Anyone else disappointed with R9 300/Fury lineup?

[Aphala]

Good to see the "I jumped the gun before the benchmarks" threads popping up.

 

Also R9 3XX is not what people were waiting for, they wanted to see the three Fury cards.

 

R9 F Nano

R9 Fury X (Air cooled)

R9 Fury X (Watercooled)

R0 Fury X2

[Hieb]

Don't be disappointed, they aren't out yet officially. And don't even act like Nvidia has never rebranded a card

 

The lineup has been revealed at this point. I'm not saying I'm disappointed by the new GPUs that were released - I'm sure the Fiji Pro and Fiji XT chips are excellent. I'm disappointed that the entire 300 lineup is literally just the same-tier card from the 200 series (e.g. R9 290 -> R9 390).

 

It's not that I didn't expect rebranding, it's that I expected them to be a notch lower.

 

I expected the R9 290X to become the R9 380X.

 

And I don't know why you mentioned Nvidia as it's not the topic of the post (this isn't a smear post, it's just disappointment with AMD's only new cards being marketed as a separate lineup from the main product family), but rebrands weren't direct copy for copy. It's not like the GTX 680 became the GTX 780... the GTX 680 got beefed up a little and became the GTX 770. So it got bumped down a tier in the new generation and got performance improved.

 

So really the 290X should have been the 380X... not the 390X.

[Hieb]

Good to see the "I jumped the gun before the benchmarks" threads popping up.

 

Also R9 3XX is not what people were waiting for, they wanted to see the three Fury cards.

 

R9 F Nano

R9 Fury X (Air cooled)

R9 Fury X (Watercooled)

R0 Fury X2

 

I'll eat my words if it turns out that the copypasta 390X, 390, 370 is better than the 290X, 290, 270 by a significant margin. But right now it appears it's simply just changing the 2 to a 3, with the 390/390X getting some better memory clock speeds.

 

I have high hopes for the Fury cards, I'm just very disappointed they're marketed as a separate product family to the R9 300 series.  The Fury X should have been the 390X, the Fury should have been the 390, and the 290/290X the 380 and 380X respectively.

[EnzoMP]

Some people will just say Amd's 290, or Amd's 390? Let's go for the 390, it has to be most powerful. 

[EnzoMP]

It's just the same thing, used with better clock settings and higher vram. 

[Aphala]

I'll eat my words if it turns out that the copypasta 390X, 390, 370 is better than the 290X, 290, 270 by a significant margin. But right now it appears it's simply just changing the 2 to a 3, with the 390/390X getting some better memory clock speeds.

 

I have high hopes for the Fury cards, I'm just very disappointed they're marketed as a separate product family to the R9 300 series.  The Fury X should have been the 390X, the Fury should have been the 390, and the 290/290X the 380 and 380X respectively.

I agree that the Fury should have been the high end R9 3XX cards instead of releasing a new line but i'll be dammed if I don't buy a Fury X once those benchies roll out

 

But I mean will 4gb HBM be better than 8gb of GDDR5? or on par with it? I plan on getting a 4K monitor if the 3rd party cards are good or even if AMD LET Sapphire and the rest make custom coolers for R9 Fury series.

[munchlax]

what i expected from 220>

360>=270/270x 

370>=280/285

380>=280x/290

 

and this is what i got

360=260

270x>370

280x>380

 

while the games are becoming more demanding they release the same things

I mean why would an hd7950/7970/280/280x owner mind to buy a new card when he has the same perfomance as the new line up ?

I would not be sad if i was paying in us dollars but for people in europe I read that a 380 will cost 209 dollars=280 euros  :angry:

[orcinhell]

I like AMD. I want to like AMD but they fail to wow me. I had a AMD card before my latest upgrade a 7970 and loved it but ever since that they have fail to keep my attention. Even after this release I am still glad I went with Nvidia.

 

Whether or not the cards are still sitting at the right price vs performance is almost irrelevant to me to some degree. AMD has come out and talked about their thin profit margins and the need to change their business image from a budget to enthusiast grade company. That said they can only really apply (as many have put it) brute force tactics to increase performance, while the rest of the line are simply rebrands of older cards. They are RND limited, due to thin profit margins and lower market share.

 

To me the most telling sign is that a company such as Nvidia who currently relies heavily on GPU sales to expand their company see team red as no real threat. As many respected members of the tech world have said before, if it came to it Nvidia could crush AMD on price. If AMD was really a player Nvidia would already be making moves, yet they stay fast and true. Nvidia are a lot of things, but they aren't fools and they would not allow AMD to undercut them as well as out preform them. If all turns out to be true and AMD do perform better at a lower cost and Nvidia do not lower costs, then they must have one hell of an ace up their sleeve with Pascal.

[dougdangger]

Unfortunately AMD has been spiraling down to its death the past 5 years.  It seems that they pulled up a bit and gained some altitude when the XBone and PS4 were announced and released.  In early 2015 they started sinking again closing in on all their all time low from 2013.  I'm guessing it's people's disappointment with the "next gen" consoles, lack luster CPU and just stale GPUs they are releasing.  Had AMD not received the contracts to build the next gen console hardware, they would have gone belly up in early 2014.

 

Nvidia did started to lose altitude as well early 2012, ticked up a little, and started to dip late into 2013 and early 2014.  Not getting any contracts in the next gen console is what most believe.  However, early 2014 Nvidia shares started climbing.  They do have involvement in mobile technology but they're actually not too well received.  One cannot ignore the fact that people are just disappointed in next gen console gaming and with AMD's lack of innovation which help bring more people into Nvidia's camp.

 

I don't wish AMD ill.  A monopoly is bad news for everyone, specially for Nvidia fanboys.  However AMD is just really not putting any effort into developing their products.  For goodness sake they kicked the crap out of Intel during their Athlon days.  Now they're rebadging GPUs from 2011 and trying to pass it off as new.  So sad.

[Guest Generallee]

The new cards are awesome, but there are a few things really eating away at me

 

1) They screwed their own naming scheme by trying to go all fancy with "Fury" branding

 

 

>Complains about new naming scheme

>nvidia have done it with the Titan 

 

It's not the whole scheme, it's just one or two cards, next gen, if AMD doesn't close doors, is gonna be named 400 series 

[InTechsicated]

The new cards are awesome, but there are a few things really eating away at me

 

1) They screwed their own naming scheme by trying to go all fancy with "Fury" branding

2) The R7 370 is still using Pitcairn from 2012... and doesn't support all the latest things like FreeSync and TrueAudio

 

I really wish the lineup was something like this:

 

R9 390X - Fiji XT/Fury X - $550

R9 390 - Fiji Pro/Fury - $400-450

R9 380X - R9 290 / 290X 4GB/8GB - $275-300

R9 380 - R9 M295X 3GB/6GB (Tonga XT) - $260-275

R9 370X - R9 285 4GB - $220

R9 370 - R9 285 2GB - $175

R7 360 - R7 260X 2GB - $125

R7 350X - R7 260 2GB - $100

 

Having the 390 and 390X basically just being 290 and 290X with extra VRAM is really disappointing. It's supposedly a new generation, they should be a tier lower. Releasing a whole new generation of cards where the only actual NEW cards aren't part of the numbering system is really lame, I

From what I understand your breakdown is actually inaccurate, the situation is even worse. The 390 and 390x are rebrands of the 8GB 290 and 290x. The only new cards they have released are the Fury and Fury X which are called by those names.

[InTechsicated]

Unfortunately AMD has been spiraling down to its death the past 5 years.  It seems that they pulled up a bit and gained some altitude when the XBone and PS4 were announced and released.  In early 2015 they started sinking again closing in on all their all time low from 2013.  I'm guessing it's people's disappointment with the "next gen" consoles, lack luster CPU and just stale GPUs they are releasing.  Had AMD not received the contracts to build the next gen console hardware, they would have gone belly up in early 2014.

 

Nvidia did started to lose altitude as well early 2012, ticked up a little, and started to dip late into 2013 and early 2014.  Not getting any contracts in the next gen console is what most believe.  However, early 2014 Nvidia shares started climbing.  They do have involvement in mobile technology but they're actually not too well received.  One cannot ignore the fact that people are just disappointed in next gen console gaming and with AMD's lack of innovation which help bring more people into Nvidia's camp.

 

I don't wish AMD ill.  A monopoly is bad news for everyone, specially for Nvidia fanboys.  However AMD is just really not putting any effort into developing their products.  For goodness sake they kicked the crap out of Intel during their Athlon days.  Now they're rebadging GPUs from 2011 and trying to pass it off as new.  So sad.

I agree completely. People often forget that the reason Intel and Nvidia have been so good for so long is because AMD use to innovate just as well and bring the pain with their products, if either company goes belly up it is really bad news for us consumers as they will no longer have a reason to try so hard and market so well. They both have a responsibility to challenge the other for supremacy and AMD is starting fail in that responsibility.

[KWelz]

I am disappointed in AMD but no for the reasons most people are.  

 

The market needs competition.  This keeps prices down and pushes companies to improve.   Without that competition Intel and Nvidia have no reason to bother.  The industry could stagnate.   

 

And currently there is no competition from AMD in the CPU market and only marginal in the GPU market.   The Fury card seems interesting but given the recent track record of AMD I am not overly hopeful.  They are quite literally stuck on 3 year old technology rebranded twice over now.   And on the CPU front it is even worse.  

[Zulkkis]

The new cards are awesome, but there are a few things really eating away at me

 

1) They screwed their own naming scheme by trying to go all fancy with "Fury" branding

2) The R7 370 is still using Pitcairn from 2012... and doesn't support all the latest things like FreeSync and TrueAudio

 

I really wish the lineup was something like this:

 

R9 390X - Fiji XT/Fury X - $550

R9 390 - Fiji Pro/Fury - $400-450

R9 380X - R9 290 / 290X 4GB/8GB - $275-300

R9 380 - R9 M295X 3GB/6GB (Tonga XT) - $260-275

R9 370X - R9 285 4GB - $220

R9 370 - R9 285 2GB - $175

R7 360 - R7 260X 2GB - $125

R7 350X - R7 260 2GB - $100

 

Having the 390 and 390X basically just being 290 and 290X with extra VRAM is really disappointing. It's supposedly a new generation, they should be a tier lower. Releasing a whole new generation of cards where the only actual NEW cards aren't part of the numbering system is really lame, IMO.

 

They are a tier lower. It's just a change of the naming scheme. Kind of like how a HD6870 is a slower card than what the HD5870 was. I agree that it is retarded but it is semantics at its best. Think the 390X as 380X and leave it at that.

 

The current pricing of the 39X doesn't make much sense but it is only the MSRP anyways.

 

It's disappointing, but AMD doesn't have the budget to develop 5 new chips every year like Nvidia does, as they have a rather small market share.  I was really hoping they'd have a bit more new stuff to show us as I'm a bit of a fanboy myself, but it looks like I'm either getting a 980Ti or a Fury X if I build a new rig this year.

 

TSMC failed to deliver a new node, so what can you do. At least 980 TI and the Fury cards are progress. 980 was pretty much a side-grade in a lot of games against a 780 TI (in games where driver support could be considered good on both).

 

 

I thought the air cooled Fury was $550 USD? But even then its a heck of a deal if you don't have any gripe with AMD and they make semi decent partner cards with custom cooling. 

 

Yeah, though I am not sure how well air cooling will work for the card. The space in power budget given by HBM was used to increase performance, which is fine, but the card is so damn small right now that it is hard to imagine how heavy a cooling solution you'd need and how would you go about implementing it on that card. You can't just slap 3 fans on it unless you make it two times as long as it needs to be.

 

Overall, I'd say it is both good and bad. SFF PCs just got lot more interesting. On the other hand, we are not dealing with gigantic performance leaps, but we've been dealing with 28 nm since forever, I mean, look at nVidia... had to wait until 980 TI to get something at relatively sane prices, and it's not earth-shattering either. I'd say the worst thing is that AMD just one-upped the 200$ segment with 285 4GB, with it was a Tonga Pro instead or something. I don't really mind the rebrands, the cards are still fine, really, but they can't be sold at the msrp.

 

I guess by the time we will finally be able to move from the current processing node, we will get real improvements. HBM v2, 14(?) nm processing node, new architectures (?) so that should be all good. Expensive, though. But it should be much less of a joke in terms of performance. The current situation is a perversion of 28nm processing that has clearly overstayed its welcome.

[Thomas_K]

Isn't the only difference between the fury and fury x is ones water cooler and one is aircooled? If so the Fury being $450 if it can get close to the 980Tis performance will keep AMD running a for another year. Even If it just exceeds the 980 being priced at $450 it'll be decent.

stock 980ti is 649.00, a stock fury is 549.00, a water cooled fury X is 649.00. In 3D Mark 11 benchmarks Fury is beating not just the 980ti but the Titan as well. At least up to 4K after 4k it starts going down quite a lot due to the 4GB cap on HBM type 1. 

[Thomas_K]

Remember also that nvidia's gross profit margin is something like 56% compared to amd's 37% so if nvidia really have two shits it could squash prices in an instant.

 

AMD's profits will be going up and keep in mind to that Nvidia is going to be indirectly paying royalties to AMD since AMD owns the patent on HBM. 

[itachipirate]

The lineup has been revealed at this point. I'm not saying I'm disappointed by the new GPUs that were released - I'm sure the Fiji Pro and Fiji XT chips are excellent. I'm disappointed that the entire 300 lineup is literally just the same-tier card from the 200 series (e.g. R9 290 -> R9 390).

It's not that I didn't expect rebranding, it's that I expected them to be a notch lower.

I expected the R9 290X to become the R9 380X.

And I don't know why you mentioned Nvidia as it's not the topic of the post (this isn't a smear post, it's just disappointment with AMD's only new cards being marketed as a separate lineup from the main product family), but rebrands weren't direct copy for copy. It's not like the GTX 680 became the GTX 780... the GTX 680 got beefed up a little and became the GTX 770. So it got bumped down a tier in the new generation and got performance improved.

So really the 290X should have been the 380X... not the 390X.

Even being a rebrand the performance of the 390x according to a few sources is fantastic. In synthetic benchmarks it appears to perform nearly as well as the 980 at a lower cost. I agree it would've been nice if the rebrands were a notch lower, but it looks like AMD might blow Nvidia out of the water for high-end cards, which is where most of their attention was placed

[sgloux3470]

Who cares what the names are?  Seriously.  

 

Here's what matters

 

 

Price $

 

Performance FPS

 

 

[Hieb]

>Complains about new naming scheme

>nvidia have done it with the Titan 

 

It's not the whole scheme, it's just one or two cards, next gen, if AMD doesn't close doors, is gonna be named 400 series 

 

I'm not happy about the Titan doing it either, but at the very least it's just one card and they release a nearly identical version of it that's part of the new generation. The Titan released as a teaser of the next generation, and then a Titan with half the VRAM releases as the GTX 780 and now as the 980 Ti.

 

This launch literally none of the new cards are part of the 300 lineup.

 

 

I am disappointed in AMD but no for the reasons most people are.  

 

The market needs competition.  This keeps prices down and pushes companies to improve.   Without that competition Intel and Nvidia have no reason to bother.  The industry could stagnate.   

 

And currently there is no competition from AMD in the CPU market and only marginal in the GPU market.   The Fury card seems interesting but given the recent track record of AMD I am not overly hopeful.  They are quite literally stuck on 3 year old technology rebranded twice over now.   And on the CPU front it is even worse.  

 

I wouldn't complain if the market just stagnated... then I could keep my same GPU without having to upgrade

Really though technology companies still progress without competition, it's how they keep people interested to keep buying products. They want ongoing revenue, so if they stop providing enticing products then people aren't buying products, ergo they aren't making money unless they keep advancing.

 

 

I agree that the Fury should have been the high end R9 3XX cards instead of releasing a new line but i'll be dammed if I don't buy a Fury X once those benchies roll out

 

But I mean will 4gb HBM be better than 8gb of GDDR5? or on par with it? I plan on getting a 4K monitor if the 3rd party cards are good or even if AMD LET Sapphire and the rest make custom coolers for R9 Fury series.

 

Performance-wise 4GB HBM will be much better, however 4GB may not be enough for extremely high resolutions in games that don't manage VRAM effectively. Some games need a boatload of VRAM while others would run at 4K on 4GB without any issues.

[Hieb]

Who cares what the names are?  Seriously.  

 

Here's what matters

 

 

Price $

 

Performance FPS

 

I do and I'm sure it influences the buying decisions of a lot of people who don't know much about the hardware too.

 

I think Nvidia has done a fine job to show how much branding and marketing impact sales.

[Icecube26]

instead of looking at performance and a price of  a gfx card... all nvidia users are looking is power draw and tdp...its their holy grail....  like a gfx card is going to ruin u..... until the 980ti maxwell release was imo kind of dissapointing aswell.. well lets look at it.... gtx 960 slower then 290/x.... gtx 970 same performance as 290/x .... 980 ... only couple fps faster on average than 290/x...modern gaming today isnt about the amount of vram like many people here are trying to prove...its about fast gpu core working to getter with a fast memory.... titan x with 12gb only runing around 40 fps at 4k... the future lies in HBM..... even nvidia decided to go with hbm next year... so what is your point here?....not mention the features that come with NV card... where apart from gamework amd provides the same stuff...it seems to me that people are  trying to  downplay fiji are just afraid they their cards might become irrelevant...my point of view.... 

[dougdangger]

I guess this is the forum where butt hurt AMD fanboys console one another.

If AMD keeps up their lack of effort in innovating, Radeon will be forgotten by early 2017.

$2.51 per share today

 

$21.68 per share today

 

Cheer up boys

[Aphala]

I'm not happy about the Titan doing it either, but at the very least it's just one card and they release a nearly identical version of it that's part of the new generation. The Titan released as a teaser of the next generation, and then a Titan with half the VRAM releases as the GTX 780 and now as the 980 Ti.

 

This launch literally none of the new cards are part of the 300 lineup.

 

 

 

I wouldn't complain if the market just stagnated... then I could keep my same GPU without having to upgrade

Really though technology companies still progress without competition, it's how they keep people interested to keep buying products. They want ongoing revenue, so if they stop providing enticing products then people aren't buying products, ergo they aren't making money unless they keep advancing.

 

 

 

Performance-wise 4GB HBM will be much better, however 4GB may not be enough for extremely high resolutions in games that don't manage VRAM effectively. Some games need a boatload of VRAM while others would run at 4K on 4GB without any issues.

2560x1440 it is, still I hope 4Gb of HBM will be able to out perform GDDR

[CoolaxGaming]

Yeah you are dissapointed in AMD.

Nvidia Fanboy. Psh.

[dougdangger]

Yeah you are dissapointed in AMD.

Nvidia Fanboy. Psh.

I am disappointed in AMD.  As an Nvidia fanboy, I won't be happy if they disappear.  Because that would mean Nvidia can charge as much as they want and we wouldn't be able to do a darn thing.

 

AMD deserves to be made fun of for their lack of effort.  I wouldn't say their tired old R9 200 series are bad.  They're stealing SOME sales from Nvidia.  Had those cards not been volcanoes, I may have bought one (290 in particular).  AMD needs to pray Nvidia doesn't drop their prices.  It's the only saving grace for AMD.