Fury Nano Discussion Thread

[antihelten]

Not everyone wants another BOX or has the money for a NAS. Also people may not have more than 1-2 HDDs when they buy the PC but will install more HDDs in the PC life time.

The PSU fan takes the hot air from inside the case and dumps it outside. Same as having a fan in the case.

You forget that Fury Nano will be faster at 4K than GTX980, that also commands a premium even if you dont want to install it in a small form factor case.

If you want a bunch of 3.5" HDDs then I suppose you're talking about the PC-05 (again none of the other cases you linked supported more than a single 3.5" HDD). Problem with that case is that it's a 20L case (29L if you count the feet), and at that point, why not get something like the Grandia GD06 at 22.4L (roughly 10% larger).

The GD06 supports:
Micro ATX (only mini ITX in the PC-05)
(small) ATX PSU (SFX in the PC-05)
Four 3.5" HDDs (only three in the PC-05)
Two 11" GPUs (only one 7.5" in the PC05)
Up to 120mm CPU cooler (only 70mm in the PC-05)
All around better ventilation (the PC-05 has a single 140mm fan placed behind the mobo)

All of the above for $130 versus $290 for the PC-05. So a 980 plus GD06 will be roughly $350 cheaper than a Nano plus PC-05.

Also having the PSU do the job of an exhaust fan is not the same as having an actual exhaust fan, since you will be heating up the PSU, and SFX PSUs already tend to run hot, so I certainly wouldn't want to use it like that.

And I haven't forgotten that the Nano might run faster than the 980 at 4K, but you seem to have forgotten that Nano hasn't actually been released yet so we don't have any reviews.

What about a 390X? Suppose that's too big though?

Don't see why the 390X would be too big, it should be possible to find ones within the 11-13" limit of the mentioned cases.

The downside of the 390X compared to the 980 would mainly be the power usage (250+ W) and the fact that you can't get one with a blower cooler, so a large part of that heat get's dumped within the case, which obviously isn't preferable when talking SFF cases.

I suppose could get a reference 290/290X card to get a blower cooler, but that's not exactly an optimal solution.

 

[Phynaz]

I have proof to back up my claims.
GTA V

Shadow of Mordor

http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/90/much-vram-need-1080p-1440p-4k-aa-enabled/index.html

4gb is not enough even at 1080p.
6gb is minimum required at 1080p and 1440p if you want to max everything out. Make that 8gb for 4k.

TechReport disagrees:
http://techreport.com/blog/28800/how-much-video-memory-is-enough

I think you are confused between allocated memory and required memory.

 

[dark zero]

AMD should reduce the prices of their Fury tier to 100 dollars and 150 of the Nano since the last one is the mid step between the Fury and the Fury X

 

[littleg]

AMD should reduce the prices of their Fury tier to 100 dollars and 150 of the Nano since the last one is the mid step between the Fury and the Fury X

I'd buy one. Hell, i'd buy five. :biggrin:

 

[DustinBrowder]

Not really. The problem is not just how fast it sends stuff, but whether it can hold all the data that is needed in VRAM. Once it has to go to RAM or the HDD, things get ugly really fast. There does appear to be some tricks they may have used in the past that used some extra VRAM that aren't needed now, but VRAM speed does not directly make up for less VRAM.

You design it to hold more data if it can't process it fast enough, sure having 256mb will affect it, obviously, but 4GB of ram, running 1.7x+ faster than GDDR5 ram is as fu8ture proof as it gets.

I'd rather get 4GB HBM than 8GB GDDR5 at 6gbps. maybe if the 8GB was running at least 8gbps, but otherwise HBM is going to be faster and stronger memory, period!

 

[bystander36]

You design it to hold more data if it can't process it fast enough, sure having 256mb will affect it, obviously, but 4GB of ram, running 1.7x+ faster than GDDR5 ram is as fu8ture proof as it gets.

I'd rather get 4GB HBM than 8GB GDDR5 at 6gbps. maybe if the 8GB was running at least 8gbps, but otherwise HBM is going to be faster and stronger memory, period!

You really don't understand how VRAM works. I don't know what to say. As long as a game doesn't need more than 4GB, then having more has no benefit, but if the game does use more, it doesn't matter how fast it is, it will cause problems.

 

[railven]

You really don't understand how VRAM works. I don't know what to say.

Your safe ignoring his posts. Second time I saw him saying GTX 980 launched at $650, pretty sure he's just here to troll.

Not to mention he pretty much calls all Nvidia owners sheeple.

EDIT:

Haha, just see his response to me:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37669138&postcount=31

Woof.

 

[tential]

just report next time.

 

[Kenmitch]

Looking forward to the reviews. Price seams a little on the high side to me.

 

[SolMiester]

So, are their any reviews of this Nono yet, I heard AMD aren't sending any samples out?, and $650?...seriously? AMD really are losing it......

 

[you2]

Vaguely I think there is an embargo on reviews till Sep 10th.

 

[Spanners]

So, are their any reviews of this Nono yet, I heard AMD aren't sending any samples out?, and $650?...seriously? AMD really are losing it......

Even if you type with your face, which the quality might indicate, that couldn't be a typo.

 

[boozzer]

Looking forward to the reviews. Price seams a little on the high side to me.

it is for a niche market hence the price premium. that is just how it works. it isn't for the avg gamers.

 

[ShintaiDK]

it is for a niche market hence the price premium. that is just how it works. it isn't for the avg gamers.

Mini cards dont have a premium. So why should this?

 

[bystander36]

Mini cards dont have a premium. So why should this?

Because there is no competition at its performance range, they can ask what they want and at least some people will buy it. At the low to mid-ranged, there are options.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Because there is no competition at its performance range, they can ask what they want and at least some people will buy it. At the low to mid-ranged, there are options.

By that logic GTX970 mini should be 500$.

And who is the buyers, those 1% of ITX cases that somehow fits the Nano size limitations and usually doesnt contain any exhaust fans?

It reminds me when some people tried to advocate for 173$ Kaveri chips while shoehorning it into something that was close to non existent.

 

[bystander36]

By that logic GTX970 mini should be 500$.

And who is the buyers, those 1% of ITX cases that somehow fits the Nano size limitations and usually doesnt contain any exhaust fans?

I'm not saying they will get a lot of buyers, but the top dog can choose their price and some people will buy it.

The reality is, it's not going to have a wide appeal. It will only be useful to a few. The Fury X is the more mainstream version of the card.

 

[crisium]

The 970 mini has stood alone without competition at its price range for nearly a year, asking no premium.

But we all know the answer. Fiji yields are low and HBM is expensive, so AMD cannot afford to sell it for less.

 

[tential]

The 970 mini has stood alone without competition at its price range for nearly a year, asking no premium.

But we all know the answer. Fiji yields are low and HBM is expensive, so AMD cannot afford to sell it for less.

It's the flagship chip still....
So I'd be surprised if it was sold for much less hence why I said the original idea of it selling below fury made no sense.. .

 

[ShintaiDK]

The 970 mini has stood alone without competition at its price range for nearly a year, asking no premium.

But we all know the answer. Fiji yields are low and HBM is expensive, so AMD cannot afford to sell it for less.

Exactly.

 

[ShintaiDK]

http://techreport.com/news/28971/wanted-for-review-amd-radeon-r9-nano

Techreport wont get a Nano sample.

 

[3DVagabond]

The 970 mini has stood alone without competition at its price range for nearly a year, asking no premium.

But we all know the answer. Fiji yields are low and HBM is expensive, so AMD cannot afford to sell it for less.

The only report that we have heard is that TSVs just went into volume production about a month ago. There have been no reports of either low yields or pricing of HBM. No word on BOM either. So,reality is we don't know. Any thing you said.

 

[boozzer]

Mini cards dont have a premium. So why should this?

don't understand why you are bunching panties when people are readily buying up gpus that cost 80% more for 15% more performance.

why not this?

you have different standards for different companies?

 

[ShintaiDK]

don't understand why you are bunching panties when people are readily buying up gpus that cost 80% more for 15% more performance.

why not this?

you have different standards for different companies?

You do know the following cards already exist?
Fury X
Fury
980TI
980

The Nano is like trying to sell a GTX970 Mini card for GTX980 price back in september 2014. There is a reason why the GTX970 Mini is priced at or below a GTX970. Because there is no premium people would be willing to pay just for a smaller card that fits into something like 1% of something that is already a niche. Its a rerun of people trying to excuse a 173$ 7850K.

 

[boozzer]

You do know the following cards already exist?
Fury X
Fury
980TI
980

The Nano is like trying to sell a GTX970 Mini card for GTX980 price back in september 2014. There is a reason why the GTX970 Mini is priced at or below a GTX970. Because there is no premium people would be willing to pay just for a smaller card that fits into something like 1% of something that is already a niche. Its a rerun of people trying to excuse a 173$ 7850K.

hehe, stop trying to convince me that there is no market demand for it. I am not the market. you aren't either.

in other words, there is a market for it. Hell, this market segment actually makes more sense to me than 80% extra cost for 15% performance.