Fury Nano Discussion Thread

[IGemini]

as a gamer, why would you limit your self to 450 watt? that is just weird. a 750watt modular psu(gold rated) can be had for as little as 60$ and it is something that would last you 5+ years, a min of 2 upgrade cycles or more.

I am actually scratching my head as to why you would limit yourself this way.

If I were in your shoes I would just skip this gen entirely. you already waited this long with a 7870, 9 more months would be nothing.

I don't care about you second-guessing what I do (or have already done) with my money or what I should or shouldn't do as a gamer.

 

[Headfoot]

I don't care about you second-guessing what I do (or have already done) with my money or what I should or shouldn't do as a gamer.

You do realize of course that washing your dishes by hand 2-4 times a month will save you as much power as the difference between a 390 and a 980 will if you use it 2 hours a day, every day, for a month.

math:
http://energyusecalculator.com/electricity_computer.htm -> 2 hr/day, average ~75 watt difference x 30 days in a month = ~4.5 kwh

http://siliconvalleypower.com/for-residents/save-energy/appliance-energy-use-chart. Dishwasher 1-2.17 kwh per load x 2-4 = ~4 loads per month for an energy efficient dishwasher, ~2 loads a month for a normal/older dishwasher. That doesn't count the cost/kwh of heating the water either.

Unless you game many hours a day, every day, the math doesn't work out. E.g. despite the oddly defensive response, boozzer is pretty much right.

 

[IGemini]

You do realize of course that washing your dishes by hand 2-4 times a month will save you as much power as the difference between a 390 and a 980 will if you use it 2 hours a day, every day, for a month.

math:
http://energyusecalculator.com/electricity_computer.htm -> 2 hr/day, average ~75 watt difference x 30 days in a month = ~4.5 kwh

http://siliconvalleypower.com/for-residents/save-energy/appliance-energy-use-chart. Dishwasher 1-2.17 kwh per load x 2-4 = ~4 loads per month for an energy efficient dishwasher, ~2 loads a month for a normal/older dishwasher. That doesn't count the cost/kwh of heating the water either.

Unless you game many hours a day, every day, the math doesn't work out. E.g. despite the oddly defensive response, boozzer is pretty much right.

This has no bearing whatsoever on my response.

 

[Headfoot]

It's like worrying about buying Starbucks twice a month while simultaneously taking out loans to buy a new car every year, then talking about how good you are at budgeting because you only get Starbucks twice a month. I think the phrase is "majoring in the minors"

 

[IGemini]

Keep presuming, you're still wrong.

 

[Attic]

It's like worrying about buying Starbucks twice a month while simultaneously taking out loans to buy a new car every year, then talking about how good you are at budgeting because you only get Starbucks twice a month. I think the phrase is "majoring in the minors"

Or penny wise and pound foolish.


The R9 Nano I get. It stands alone for the performance/size/power it delivers.

I'd be a buyer at $425-450, otherwise I'll lock onto a mini 970 price point for my next HTPC/Gaming system.

But again, the small form factor stuff, that the R9 Nano is going to be primed for,..I tend to think of SFF going for HDTV's. But the R9 Nano is asking for a price premium for it's "4K prowess", and it sits in SFF, yet it doesn't have HDMI 2.0 for 4K HDTV's.

Just seems like a major blunder on multiple levels from AMD. Do people need a super small R9 Nano for a build that is going under their desk, or do they need it for HTPC/Gaming builds going into confined spaces under TV's or in Media Cabinets? I think the answer is obvious, which makes that lack of HDMI 2.0 on the R9 Nano a big deal.

 

[Eymar]

AMD not giving Hardocp sample either: http://www.hardocp.com/news/2015/09/03/amd_refuses_to_sample_hardocp_new_nano#.Veh30Z3BzRY

I can get why their pissed with hardocp ("Nano PAPER launch", Fury reviews), but don't think it helps their cause.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I think we all know why. The Nano is going to throttle hard.

 

[monstercameron]

Or penny wise and pound foolish.


The R9 Nano I get. It stands alone for the performance/size/power it delivers.

I'd be a buyer at $425-450, otherwise I'll lock onto a mini 970 price point for my next HTPC/Gaming system.

But again, the small form factor stuff, that the R9 Nano is going to be primed for,..I tend to think of SFF going for HDTV's. But the R9 Nano is asking for a price premium for it's "4K prowess", and it sits in SFF, yet it doesn't have HDMI 2.0 for 4K HDTV's.

Just seems like a major blunder on multiple levels from AMD. Do people need a super small R9 Nano for a build that is going under their desk, or do they need it for HTPC/Gaming builds going into confined spaces under TV's or in Media Cabinets? I think the answer is obvious, which makes that lack of HDMI 2.0 on the R9 Nano a big deal.

HDMI 2 only matters for 4k60p content. HDMI 1.4 will do 4k24p and 4k30p. For 4k60p is is an issue but you can always 4k vsr 1080p and let the TV upscale to 4k.

 

[ShintaiDK]

HDMI 2 only matters for 4k60p content. HDMI 1.4 will do 4k24p and 4k30p. For 4k60p is is an issue but you can always 4k vsr 1080p and let the TV upscale to 4k.

Or just get a DP1.2 to HDMI 2.0 converter.

 

[soccerballtux]

68 was the highest it looked like.

people have been complaining of AMD temps for the last few years, I'm confused, my 7950 doesn't get higher than 68C even when overclocked. What's wrong with people?

 

[Good_fella]

Putting it simply: TR is the overlord of NV fans, always doing test with heavy anti-AMD bias.

AMD heard us, finally.

But Kyle Bennett from HardOCP pleased Great Soviet Company. Why they won't get any of Nano Golden Samples?

http://www.hardocp.com/news/2015/09/03/amd_refuses_to_sample_hardocp_its_new_nano#.VeiEqPaqpBc

 

[positivedoppler]

I like hardocp's approach of just going out and purchasing it. Its how all hardware review should be done. Why shield i trust a review if amd, intel, or nvidia hand selected the hardware. Site that cant afford to buy the hardware, i wouldn't rely on the review of such a small Mickey Mouse outfit

 

[IlllI]

this was the card I was most looking forward to... but I could have sworn the rumors/ 'leaks' were that it would be much less than the fury x.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I like hardocp's approach of just going out and purchasing it.

I agree that all sites should do this, it removes all possible influence from the various hardware vendors. BTW Kyle is saying they may not bother to review Nano at all because according to him the market for such a card is simply too small so the expense to do the review is not worth it.

I personally don't blame AMD for cutting H off, the general attitude displayed by Kyle and Brent has been very unprofessional.

 

[SimianR]

I had a GPU upgrade in the running for a LONG time (start of spring), but I was willing to wait for AMD's latest generation before I made a choice after nVidia released Maxwell. The 390 was the most appealing in the price/perf domain, but it worked against building my rig for power efficiency. It was also frustrating to find any relevant data on 390 power consumption when all the reviews put ridiculously overpowered units in their computers. And the reviews themselves are pretty sparse. Ultimately, I'm really annoyed that AMD chose to drag out the release all summer (Fury X2 not withstanding).

In another Nano thread I said the card only made sense in the $450-500 range, and I stand by it. If it can best the 980 in performance (i.e. not just at par), I could probably rationalize $550. For $650...I feel like I wasted my time. To add insult to injury, the Nano reveal was a paper launch and the actual retail launch was two weeks later. I got damned sick of waiting. It happens once every 4-5 generations but nVidia earned my money this upgrade cycle.

Tonight I dropped in a GTX 980 Poseidon in my main rig and am quite pleased with the performance. It's a bit more beastly than my 7870, but that was expected. My tower's gaming load with the 7870 was 210W, with the 980 it's 275W. The 390 would've certainly forced me to buy another PSU. And after rebate processing I'd have spent $440...I can work with that. I'm not saying the Nano is a bad piece of tech, just bad marketing and/or pricing.

Hey, the 980 is a great card and I'm glad that you're happy with your purchase. That being said, a 290 would have been a huge upgrade over that 7870 and they were going for $200-250 for a long time. I'm running an i5 4670k and an R9 290 and my power usage never breaks 350W - you could have easily gotten away with one even on that 450W power supply - assuming you're not doing crazy overclocking on the CPU and GPU. The recommended power supplies for the 290/290x and even the 390 are hugely over exaggerated.

 

[tential]

I like hardocp's approach of just going out and purchasing it. Its how all hardware review should be done. Why shield i trust a review if amd, intel, or nvidia hand selected the hardware. Site that cant afford to buy the hardware, i wouldn't rely on the review of such a small Mickey Mouse outfit

It's why I want to start reviewing lol. I already make decent disposable income, with far more earning potential down the road, and I hate the fact that people are overly nice in reviews. Just tell it how it is, rip it apart if it has to, but I WANT A REAL OPINION.
Not just "EVery product is an 8.5+!"

Just plagiarizing RussianSensation alone would be enough for me to start a blog lol.

Or penny wise and pound foolish.


The R9 Nano I get. It stands alone for the performance/size/power it delivers.

I'd be a buyer at $425-450, otherwise I'll lock onto a mini 970 price point for my next HTPC/Gaming system.

But again, the small form factor stuff, that the R9 Nano is going to be primed for,..I tend to think of SFF going for HDTV's. But the R9 Nano is asking for a price premium for it's "4K prowess", and it sits in SFF, yet it doesn't have HDMI 2.0 for 4K HDTV's.

Just seems like a major blunder on multiple levels from AMD. Do people need a super small R9 Nano for a build that is going under their desk, or do they need it for HTPC/Gaming builds going into confined spaces under TV's or in Media Cabinets? I think the answer is obvious, which makes that lack of HDMI 2.0 on the R9 Nano a big deal.

It is. If it wasn't for Wasabi Mango Korean displays, I'd have a 980ti right now. It's the best performance I can get for the price. But since I can use freesync at 4K on an "HDTV"? Then, I'll try it. But for EVERY person who is normal, and will buy a TV/has a TV already with HDMI2.0? Ya... AMD shot themselves in the food hard. No HDMI 2.0 but screaming this is a 4K card that can do SFF for HTPC? Lol.....

VSR is huge though. Just 1440p VSR adds a massive difference for me at 80 inches. I only want a new card to get more VSR lol. I'm going to try an R9 290/x for the meantime though. The value is just too good there, especially if I crossfire, to get new card.

 

[Techhog]

I think we all know why. The Nano is going to throttle hard.

I'll quote you on that! Also, how hard do you think? Sub-980 (stock) performance? Sub 390X?

 

[jpiniero]

AMD isn't specifying a base clock, so I don't know if you can call it throttling. Then again you won't see it anywhere near the Fury X's clocks. Probably will be closer to 850-900 Mhz in games.

I'll quote you on that! Also, how hard do you think? Sub-980 (stock) performance? Sub 390X?

It should be faster than the 980. How much would depend on the game but it would be pretty close.

 

[Techhog]

AMD isn't specifying a base clock, so I don't know if you can call it throttling. Then again you won't see it anywhere near the Fury X's clocks. Probably will be closer to 850-900 Mhz in games.



It should be faster than the 980. How much would depend on the game but it would be pretty close.

I know, but I don't agree with him and I'm only curious about how much he believes it'll throttle.

 

[LTC8K6]

I thought the boost clock is what AMD normally does specify and the base clock they don't specify.

Such as here:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9564/amd-announces-radeon-r9-nano-shipping-september-10th

 

[HOOfan 1]

I personally don't blame AMD for cutting H off, the general attitude displayed by Kyle and Brent has been very unprofessional.

What has Brent done that was unprofessional?

 

[SimianR]

What has Brent done that was unprofessional?

Some of the conclusions he came to at the end of those Fury/FuryX reviews were pretty damn one sided. I can see slamming the price and availability, but look at some of his conclusions.

In terms of gaming performance, the AMD Radeon R9 Fury X seems like better competition for the GeForce GTX 980 4GB video card, rather than the GeForce GTX 980 Ti. GTX 980 cards are selling for as low at $490 today. This is not a good thing since the AMD Radeon R9 Fury X is priced at $649, the same price as the GeForce GTX 980 Ti.

Considering the 390X edges out the 980 - I'm not sure how he came to the conclusion that the Fury X's competition is the 980?

 

[boozzer]

I don't care about you second-guessing what I do (or have already done) with my money or what I should or shouldn't do as a gamer.

there was no second guessing as I never presumed to your reason :biggrin: this is how I feel about your post D: no 2nd guessing needed here :thumbsup:

 

[boozzer]

I know, but I don't agree with him and I'm only curious about how much he believes it'll throttle.

it is just his negative opinion regarding amd products. you can't fault him as it is just his opinion. he clearly puts "I think" in front of his post. :sneaky: