Sapphire R9 Fury revealed

[Sunako]

Cooler looks great but that short pcb.

[ozziestig]

I want to see someone watercool that, just because they can.

I know you could get the Fury x but I want to see a custom loop with that in it.

@LinusTech Please do this when(or if) someone makes a waterblock for this.

[Ashaira]

and in some games it straight up doesn't work.

which is the games fault. witcher 1 refuses to work inn cossfire  but a random indie game will work no problem.

[Sunako]

maybe they just thought "hey, we have this excellent cooler, why bother trying to fit the same cooling in 2/3rds of the space?" and just slapped it on as-is, only relocating the heatpipes to be on the gpu. I also imagine they just don't see a reason to shrink it, after all cooler is better even if a smaller heatsink would have been enough. It just looks a bit silly ^^

I see them using a large cooler to hit the performance target not to be lazy

[ivan134]

Looks massive compared to the Fury X, Yikes.

 

Also, that extension wow. What is that cooling? The Fury X doesn't even extend nearly that far out.

 

How hot is this thing going to get?

 

 

I feel like this is a card filling a niche that isn't quite necessary. If you want more raw performance than the 390X, just crossfire two 390's. If you want a better single GPU, get the Fury X.

Are you both really that worried about your Nvidia stocks? Don't worry, Nvidia is doing well.

[ZetZet]

which is the games fault. witcher 1 refuses to work inn cossfire  but a random indie game will work no problem.

yes, that's why consumers should buy one card. it works better most of the time.

[Kyuubixchidori]

actually legitimately curious how it affects cooling performance to have the end open like that. I feel like it may get WAY more airflow. 

[Misanthrope]

maybe they just thought "hey, we have this excellent cooler, why bother trying to fit the same cooling in 2/3rds of the space?" and just slapped it on as-is, only relocating the heatpipes to be on the gpu. I also imagine they just don't see a reason to shrink it, after all cooler is better even if a smaller heatsink would have been enough. It just looks a bit silly ^^

 

Only this is actually a new cooler: what they had was the tri x and vapor x which are granted, not small, but not this massive. It is possible however, that they designed this one for the 390 and 390x and just recycled it for the Fury but again, if you're recycling a design why not recycling the nice and elegant one and not the so-massive-it-will-sag-and-not-fit-90%-of-cases cooler

[Humbug]

maybe they just thought "hey, we have this excellent cooler, why bother trying to fit the same cooling in 2/3rds of the space?" and just slapped it on as-is, only relocating the heatpipes to be on the gpu. I also imagine they just don't see a reason to shrink it, after all cooler is better even if a smaller heatsink would have been enough. It just looks a bit silly ^^

The big cooler is important strategically.

Remember AMD has two other Fiji offerings. The Fury X and the R9 nano. Both are small, understated elegant solutions. They will not appeal to people who like giant epeen GPUs. So AMD needs to use the Fury non-x to cater to that crowd.

[Misanthrope]

The big cooler is important strategically.

Remember AMD has two other Fiji offerings. The Fury X and the R9 nano. Both are small, understated elegant solutions. They will not appeal to people who like giant epeen GPUs. So AMD needs to use the Fury non-x to cater to that crowd.

 

Not saying you are not right, but if that is the case those people need to be shot.

[ivan134]

The big cooler is important strategically.

Remember AMD has two other Fiji offerings. The Fury X and the R9 nano. Both are small, understated elegant solutions. They will not appeal to people who like giant epeen GPUs. So AMD needs to use the Fury non-x to cater to that crowd.

That's fucking dumb, sad and very true. It's also coming mostly from my fellow Muricans who think bigger is better (not sure what the fuck everyone is compensating for). I prefer elegance and finesse.

[Ashaira]

The big cooler is important strategically.

Remember AMD has two other Fiji offerings. The Fury X and the R9 nano. Both are small, understated elegant solutions. They will not appeal to people who like giant epeen GPUs. So AMD needs to use the Fury non-x to cater to that crowd.

if i wasn't skipping this generation i would grab 2 Fijix2 and water cool them. 4 gpus in the same space as 2 normal ones.

[Ashaira]

That's fucking dumb, sad and very true. It's also coming mostly from my fellow Muricans who think bigger is better (not sure what the fuck everyone is compensating for). I prefer elegance and finesse.

Well desktop users tend to prefer performance over portability or power consumption (see laptops) so having a big case decked with the best components and 1-2 midget cards would be a bit jaring for some. Sure it's only looks but if looks didn't matter we wouldn't be buying new cards and other components every few years

[Misanthrope]

Well desktop users tend to prefer performance over portability or power consumption (see laptops) so having a big case decked with the best components and 1-2 midget cards would be a bit jaring for some. Sure it's only looks but if looks didn't matter we wouldn't be buying new cards and other components every few years

 

Some desktop users but if that was the case for everybody the mitx market wouldn't be exploding right now with tons of new cases and power supplies for really small form factors.

[NumLock21]

for fury, i rather go with the reference design. Looks much nicer.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Some desktop users but if that was the case for everybody the mitx market wouldn't be exploding right now with tons of new cases and power supplies for really small form factors.

 

That is true, but you have to take note. Not everyone is buying those cases...

[MEC-777]

Looks awesome, but like with the GTX 660, they should have extended the PCB so the heatsink is balanced over it. This might cause some severe overhang possibly.

 

No need to make the PCB unnecessarily long. It will actually help keep the card cooler by having the back open like that. Air can simply flow through easily, unobstructed. The more air you can blow through the cooler with less resistance, the cooler the card will run.

 

Gonna be good for cooling and noise levels. The third fan gets fantastic airflow straight through the rad and up towards the top of the case. Instead of bouncing the air off the heat sink and pushing it out the side of the rad.

 

^This.

[ivan134]

Well desktop users tend to prefer performance over portability or power consumption (see laptops) so having a big case decked with the best components and 1-2 midget cards would be a bit jaring for some. Sure it's only looks but if looks didn't matter we wouldn't be buying new cards and other components every few years

The market is trending towards micro ATX and mini ITX. There's a good reason the Fury Nano was the most exciting thing at the reveal. I disagree with your assessment of why people want bigger cards.

 

Old habits die hard. A lot of people remember the days when cards were harder to cool and you need gigantic cases with a bajillion fans to cool them. People have been conditioned to think that way for years. We also see this problem in people recommending power supplies. An r9 290, as power hungry as it is, can be safely run on a 500W power supply, but you will still see people say ridiculous things like you need a 650W power supply for a 290. That also comes from years of using inefficient hardware.

 

Hardware has come a long way from what it used to be. We don't need giant power supplies and we don't need giant cases to cool our hardware. That's usually how it is with technology. We find ways to make things more compact and more powerful at the same time.

[Ashaira]

The market is trending towards micro ATX and mini ITX. There's a good reason the Fury Nano was the most exciting thing at the reveal. I disagree with your assessment of why people want bigger cards.

 

Old habits die hard. A lot of people remember the days when cards were harder to cool and you need gigantic cases with a bajillion fans to cool them. People have been conditioned to think that way for years. We also see this problem in people recommending power supplies. An r9 290, as power hungry as it is, can be safely run on a 500W power supply, but you will still see people say ridiculous things like you need a 650W power supply for a 290. That also comes from years of using inefficient hardware.

 

Hardware has come a long way from what it used to be. We don't need giant power supplies and we don't need giant cases to cool our hardware. That's usually how it is with technology. We find ways to make things more compact and more powerful at the same time.

Well that's what i'm saying. It's not a matter of NEED but WANT. I didn't NEED 2 480 monsta rads but i WANTED them.

[Notional]

Dat tiny PCB. I wonder if these cards can be air cooled at that size, when we move to 14nm FinFet next year? Based on broadwell, the actual hz doesn't seem to move upwards anyways. Would have preferred to have a perforated backplate, extend to the end of the cooler. Would still allow for air to pass through, but look much nicer, and make the card more rigid.

[MEC-777]

The market is trending towards micro ATX and mini ITX. There's a good reason the Fury Nano was the most exciting thing at the reveal. I disagree with your assessment of why people want bigger cards.

 

Old habits die hard. A lot of people remember the days when cards were harder to cool and you need gigantic cases with a bajillion fans to cool them. People have been conditioned to think that way for years. We also see this problem in people recommending power supplies. An r9 290, as power hungry as it is, can be safely run on a 500W power supply, but you will still see people say ridiculous things like you need a 650W power supply for a 290. That also comes from years of using inefficient hardware.

 

Hardware has come a long way from what it used to be. We don't need giant power supplies and we don't need giant cases to cool our hardware. That's usually how it is with technology. We find ways to make things more compact and more powerful at the same time.

 

You also have to remember that now, more than ever, people are more concerned with noise, temperatures and efficiency (not so much efficiency, but it's becoming more of a thing). 

 

That being said, in order to keep a high-performance GPU running cool and quiet under full loads requires a some what over-sized and over-designed cooler. With many cards (look at the Gigabyte G1, for example) the coolers seem like major over-kill at stock clocks, but overclocking is also becoming very common. Overclocking brings along with it significantly more heat output. 

 

With regards to running a 290 on a 500w PSU - what can be done and what is ideal/recommended are two different things. 

[osbios]

... We also see this problem in people recommending power supplies. An r9 290, as power hungry as it is, can be safely run on a 500W power supply, but you will still see people say ridiculous things like you need a 650W power supply for a 290. That also comes from years of using inefficient hardware. ...

 

That phenomena mainly comes from very cheap PSUs that use there load peak wattage as the advertised number and have like 15 Amp on the 5V rail.

[MEC-777]

Dat tiny PCB. I wonder if these cards can be air cooled at that size, when we move to 14nm FinFet next year? Based on broadwell, the actual hz doesn't seem to move upwards anyways. Would have preferred to have a perforated backplate, extend to the end of the cooler. Would still allow for air to pass through, but look much nicer, and make the card more rigid.

 

Looking at the back side, there appears to be support material there already (the black bar pattern). It's probably more rigid that it looks. Sapphire doesn't tend to skimp on their coolers/card designs. Not from the last generation or two on their high-end stuff anyways.

[DEDRICK]

No one has mentioned that it doesn't have 4096 Stream processors, only has 3584

[MEC-777]

No one has mentioned that it doesn't have 4096 Stream processors, only has 3584

 

Wasn't that already known?