AMD Blocks/Disables Overclocking the Memory for the Radeon R9 Fury X

[patrickjp93]

I'm aware of that, but I'm talking about low overclocks, like what if I want to OC 2 or 3 MHz?

If you have to overclock the entire interposer (a definite possibility) to be able to touch the memory you may introduce instability all over the place as straps are violated on both ends.

[MastuhWaffles]

I think AMD should take the time and work on this a little more. It seems like the product isn't ready yet, and in the end, if you rush something out to early (like video games) you have to spend time dealing with complaints and fixing the problems, it's more logical to take more time to make sure everything is working perfectly.

[79 Potatoes]

If you have to overclock the entire interposer (a definite possibility) to be able to touch the memory you may introduce instability all over the place as straps are violated on both ends.

Well, if it OCs all the interposer I'd take the risk for a low OC, after all I paid for it

[Takata]

If someone is overclocking, is assuming the risks and it's always been like that.

 

 

At first I kinda brushed it off because I don't normally overclock my vram anyway, but you know what? Screw this. I don't give a damn if it's a new technology, there's no reason to protect enthusiasts from themselves. If I want to push my vram and end up killing the thing, I absolutely should have the ability to. There is NEVER an acceptable reason to REMOVE functionality from a device that could function normally otherwise. My opinion on this topic is the same as when Nvidia removed the ability to overclock mobile GPUs. If I want to nuke my laptop, I should have the ability to. If I want to blow up my GPU, I should have the ability to. If I want to have a dedicated PhysX GPU in my AMD rig, I should have the ability to. If I want to disable windows updates, I should have the ability to. If I want to run F@H on my PS3, then I should have the ability to! I am getting so sick and tired of manufacturers removing functionality from our devices that would have required literally no effort to leave alone. This is garbage, #OverclockHBMorRiot

It's not just the customer taking a risk. AMD takes a risk too if they allow overclocking. If it overclocks poorly, AMD will look bad. If it breaks or fails easily when overclocked, AMD may have to provide free replacements for customers who were actually at fault.

 

 

If we are going to crucify Nvidia for not allowing mobile overclocking (especially on MXM equipped laptops that have beefy cooling) then I fully expect people to also bitch out AMD for not allowing ENTHUSIASTS to overclock their HBM. 

 

The Fury is a enthusiast card, no? Did I miss the memo where AMD is afraid of what ENTHUSIASTS will do to their ENTHUSIAST card? Hmm, why call it that anyways if you're gonna block off parts of the playground because "you think its good enough". 

 

People here say we bitch at AMD for no reason. Well...if AMD stopped making boneheaded choices like this (and Nvidia to boot), we'd stop making fun of them for it. Ironically the AMD guys knee-jerk their "oh look people will now insult AMD" speeches for no reason. Stop being so melodramatic and stop making a mountain out of molehill. AMD is being silly, they'll get called out for silliness. Don't like people doing that? Stop being so invested in what GPU you own. 

I thought AMD watercooled the card so the end user didn't have to be "enthusiast" enough to distmantle their card and assemble their own loop to have that kind of performance. (Plus the card probably just wouldn't work that well with air-cooling.)

 

Perfectly fine for Intel, AMD, and Nvidia to disable overclocking where it doesn't make sense, or could do more harm to them than good.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

If you have to overclock the entire interposer (a definite possibility) to be able to touch the memory you may introduce instability all over the place as straps are violated on both ends.

 

Would overclocking the HBM brick the card by any chance?  :huh:

[Guest Kloaked]

 

 

Mate, the people "defending" Nvidia about the 970 were just telling it like it is. We didn't hop onto the hate train; instead we actually had the cards on hand ourselves and tested them.

 

I personally did not find any issue with the card. Everyone was making a mountain out of a mole hill that didn't even actually affect anything significant. The people who actually tested that card in games didn't find any actual issues with it and that's why we said something to the naysayers and the bandwagoners. It wasn't us starting the shit storms, it was everyone else who were calling us liars and instead took to latin retorts and other tired arguments instead of factual evidence. Not a single person on this forum even presented video evidence except for @Razzaa and he made the same rational conclusion that I did with my 970: there's nothing wrong with it.

 

But by all means, continue to think the people who actually fucking tested the card are fanboys for not finding any evidence of a problem with the card.

 

The reason Stronz said what he said was because everyone was bitching about Nvidia locking some of their mobile chips from being overclocked; I bet many of the bitchers (is that even a word) didn't even have an Nvidia GPU equipped laptop. Because of what AMD is doing with their HBM, everyone should bitch about that too because "DAE LOCK IS BAD FOR ENTHUSIASTS". Jesus.

 

Everyone of you guys who are pulling the fanboy card need to grow up. It's not fanboyism, it's calling shit like it is.

[79 Potatoes]

If it overclocks poorly, AMD will look bad.

I overclock for myself not the public, but I get that point, like reviewers, OC competitions or anyone complaining. Anyway IMO locking a feature for reputation is dick move.

[Facety]

Perfectly fine for Intel, AMD, and Nvidia to disable overclocking where it doesn't make sense, or could do more harm to them than good.

 

Precisely

[TroubleKlef]

Good for AMD. This product is currently the highlight and the best of what AMD has to offer. Especially since AMD has adopted HBM and it's a first generation product, they don't want any mishaps.

[Icecube26]

i agree with amd here .. its a new type of technology.... who knows what could happen.... u might eventually break the card....

[MrDynamicMan]

I think it's right. If someone ocs by 1mhz and breaks the shit out of the card, hbm will look bad.

EDIT:

Guys...

Disabling memory ocing does not mean all ocing is disables

[GoodN1ght]

This technology is so new, they probably want to deep test it before allowing to OC that memory. That's normal.

I suspect a couple of professional overclockers will have the permission then we'll see from there. Really only people who REALLY know what they're doing should mess with this. 

[Guest]

Mate, the people "defending" Nvidia about the 970 were just telling it like it is. We didn't hop onto the hate train; instead we actually had the cards on hand ourselves and tested them.

I personally did not find any issue with the card. Everyone was making a mountain out of a mole hill that didn't even actually affect anything significant. The people who actually tested that card in games didn't find any actual issues with it and that's why we said something to the naysayers and the bandwagoners. It wasn't us starting the shit storms, it was everyone else who were calling us liars and instead took to latin retorts and other tired arguments instead of factual evidence. Not a single person on this forum even presented video evidence except for @Razzaa and he made the same rational conclusion that I did with my 970: there's nothing wrong with it.

But by all means, continue to think the people who actually fucking tested the card are fanboys for not finding any evidence of a problem with the card.

The reason Stronz said what he said was because everyone was bitching about Nvidia locking some of their mobile chips from being overclocked; I bet many of the bitchers (is that even a word) didn't even have an Nvidia GPU equipped laptop. Because of what AMD is doing with their HBM, everyone should bitch about that too because "DAE LOCK IS BAD FOR ENTHUSIASTS". Jesus.

Everyone of you guys who are pulling the fanboy card need to grow up. It's not fanboyism, it's calling shit like it is.

I read the first 2 paragraphs, but I never said the 970 was a bad card, however it was a dirty move from Nvidia and slower last half GB of memory is still slower.

If it was a bad card I never would have put it in the new build of a friend 3 days ago.

Also the situations are NOT the same, they are not disabling the core clock like Nvidia did and it's HBM, not GDDR5, it's new-ish territory.

Now GOOD FUCKING DAY. And I won't look again In this hellhole thread.

[Guest Kloaked]

I read the first 2 paragraphs, but I never said the 970 was a bad card, however it was a dirty move from Nvidia and slower last half GB of memory is still slower.

If it was a bad card I never would have put it in the new build of a friend 3 days ago.

Also the situations are NOT the same, they are not disabling the core clock like Nvidia did and it's HBM, not GDDR5, it's new-ish territory.

Now GOOD DAY. And I won't watch again In this hellhole thread.

 

[BiG StroOnZ]

 

I don't lol very much, but this made me lol.

[Texhnlyze]

If it was Nvidia that was first releasing HBM, and they blocked overclocking the memory nobody would be bashing Nvidia. Just shows the amount of ignorance in this forum. 

 

What? If Nvidia makes one mistake and it's reported to this forum, it becomes a hot topic stretching to 30 pages or even more. The hate that AMD gets here is the same as the hate that NVidia gets. 

[brokencross]

Meh. Overclocking the memory makes virtually no difference. Best case scenario, maybe 5 more fps.

[MEC-777]

Love how everyone jumps on this as if HBM works like GDDR5. It's not GDDR5 and it doesn't work the same way, so no, this is not like Nvidia locking down overclocking on it's mobile GPUs. This is a different situation. 

 

I would wager there's so much bandwidth available with HBM that you'd probably never see much of a gain from OCing it anyways.

 

Also, we still don't know how much the core will OC, so how about everyone cool your jets and wait for some actual overclocking tests. 

 

[BiG StroOnZ]

Meh. Overclocking the memory makes virtually no difference. Best case scenario, maybe 5 more fps.

 

But that's the difference between 55 fps and 60 fps

 

PCMASTERRACE.

[brokencross]

But that's the difference between 55 fps and 60 fps

 

PCMASTERRACE.

Nah, it's called diminishing returns.

We don't even know how that type of memory behave, much less the heat it might produce.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Nah, it's called diminishing returns.

 

No it's called if you gain 5 fps from overclocking the core and 5 fps from overclocking the memory. You now gained 10 fps compared to stock.

 

Overclocking the memory is definitely beneficial. 

[Takata]

I overclock for myself not the public, but I get that point, like reviewers, OC competitions or anyone complaining. Anyway IMO locking a feature for reputation is dick move.

A company's reputation for producing products that work consistently and reliably is more important than satisfying someone who demands a feature that probably doesn't make sense, and may work against consistency and reliability.

 

 

But that's the difference between 55 fps and 60 fps

 

PCMASTERRACE.

That's why PC games have so many adjustable settings for detail and performance. Use them.

[brokencross]

No it's called if you gain 5 fps from overclocking the core and 5 fps from overclocking the memory. You now gained 10 fps compared to stock.

 

Overclocking the memory is definitely beneficial. 

It's virtually useless. You just overclock the memory for those extra 3fps. What really matters is the core clock.

[BiG StroOnZ]

 

 

That's why PC games have so many adjustable settings for detail and performance. Use them.

 

No, I'll just overclock my memory instead and gain more performance without having to adjust my settings at all.

 

It's virtually useless. You just overclock the memory for those extra 3fps. What really matters is the core clock.

 

They are both equally important. Trust me. Not everyone gets a Silicon Lottery card that can overclock heavily on the core, but you can always count on quality memory being utilized in graphics cards these days. You can make up the difference if you get a bad clocker with memory overclocking. Trust me I had a GTX 670 that could do +750 on the memory in 3DMark11 but could only do 1300MHz on the core.

[brokencross]

 

 

 

No, I'll just overclock my memory instead and gain more performance without having to adjust my settings at all.

 

 

They are both equally important. Trust me. Not everyone gets a Silicon Lottery card that can overclock heavily on the core, but you can always count on quality memory being utilized in graphics cards these days. You can make up the difference if you get a bad clocker with memory overclocking. Trust me I had a GTX 670 that could do +750 on the memory in 3DMark11 but could only do 1300MHz on the core.

 

Those "+750" on 3dmark translate to about 3-5fps in-game.

My 280 has a maxed out memory clock. I gained 3fps from the stock clock.