Jump to content

Radeon Fury X voltage locked ?

zMeul
By zMeul
in Tech News
 Share
Posted

One of the posters in that thread from the OP pointed out that the Titan X also had a locked voltage when it launched. AMD have stated that the Fury X is "an overclockers' dream," and for them to disallow overclocking wouldn't make sense. We'll probably see the voltage unlocked via software update after it launches, so we should hold all opinions of this card until the 24th  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Is it really THAT big of a deal? Flash the bios if it bothers you that much (assuming it will be locked). I mean, HBM is insanely fast as it is and it's not like memory overclocks made a huge difference compared to overclocking the core.

And can we also admit that overclocking the GPU doesn't even make a huge difference unless someone does LN2 and hits INSANE clocks.

I overclocked my 980's to 1560mhz and at best I got an extra one or two FPS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

This is just one more zMeul article trying to put AMD in a bad light.

I'm sure he didn't mean to come off that way, it's just with the hype around Fury X, every little bit of info released gets it own sensational topic. Let's just all get along and get some popcorn for when the reviews hit the web.

That's no moon, that's a death ball !
K'Nex Server -- R9 290 Alpenföhn Peter Review -- Philips BDM4065UC Review
CPU Intel i5-4760K @ 4.3Ghz MEM 4x 4GB Cucial Ballistix 1600 LP MOBO Asus Maximus VI Gene GPU 980Ti G1 @ 1.47Ghz SSD 3x Samsung 840 EVO 240GB Raid0 CASE Silverstone SG10 DISPLAY Philips BDM4065UC 40" UHD

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

And can we also admit that overclocking the GPU doesn't even make a huge difference unless someone does LN2 and hits INSANE clocks.

I overclocked my 980's to 1560mhz and at best I got an extra one or two FPS.

Huh, my 290x ocd to 1150 gets me about a good 5 frames...

Lets all ripperoni in pepperoni

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

And can we also admit that overclocking the GPU doesn't even make a huge difference unless someone does LN2 and hits INSANE clocks.

I overclocked my 980's to 1560mhz and at best I got an extra one or two FPS.

So you're running an SLI config? That's not exactly ideal testing because running SLI opens up another can of worms. In addition, overclocking your video cards by that much should allow for much higher performance. Anandtech for example gained 13FPS in Metro Last LIght at 2560x1440 with a max boost clock of 1515MHz. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/22

 

Your "extra one or two FPS" claim is exaggerated majorly.

"It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out." - Carl Sagan.

"I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you" - Edward I. Koch

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=28207594&postcount=1139

 

This it is quite common that new cards to market have no voltage control, takes software updates to enable it. smile.gif

I didn't know that before. I thought they just told reviewers not to overvolt it past a certain point... Like Linus was just told not to overvolt his Intel CPU past 1.4V for his phase-change build.

 

On the other hand, I guess the consequences of overvolting too far would be worse than this:

https://youtu.be/9S2GwLUN-8Q?t=3m28s

 

Not exactly encouraging that he predicts the 980Ti's better overclockability will put it ahead of even an overclocked Fury X, but -shrug-, silicon lottery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

So you're running an SLI config? That's not exactly ideal testing because running SLI opens up another can of worms. In addition, overclocking your video cards by that much should allow for much higher performance. Anandtech for example gained 13FPS in Metro Last LIght at 2560x1440 with a max boost clock of 1515MHz. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/22

 

Your "extra one or two FPS" claim is exaggerated majorly.

I tried with and without SLI, same thing. This is from my personal experience and also I tend not to believe any online reviews and benchmarks even Linus's and AnandTech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

@TehStranger? Overclocking GPU Core did make a HUGE difference on my R9 290.

An extra 200 Mhz gave me playable Dying Light @ 2160p, ofc not at maximum settings.

That's no moon, that's a death ball !
K'Nex Server -- R9 290 Alpenföhn Peter Review -- Philips BDM4065UC Review
CPU Intel i5-4760K @ 4.3Ghz MEM 4x 4GB Cucial Ballistix 1600 LP MOBO Asus Maximus VI Gene GPU 980Ti G1 @ 1.47Ghz SSD 3x Samsung 840 EVO 240GB Raid0 CASE Silverstone SG10 DISPLAY Philips BDM4065UC 40" UHD

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

@TehStranger? Overclocking GPU Core did make a HUGE difference on my R9 290.

An extra 200 Mhz gave me playable Dying Light @ 2160p, ofc not at maximum settings.

Well maybe you would see a difference at higher resolutions. I'm still running 1080p 144hz. Maybe I should do some testing with DSR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Okay, now it's fair to throw a fit. AMD flat-out lied, and this card now serves no purpose on the market. 

Lied..? wtf? when did they EVER said this card is going to be overclockable?!

 

Serves no purpose?! this card is 650 USD and runs faster than a Titan X.. you telling me it serves no purpose?

Security Analyst & Tech Enthusiast

Ask me anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

From Gibbo on that exact page:

 

And furthermore:

 

So this is probably just a case of software not up to date on a NON released card. To put things into perspective from another user:

 

 

So really @zMeul has no evidence that Fury X is voltage locked, and his source doesn't state so either. This is just one more zMeul article trying to put AMD in a bad light.

Pretty typical of every post hes made in recent months. Hes really on a mission to turn people away from a card that isn't released with a NDA still on it. 

AMD Ryzen 5900x, Nvidia RTX 3080 (MSI Gaming X-trio), ASrock X570 Extreme4, 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB @ 3200mhz CL16, Corsair MP600 1TB, Intel 660P 1TB, Corsair HX1000, Corsair 680x, Corsair H100i Platinum

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Pretty typical of every post hes made in recent months. Hes really on a mission to turn people away from a card that isn't released with a NDA still on it. 

How do any of his recent topics point to him wanting AMD to fail? He's literally posting details about it the cards, most of which have been bad things - yes, but he's just reporting on it...

Just remember: Random people on the internet ALWAYS know more than professionals, when someone's lying, AND can predict the future.

i7 9700K (5.2Ghz @1.2V); MSI Z390 Gaming Edge AC; Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 16GB 3200 CAS 16; H100i RGB Platinum; Samsung 970 Evo 1TB; Samsung 850 Evo 500GB; WD Black 3 TB; Phanteks 350x; Corsair RM19750w.

 

Laptop: Dell XPS 15 4K 9750H GTX 1650 16GB Ram 256GB SSD

Spoiler

sex hahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Lied..? wtf? when did they EVER said this card is going to be overclockable?!

 

Serves no purpose?! this card is 650 USD and runs faster than a Titan X.. you telling me it serves no purpose?

Exactly, even if you can't overclock the memory or increase the voltage, overclocking the core clock will bring it around 10% higher (as estimated by Gibbo). If what he says is true about the temps, then even if the GPU couldn't be OVERCLOCKED AT ALL, I still consider that a win.

 

On Par or Almost Equal to 980 Ti / Titan X, Better Temps, and Only a Little Over Half the Cost.

 

If that can't be considered a win, then I don't know what is.

 

Yes, I know this is based off a rumor; however, if you can't believe my statement, then you can't call this news at all either. Literally taken from the same guy

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

How do any of his recent topics point to him wanting AMD to fail? He's literally posting details about it the cards, most of which have been bad things - yes, but he's just reporting on it...

 

For the most part I'm just thinking a little less jolt cola, and a bit more rum cake.  Being first is fun and all, but not so much when you're just the first to be wrong or mistakenly spread misinformation.  Making decent reports is hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

New tech needs new approach. OCing a ddr5 is shit ton different than hbm.

Probably requires more tweaking and a more stable driver in the future, as for now, dont be crying when you break a $650 toy and couldn't get a refund.

ROG X570-F Strix | AMD R9 5900X | EK Elite 360 | EVGA 3080 FTW3 Ultra | G.Skill Trident Z Neo 64gb | Samsung 980 PRO 
ROG Strix XG349C | Corsair 4000 | Bose C5 | ROG Swift PG279Q

Logitech G810 Orion | Sennheiser HD 518 |  Logitech 502 Hero

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Lied..? wtf? when did they EVER said this card is going to be overclockable?!

 

Serves no purpose?! this card is 650 USD and runs faster than a Titan X.. you telling me it serves no purpose?

They said that it overclocks well, and Titan X is irrelevant. What would be a reason to pick this over a 980 Ti?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

How do any of his recent topics point to him wanting AMD to fail? He's literally posting details about it the cards, most of which have been bad things - yes, but he's just reporting on it...

The fact that all of his topics this past week are specifically only negative things about the Fury X and have the most obscure sources (which means that he is trying his hardest to find every negative detail) it's clear that OP is on a crusade against the Fury X.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

How do any of his recent topics point to him wanting AMD to fail? He's literally posting details about it the cards, most of which have been bad things - yes, but he's just reporting on it...

Dude, literally everything he he posts is to bash AMD or to rub something in the face of AMD fanboys. You'd have to be intentionally ignorant to not see that. He's obsessed with this. I don't know is he wants AMD to fail, but he definitely hold a lot of contempt for AMD fans. There's really no denying that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Dude, literally everything he he posts is to bash AMD or to rub something in the face of AMD fanboys. You'd have to be intentionally ignorant to not see that. He's obsessed with this. I don't know is he wants AMD to fail, but he definitely hold a lot of contempt for AMD fans. There's really no denying that.

But all of the posts he shows have sources... Yes, they show AMD in a negative light. But the Gameworks threads showed Nvidia in a negative light (Pretty sure same person posted most of them), did he get called a "NVIDIA HATING AMD FANBOY"? No. 

And all of the posts have evidence/ reasoning behind them all of the recent topics on his profile except this one which is debatable because when it was published this was all the info released...

 

This Post: At the time of him posting it, no one was speculating that it was only locked because it was pre- production. Only that it can't overclock much on Stock Power.

3xx Tessellation not improved just Drivers: This post has evidence behind it, how does this show him as a fanboy?

Fury X Based off of GCN 1.2: How does this show bias? It's reporting on a fact, how does this show him as a fanboy.

Fury X Not having HDMI 2.0: How does this show him as a fanboy once again? 

Is it because he shows negative things about AMD cards specifically? When he's made ones on Nvidia cards before. There just isn't any news about Nvidia cards right now...

 

He also posted THIS thread, which could have shown Nvidia doing another 970 VRAM thing. Why does that not make him an AMD fanboy?

Just remember: Random people on the internet ALWAYS know more than professionals, when someone's lying, AND can predict the future.

i7 9700K (5.2Ghz @1.2V); MSI Z390 Gaming Edge AC; Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 16GB 3200 CAS 16; H100i RGB Platinum; Samsung 970 Evo 1TB; Samsung 850 Evo 500GB; WD Black 3 TB; Phanteks 350x; Corsair RM19750w.

 

Laptop: Dell XPS 15 4K 9750H GTX 1650 16GB Ram 256GB SSD

Spoiler

sex hahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Please don't put people into boxes. The OP did post useful information, don't punish him for keeping the LTT forums up to date on what's happening with the Fury X. If people got up in arms very time an article/news bit got posted that doesn't rub them the right way then this forum would become a place of censorship and nothing would get posted at all.

That's no moon, that's a death ball !
K'Nex Server -- R9 290 Alpenföhn Peter Review -- Philips BDM4065UC Review
CPU Intel i5-4760K @ 4.3Ghz MEM 4x 4GB Cucial Ballistix 1600 LP MOBO Asus Maximus VI Gene GPU 980Ti G1 @ 1.47Ghz SSD 3x Samsung 840 EVO 240GB Raid0 CASE Silverstone SG10 DISPLAY Philips BDM4065UC 40" UHD

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

But all of the posts he shows have sources... Yes, they show AMD in a negative light. But the Gameworks threads showed Nvidia in a negative light (Pretty sure same person posted most of them), did he get called a "NVIDIA HATING AMD FANBOY"? No. 

And all of the posts have evidence/ reasoning behind them all of the recent topics on his profile except this one which is debatable because when it was published this was all the info released...

 

This Post: At the time of him posting it, no one was speculating that it was only locked because it was pre- production. Only that it can't overclock much on Stock Power.

3xx Tessellation not improved just Drivers: This post has evidence behind it, how does this show him as a fanboy?

Fury X Based off of GCN 1.2: How does this show bias? It's reporting on a fact, how does this show him as a fanboy.

Fury X Not having HDMI 2.0: How does this show him as a fanboy once again? 

Is it because he shows negative things about AMD cards specifically? When he's made ones on Nvidia cards before. There just isn't any news about Nvidia cards right now...

 

He also posted THIS thread, which could have shown Nvidia doing another 970 VRAM thing. Why does that not make him an AMD fanboy?

I didn't see the other things. I guess he's just overly aggressive and immature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

How do any of his recent topics point to him wanting AMD to fail? He's literally posting details about it the cards, most of which have been bad things - yes, but he's just reporting on it...

Selective reporting, that is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

This just in:  LMG might/or might not have a Fury X in their hands right now.

 

 

Slow the crap down, give it a few days so we have something solid.

 

We knew about the locked memory... maybe done for a good reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing Tech News

×