Jayz2cents' video on the Fury X

[Dabombinable]

Sorry for ranting, read too much of this particular thread

For me its out much of a certain person making comments without knowing what they are talking (aka, Notional).

[Notional]

Are you serious?

 

No one straw manned you,  you where and still are wrong.  just because the Fury can fit into two cases a 980TI can't doesn't make it smaller/better.  Your arguments are thin at best and grasping at straws at worse.

 

When they claimed that I stated a Fury X was 50% smaller than a 980ti, they did yes. Like I said, it was probably down to not knowing math properly, but I corrected it many times.

 

No being over 7cm shorter makes it smaller. Making it cooler running makes it better (is that not what everyone used to say about NVidia's 900 series?). My original arguments still stands. You can disagree all you want to that.

[Notional]

That is hilarious,  your argument is that it can go into 2 cases a 980 can't.  2 Cases out of hundreds if not thousands of cases,  and you think everyone else is blowing it out of proportion?   

 

So how many cases do you need for me to go through to make the point? 5? 10? 10.000 cases? I was asked for an example, and gave two, from one single brand only. That should be plenty to support my point.

Like I said, even if a card can fit, the lack of active cooling might make it a non solution.

 

Your not being constructive either-in fact I haven't seen you been truly constructive yet so.....shazbot.

 

How about we just have a constructive argument instead? You know where we use sources and arguments to back up our claims and positions? Blocking people are for children and SJW who cannot argue their case. But of course being constructive is a subjective thing. What would be constructive in your mind?

[MegaDave91]

Didn't like Linus drop it from his car or something ?

In the box, yes, surrounded by THICK soft foam. I really doubt it caused the card to malfunction; I think it was defective to begin with.

[mr moose]

When they claimed that I stated a Fury X was 50% smaller than a 980ti, they did yes. Like I said, it was probably down to not knowing math properly, but I corrected it many times.

 

No being over 7cm shorter makes it smaller. Making it cooler running makes it better (is that not what everyone used to say about NVidia's 900 series?). My original arguments still stands. You can disagree all you want to that.

 

 

So how many cases do you need for me to go through to make the point? 5? 10? 10.000 cases? I was asked for an example, and gave two, from one single brand only. That should be plenty to support my point.

Like I said, even if a card can fit, the lack of active cooling might make it a non solution.

 

 

How about we just have a constructive argument instead? You know where we use sources and arguments to back up our claims and positions? Blocking people are for children and SJW who cannot argue their case. But of course being constructive is a subjective thing. What would be constructive in your mind?

 

You said yourself it was an "eyeing",  so your going to hold everyone else to precise measurements but you're allowed to just thumb it up to suit your argument.  Please, fact of the matter is the Fury is only smaller if you ignore the fact there is a radiator hanging of the end.  But you refuse to because it doesn't cater to your desperate need to hold AMD above everything else on this planet.

 

People called you out because you were wrong, not because of a strawman argument, not because they don't understand the difference in percentages or the difference in the size of the PCB GPU is soldered to, but because you were being derogatory when touting your math facts whilst being wrong yourself, now you are using one or 2 rare build scenario's as reason to hold to your obviously thin grasp on the discussion. 

 

I don't know if you have realised this but after 17 pages you are the only one left trying to argue a case that is neither true for 99% of the pc building community nor factually correct. 

[Notional]

I don't know if it would be constructive but you just shutting the fuck up would be delightful

 

How about no?

 

You said yourself it was an "eyeing",  so your going to hold everyone else to precise measurements but you're allowed to just thumb it up to suit your argument.  Please, fact of the matter is the Fury is only smaller if you ignore the fact there is a radiator hanging of the end.  But you refuse to because it doesn't cater to your desperate need to hold AMD above everything else on this planet.

 

People called you out because you were wrong, not because of a strawman argument, not because they don't understand the difference in percentages or the difference in the size of the PCB GPU is soldered to, but because you were being derogatory when touting your math facts whilst being wrong yourself, now you are using one or 2 rare build scenario's as reason to hold to your obviously thin grasp on the discussion. 

 

I don't know if you have realised this but after 17 pages you are the only one left trying to argue a case that is neither true for 99% of the pc building community nor factually correct. 

 

Actually do yourself a favour and go back and read my first post again. All I stated was that Fury X was smaller and quieter, which it is. That was the argument, and still is. I wasn't holding anyone to precise measurements, I was correcting people on their false representation of what I said, and correcting their way of calculating percentages, which were factually incorrect.

 

How am I holding AMD above everything else? They made a high end card that is smaller than anything else on the market. Is that not a good thing? You do understand that Pascal will probably be just as small, if not smaller right? And it will have HBM as well. But I guess when NVidia does something, it's the most important thing ever, but when AMD does it, it's a bad thing.

Why does AMD not deserve credit for bringing HBM technology to the market? I don't get it. I've praised NVidia for inventing synced framerates in gsync, and I've praised AMD for this, but somehow that makes me an AMD fanboy. Seriously.

 

With HBM, both AMD and NVidia will make smaller cards, so we should see a lot of smaller builds in just the next year. Builds like AMD's Quantum, which is not possible to do with anything NVidia has to offer. Again how many cases do you think is necessary and fair for me to find, to make a point? Do you honestly expect me to go through every single case of every single brand ever, to back up a point? No one is going to do that, and you wouldn't either. Don't demand standards you would never adhere to yourself. That's just hypocrisy.

[BSpendlove]

 (I'm gay, big is better, women think so too, get over it)

Worst thing I've ever heard.

[mr moose]

How about no?

 

 

Actually do yourself a favour and go back and read my first post again. All I stated was that Fury X was smaller and quieter, which it is. That was the argument, and still is. I wasn't holding anyone to precise measurements, I was correcting people on their false representation of what I said, and correcting their way of calculating percentages, which were factually incorrect.

 

How am I holding AMD above everything else? They made a high end card that is smaller than anything else on the market. Is that not a good thing? You do understand that Pascal will probably be just as small, if not smaller right? And it will have HBM as well. But I guess when NVidia does something, it's the most important thing ever, but when AMD does it, it's a bad thing.

Why does AMD not deserve credit for bringing HBM technology to the market? I don't get it. I've praised NVidia for inventing synced framerates in gsync, and I've praised AMD for this, but somehow that makes me an AMD fanboy. Seriously.

 

With HBM, both AMD and NVidia will make smaller cards, so we should see a lot of smaller builds in just the next year. Builds like AMD's Quantum, which is not possible to do with anything NVidia has to offer. Again how many cases do you think is necessary and fair for me to find, to make a point? Do you honestly expect me to go through every single case of every single brand ever, to back up a point? No one is going to do that, and you wouldn't either. Don't demand standards you would never adhere to yourself. That's just hypocrisy.

 

Yeah, you just keep telling yourself all that.  No one said anything about AMD not deserving credit for HBM, you brought that up, I didn't say anything about pascal or nvidia and no one said anything about g sync or frame rates.  what makes you a fanboy is the unrelenting refusal to accept facts, like the fact that you keep ignoring the radiator.  It's a part of the card whether you like it or not, ergo it is not smaller, it might be more convenient in a handful of build scenarios but then no one has disputed that. 

 

But you know, tell yourself whatever you have to to get through the day.

[mr moose]

Lol can we not throw the f-bomb?  :rolleyes:

 

 

 

Anyway, after reading this thread. It seems that standing on the opposite of AMD always gets you dem likes 

 

No being realistic gets likes, no one in this thread opposes AMD, just their fanboys.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

No being realistic gets likes, no one in this thread opposes AMD, just their fanboys.

 

Holy shit I was right, you instantly got 2 

[mr moose]

Holy shit I was right, you instantly got 2 

 

And you gave one of them so what does that tell you? you are either trolling or out to prove a failing point.

[Psykomantis00]

So is it too early to bet on AMD rebranding again next year?

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

And you gave one of them so what does that tell you? you are either trolling or out to prove a failing point.

 

LOL you can't say that! How am I supposed to refute your reply  :lol:

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

So is it too early to bet on AMD rebranding again next year?

 

They'll probably do it again. Air cooled Fury might be the 490/x 

A cut down/different variant of the r9 Nano might be the 480/x. 

Others might be the new architecture. 

[Sauron]

Maybe you should read your own post again.

 

Saying a card is 50% larger than another is not equivalent to saying the first card is 50% of the size of the second. Careful here. 100 +50% is 150. 50% of 150 is 75. He said that the Fury X is 2/3rds of the size of a 980ti, not half the size.

 

Sorry if someone corrected you already, didn't read all the last 90 posts yet

[Khvarrioiren]

They'll probably do it again. Air cooled Fury might be the 490/x

A cut down/different variant of the r9 Nano might be the 480/x.

Others might be the new architecture.

14nm process for the next AMD GPUs is all but confirmed, so I very highly doubt that.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

14nm process for the next AMD GPUs is all but confirmed, so I very highly doubt that.

 

14nm FinFet manufacturing or not, AMD will need at least one newer architecture.

[mr moose]

Saying a card is 50% larger than another is not equivalent to saying the first card is 50% of the size of the second. Careful here. 100 +50% is 150. 50% of 150 is 75. He said that the Fury X is 2/3rds of the size of a 980ti, not half the size.

 

Sorry if someone corrected you already, didn't read all the last 90 posts yet

 

I knew that before I even posted, my gripe has always been the fact that it isn't actually 50% in either direction and the derogatory and insulting language used when his own claims where wrong.  He even went on afterwards to say he was just eyeballing the figures, yet wants to take everyone else to task for not getting the math specifically right.  

[cesrai]

Sure, but not attached statically as an extension of the PCB. Like I said, it adds 3cm to the 120mm fan. If you don't have such a fan in your case, it probably would not support any card of this performance anyways.

 

http://www.lian-li.com/en/dt_portfolio/pc-q33/

http://www.lian-li.com/en/dt_portfolio/pc-q11/ (if you can ghetto fix it to the 14cm holes)

 

Cannot be bothered finding others, but you go ahead.

Lian Li are generally good at making small cases fit larger cards today though. But there are a few cases that would fit an R9 nano, and nothing else in that class, but that of course is a different matter.

Now it's true that both of your cases that are from Lian Li can't fit a 980Ti but there is the SilverStone SG13 which is smaller ( I mean the volume so it takes less space ) than both of your cases and there are other cases and a lot of them that will fit the 980Ti.

Now back to main point you said the Fury is 75& smaller which it isn't ( members pointed that out ) and at same time you aren't including the AIO cause it's more convent and you can just put it in a 120mm fan mount.

Also your claim that because of 980Ti reaching 80+c is bad and shouldn't be in ITX is a problem is b.s. until you provide evidence and you claiming the lack of active cooling makes it a non solution is b.s. until you provide evidence.

[Elapo]

Yeah keep blindingly supporting Nvidia, go ahead and look forward to a future of nothing but botched fucking gameworks releases.

 

Implying gameworks is actually the problem, and not poor optimization.

 

Yesyes, hairworks blahblah, we pretty much connected that to AMD having less tesselation performance and Nvidia cranking up the tesselation settings for hairworks.

 

Gameworks is NOT the problem (as shown again with B:AK). 

[cesrai]

Ohhh people here even implied game works cripples AMD cards performance I guess bullshit is raising despite all the evidence alwaysfsx and other members provided.

[Misanthrope]

Implying gameworks is actually the problem, and not poor optimization.

 

It's not an implication: performance is terrible even on Nvidia cards, particularly on Kepler cards. Sure on AMD goes from "terrible" to "abyssal" but it's still no where near acceptable for cards upwards of 650 bucks.

[cesrai]

It's not an implication: performance is terrible even on Nvidia cards, particularly on Kepler cards. Sure on AMD goes from "terrible" to "abyssal" but it's still no where near acceptable for cards upwards of 650 bucks.

You mean project cars ? it isn't even a game works title.

[Elapo]

It's not an implication: performance is terrible even on Nvidia cards, particularly on Kepler cards. Sure on AMD goes from "terrible" to "abyssal" but it's still no where near acceptable for cards upwards of 650 bucks.

 

Yup, and in case of B:AK performance is terrible regardless of graphics settings. It's not bad because it's a gameworks title, it's bad because it's a bad port.

[Misanthrope]

Yup, and in case of B:AK performance is terrible regardless of graphics settings. It's not bad because it's a gameworks title, it's bad because it's a bad port.

 

It still gives Nvidia egg on their face if you ask me: They talk about how gameworks is supposed to be not only the effects but the experience and help from Nvidia. Now that means that

 

1) That's just bullshit

 

2) Someone from Nvidia actually took a look at that stupid Batman game and said "Yep, this is the game we wanna push Gameworks and new GPU bonus games with" and was totally ok with the state it was released in.

 

I'm sure in the hands of competent developers, Gameworks is actually either a great tool or a minor thing (i.e. The Witcher 3 actually runs fantastically without it) or all the talk about being much easier and nicer for developers is actually bullshit and the only help Nvidia is giving is money. Because really I don't think they wanna come out and say "Yes is unfortunate WB recalled the game but we really think Gameworks helped them!"