:

 

So given how AMD and Nvidia normally market dual GPU cards, does this actually only have 2GB HBM?

2GB? Noooooooooooooooooooooo. At least it's gonna be 2x2GB 

[othertomperson]

Given directx 12, it's actually 8gb.

 

People keep saying this like it's an automatic given as soon as they update to Windows 10, as though AFR will just suddenly stop existing and SFR will immediately be as good as the last decade of refinements has made AFR...

[snowComet]

do these new cards have hdmi 2.0?

[Bouzoo]

People keep saying this like it's an automatic given as soon as they update to Windows 10, as though AFR will just suddenly stop existing and SFR will immediately be as good as the last decade of refinements has made AFR...

He's right, even w/o DX12, the 295X2 had 8GB because it had 2x290X chips.

[FratStar]

 I keep hearing Fury (non x) is a 3584 core unit, did AMD call the non x a fully enabled chip too? 

 

She said the Fury X is the water cooled variant Fury is the air cooled version, and finally fury nano and fury x2 ( whatever they want to call it) will be discussed at a later time.

 

So from the looks of it there is no such thing as a cut down Fiji card in the works.....yet.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

i dont get the "New Era" part.

[Sam Z Man]

i dont get the "New Era" part.

It's just marketing, but then again this is the first card to have such a insanely high memory bus and more are to follow, so just like the jump to DDR5 on video cards, this in a way is a "New Era".

[Notional]

i dont get the "New Era" part.

 

First graphics card in the world to have HBM. Lower power usage, small package. ITX sized koth cards. That is a first by all accounts, and is a new era of high end cards.

[Pizzatime6]

I have owned a AMD gpu, the 295x2 in the past. The card was good but in my experience with it the drivers were a pain. At one point my pc would download the drivers then failed to use them. It was super annoying. Other then that they are good value for the performance. Though becuase of the driver issues I had I personally won't own another AMD gpu. Not only that but I've noticed even when a new game comes out there is no new drivers until a few months later. (at least when I had the AMD gpu) Everything said these new gpus bring in competition with nvidia's current cards which is always good for us as consumers.

[BiG StroOnZ]

 

http://www.twitch.tv/amd/v/6240136

 

Skip to 1:15:20. There is no uncertainty. She clearly states that the Fury x is the liquid cooled version and the Fury is the air cooled version.

 

"we're also introducing along with the Fury X, the Fury. Which is an air cooled version.The Fury X is the liquid cooled version, the Fury is the air cooled version."

 

That would be the exact quote. She even confirmed it right after the introduction. 

 

Only interesting part is that Fury X specs are listed already, but Fury specs are not:

 

 

I've made a few edits to my post since your quote. I don't find it logical for them to cut down Fiji. Especially when the Fury X costs only $100 more. Which at least 2/4 of that can be easily accounted for in the custom liquid loop (custom block, aftermarket components). Along with additional technologies that Fury won't have, not to mention the build materials for the Fury X are to be of utmost quality. As explained Fiji needs a custom AIO unit to even begin to water cool it. I just don't see AIBs investing R&D into other company's to develop a unit that will properly accommodate the GPU. They all have new high end air cooling units they've just used on a few of new cards on the market (like the DirectCU III). AMD could be banking on them being the only supplier of a water cooled edition. Which when supply meets demand the price premium plays into effect.

Custom liquid loop + additional technologies + high quality components + only WCE on the market = +$100

 

From a business perspective, they have to do something with the dies that don't quite make the cut for a Fury X. They will have defunct and defective dies regardless of how mature the 28nm process is, they aren't going to do nothing with them. It's standard practice to do something with those dies.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

First graphics card in the world to have HBM. Lower power usage, small package. ITX sized koth cards. That is a first by all accounts, and is a new era of high end cards.

 

oh, nice. 

[Whoopsie988]

Shame most of them are rebrands

[Opcode]

From a business perspective, they have to do something with the dies that don't quite make the cut for a Fury X. They will have defunct and defective dies regardless of how mature the 28nm process is, they aren't going to do nothing with them. It's standard practice to do something with those dies.

It's common to see a company sell off partially bad products as a cut down version. Although I'm sure they bin them chips long before they ever get placed on an interposer with HBM. What do they plan on doing with them binned chips is the million dollar question. The performance gap between a cut down Fiji and a fully feature Fiji based on them projected specifications is too big for what would only account for for a $20-30 price difference between the two (take all of the custom stuff off from the Fury X and it should be ~$600). I think AMD is recycling bad chips or binning them for a future product. They also could of made Fiji to rock 66 compute units so the number of bad chips will be very minimal. It's a common practice to just add a few extra on such a big chip to make up for yields (they have the die space to do it). We'll know more later once die shots and all of that leak out. For right now hopefully Fury is a fully featured Fiji as the press conference would imply that it is.

[BiG StroOnZ]

It's common to see a company sell off partially bad products as a cut down version. Although I'm sure they bin them chips long before they ever get placed on an interposer with HBM. What do they plan on doing with them binned chips is the million dollar question. The performance gap between a cut down Fiji and a fully feature Fiji based on them projected specifications is too big for what would only account for for a $20-30 price difference between the two (take all of the custom stuff off from the Fury X and it should be ~$600). I think AMD is recycling bad chips or binning them for a future product. They also could of made Fiji to rock 66 compute units so the number of bad chips will be very minimal. It's a common practice to just add a few extra on such a big chip to make up for yields. We'll know more later once die shots and all of that leak out. For right now hopefully Fury is a fully featured Fiji as the press conference would imply that it is.

 

I don't believe she said anything regarding specs about the Nano, perhaps this is where those chips are going.

[othertomperson]

He's right, even w/o DX12, the 295X2 had 8GB because it had 2x290X chips.

 

Yes, that is the crux of my joke... though it was funnier before you tried to explain it.

[shawno]

I wonder if this will force nvidias hand in reducing the prices for 980ti and titan x?

Was hoping id wake up to amd saying the 390x would be the same hawaii gpu with hbm added.

[Opcode]

I don't believe she said anything regarding specs about the Nano, perhaps this is where those chips are going.

Could be, it seems like the most logical place to get rid of the dysfunctional chips. People will still buy it simply because of its form factor.

[Guest Kloaked]

I'm wondering if those rad fans are Silencio fans.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Could be, it seems like the most logical place to get rid of the dysfunctional chips. People will still buy it simply because of its form factor.

 

I think this would make the most sense for a cut down version to go, because being that small will result in increased thermal density, which makes me believe if it is only cooled by a single fan (with 175W cooling capacity) it has to have much disabled to compensate. I believe she also mentioned its power draw was quite low, which would also make sense if it is half the power of the 290X, that would put it at about 150W. AMD is quoting around 275W for the Fury X for reference versions, so they are basically cutting power consumption by about 45% So I'm imagining it has more stream processors than a 290X but maybe the speculated 3584 SPs is still too much.

[Opcode]

 

AMD should put this guy (Joe Macri) on pushing sales, he's pretty damn convincing.

 

I think this would make the most sense for a cut down version to go, because being that small will result in increased thermal density, which makes me believe if it is only cooled by a single fan (with 175W cooling capacity) it has to have much disabled to compensate. I believe she also mentioned its power draw was quite low, which would also make sense if it is half the power of the 290X, that would put it at about 150W. AMD is quoting around 275W for the Fury X for reference versions, so they are basically taking cutting power consumption by about 45% So I'm imagining it has more stream processors than a 290X but maybe the speculated 3584 SPs is still too much.

The R9 Nano has a lot of board work done to it to cut back on both power and thermals as stated by Raja Koduri. AMD listed Fury X on their website under the 300 series. Interestingly enough that's the only Fiji card listed. I mean I can wrap my head around Fury being a cut down Fiji although with the way AMD presented Fiji I wouldn't of guess it. One thing worth noting though is even if Fury ends up being a cut down Fiji it should completely justify its placement price wise in the market. 3500+ GCN 1.3 SPUs is a safe bet the GTX 980 gets man handled at the same cost.

[Blake]

yeah, that is because the 7990 > 690, and was cooler card. The r9 295x2 was better then the titan z, although the 290x < titan black. The r9 295x2 was a win for AMD as it was cool and had great performance. The r9 290x DID struggle against the 780, and was demolished by the 780ti, 970, 980, 980ti, titan x etch. ALL of these cards consume less power than the r9 290x

 

@1080p - you are correct.

@1440p - toss a coin, 50% 780 wins, other 50% r9 290x destroyed.

@2160p - R9 290x wins against 780/ti, 970, with it being pretty even versus the 980 (but I only consider this as it is generally a few FPS (48 v 45) lower, but is massively cheaper - 700-800AUD versus 500-600AUD)

 

On the power consumption topic: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review/16

Please look up the meaning of immaterial, 5w @ idle and ~20w at full load.

 

Assuming 24x7, 365d @ 22c per KWH = $38.54, assuming full load, or  $9.636 at idle (lets split the difference and say 12 on load and 12 at idle = $24.088) This means you either need to be running a datacenter (however this doesn't work as AMD cards generally spank it all over nVidia when looking at double precision compute performance) - However if your running a datacenter you will be looking at other power saving methods such as deploying gigabit/10 gigabit fibre links as you'd be looking at 5w v 10w per cable versus Ethernet (1000 cables mean a 5000w power savings), or only upgrade after 4+ years at the closest difference in cost, could actually be up to 12 years.

[ltguy]

Wait.. no 8gb models. Wow i really couldn't care less now.

[Cookybiscuit]

Wait.. no 8gb models. Wow i really couldn't care less now.

Thats HBM for you bruh.

[Sam Z Man]

Wait.. no 8gb models. Wow i really couldn't care less now.

Once DX12 starts getting used that all changes.