exar333
Diamond Member
- Feb 7, 2004
- 8,518
- 8
- 91
Agree, which sort of makes me wonder if AMD is yield-restricted on this card? I am planning a Mini-ITX build and CF/SLI isn't an option. This card at or around $1000 would be PERFECT.
For those on full-size ATX or larger machines, it is pretty much worthless unless you just want a benching machine (quadfire, etc). Most high-end builds support 3 slots and I could already get 3 Furys or Nanos for this price and likely clock higher.
$1500 may have been fair 9 months ago, but it is too much for where this product is launching now. Just my $0.02.
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
well this card its going to be the fastest single card for the next 12 months or even more. It has an AIO custon cooling. It will be faster than Titan X that is currently selling for $999 and people asking for the same price ??
If AMD had a $999 card and NVIDIA would introduce a $1500 card like the AMD Radeon Pro Duo, everyone would say thats the best card of the planet and they wouldnt have any problem with the price.
If AMD had a $999 card and NVIDIA would introduce a $1500 card like the AMD Radeon Pro Duo, everyone would say thats the best card of the planet and they wouldnt have any problem with the price.
Last edited:
The Titan X being a huge ripoff doesn't make the Pro Duo a great deal. It would be dumb to buy either IMO. Titan X doesn't really need to exist, but it does and it should cost $750 at most. RPD should be $1100 at most.
RPD has slightly under Fury CF performance and costs an extra $500.
exar333
Diamond Member
- Feb 7, 2004
- 8,518
- 8
- 91
$1500 for a dual GM110 would be about right, based on most Tis being right around $700. This is only 2x the performance of the Nano at $500, and the AIO cooling is essentially the same as the Fury X.
I might even buy $1200, but $1500 is over-priced. Also consider there is more hesitation in buying a halo AMD product. Not being a jerk here, just saying AMD products really struggle to hold their MSRP above $1000 for non-pro offerings. That is the market...AMD is more known as the 'value brand' for better or worse.
MagickMan
Diamond Member
- Aug 11, 2008
- 7,460
- 3
- 76
I'm hearing rumbles that the Titan and 1080Ti will drop at the same time, or close to it, right before Xmas. One with 8GB HBM, and slightly cut down, and the other with full Pascal and 16GB. Prices the same as last gen.
thesmokingman
Platinum Member
- May 6, 2010
- 2,302
- 231
- 106
Yea, of course this is not a good buy when comparing logistics for the enthusiasts. Welcome to duh. It's a halo dual gpu card, those were never a good buy ever until they were price slashed and that was only by AMD. Nvidia never allowed that on their cards. Shrugs, much ado/arguing about nothing.
2x Fury X cost $1200 with cheapest prices on newegg.
You pay $300 more for single card. If you dont mind and /or you have the spare volume on your case, you can clearly buy 2x Fury X and save $300
I said Fury. Look at the graph I posted. A quick look on newegg puts the cheapest Fury at $470. So really it's $560 more for the privilege of using only one PCI slot.
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
Cheapest 980Ti at newegg is at $600, 2x GTX 980Ti = $1200
Since Fury X has way better CF scaling you pay $300 more for a custom AIO and single card.
And yes the AIO heat-sink is custom made for the Radeon Pro Duo.
thesmokingman
Platinum Member
- May 6, 2010
- 2,302
- 231
- 106
happy medium
Lifer
- Jun 8, 2003
- 14,387
- 480
- 126
I think the new Polaris/1080 gtx cards will be very close to the performance of this Fury Duo card, if history is correct.
See the mid range, new node gtx680 vs the 6990.
Then came along the 780ti and 290x (A.K.A. 1080ti/big Polaris in 2017) and beat up on the 6990 (A.K.A. Fury Duo).
Last edited:
It's there because 2x8pin, 1x6pin would just barely be enough to run the card stock.
I haven't seen any good OC results from Fury and 400w+ is a lot to ask from a single fan and radiator. I wouldn't expect much.
Looking back at the first post, it's pretty funny that AMD is showing off this GPU in a case that could easily accommodate CF fury/furyx/nano. Isn't this kind of thing for the 8 people in the world who want top end performance but can't possibly have a computer bigger than a shoe box?
Last edited:
I think the new Polaris/1080 gtx cards will be very close to the performance of this Fury Duo card, if history is correct.
See the mid range, new node gtx680 vs the 6990.
Then came along the 780ti and 290x (A.K.A. 1080ti/big Polaris in 2017) and beat up on the 6990 (A.K.A. Fury Duo).
TPU always has a few games that Crossfire doesn't work on which drags down the avg. 295x2 is still the fastest card. IIRC the 7990 stayed the fastest as well until the 295x2 was released.
I find this interesting though...
The original fury x2
...and the Radeon Pro duo.
Besides the 3x 8pins vs 2, the PCB looks to be beefed up as well. I wonder what happened with the original? Also looks like they gave up the idea of making it as small as possible.
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
TPU always has a few games that Crossfire doesn't work on which drags down the avg. 295x2 is still the fastest card. IIRC the 7990 stayed the fastest as well until the 295x2 was released.
I find this interesting though...
The original fury x2
...and the Radeon Pro duo.
Besides the 3x 8pins vs 2, the PCB looks to be beefed up as well. I wonder what happened with the original? Also looks like they gave up the idea of making it as small as possible.
I believe the first x2 was made for air cooling or 300-350W TDP. The Radeon Pro Duo is another beast.
A single Fury X averages 250w in AotS with DX12 and async compute enabled.
RPD is a bit less than 2x Fury X but yes, it will need more than 450w. Especially if you want to start talking about OC.
I'm not sure about the air cooling part, but I had predicted basically Nano x2 from the original. The RPD though looks to be more. Even though there appears to be a spot on the PCB for a dual BIOS switch, it appears to be empty. Too bad, because I think this card could use an efficiency setting as well as a performance one. Although maybe AMD's frame limiting eliminates the need?
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
A single Fury X averages 250w in AotS with DX12 and async compute enabled.
RPD is a bit less than 2x Fury X but yes, it will need more than 450w. Especially if you want to start talking about OC.
R9 295X2 that has two R9 290X with a TDP of 500W only has 2x 8pins.
And im saying again, why 2x Fury X would need more than 2x 8pins ???
R9 295X2 2x 8pin
Radeon Pro Duo 3x 8pin
thesmokingman
Platinum Member
- May 6, 2010
- 2,302
- 231
- 106
R9 295X2 that has two R9 290X with a TDP of 500W only has 2x 8pins.
And im saying again, why 2x Fury X would need more than 2x 8pins ???
R9 295X2 2x 8pin
Radeon Pro Duo 3x 8pin
I was using your math
"2x 8 = 300W
1x 6 = 75W
+
75W from PCIe
= 450W"
2 x ~250 > 450
295x2 may be "500w TDP", but it only draws 427w according to TH
http://media.bestofmicro.com/2/J/430363/original/10-R9-295X2-Power-Consumption-Gaming.png
I don't know what consequences there are from drawing more than the rated power from 8pin cables, but maybe the reason AMD added a third was because they were drawing too much from two.
A single Fury X has 2 8pins and it uses nowhere near as much power as a 295x2. It OCs like crap. Why would RPD suddenly be able to OC like a monster because it has 1.5 8pins per GPU?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter