Just admit it ...
AMD got conroe'd by Nvidia ...
Gameworks is not to blame here, it's either AMD's design team or their management and I'm thinking it's a little bit of both ...
Just admit it ...
AMD got conroe'd by Nvidia ...
Gameworks is not to blame here, it's either AMD's design team or their management and I'm thinking it's a little bit of both ...
as to the op, no gameworks has little to do with it.
how did it get conroe'd?
let me see:
newer memory tech!
more flops!
~1.4x efficiency!
and there is still tonnes of stuff yet to be quantified!
as to the op, no gameworks has little to do with it.
can you blame gameworks for this kind of stuff, or is it more about quality of the drivers work from AMD?
Just admit it ...
AMD got conroe'd by Nvidia ...
Performance is within spitting distance of the 980 TI. Whereas the TI is already out and has a solid edge in most games the Fury X is smaller, quieter (depending on review site/method) and has reasonable power requirements.
That hardly qualifies as "conroe'd"
Fury won't be the outright win AMD wanted but it certainly isn't a failure of a product. If I had $650 burning a hole in my pocket for a new GPU I would say the stock water cooling and small form factor would be relevant buying considerations.
can you blame gameworks for this kind of stuff, or is it more about quality of the drivers work from AMD?
A noter que le jeu s'est avéré instable sur les GeForce GTX 900. Un plantage du pilote survenait régulièrement, ce qui nous a demandé de recommencer plusieurs fois nos mesures.
No just no. This is no where close to a Conroe style situation you're insane to even try to compare it.Just admit it ...
AMD got conroe'd by Nvidia ...
Gameworks is not to blame here, it's either AMD's design team or their management and I'm thinking it's a little bit of both ...
Performance is within spitting distance of the 980 TI. Whereas the TI is already out and has a solid edge in most games the Fury X is smaller, quieter (depending on review site/method) and has reasonable power requirements.
That hardly qualifies as "conroe'd"
Fury won't be the outright win AMD wanted but it certainly isn't a failure of a product. If I had $650 burning a hole in my pocket for a new GPU I would say the stock water cooling and small form factor would be relevant buying considerations.
No just no. This is no where close to a Conroe style situation you're insane to even try to compare it.
The card is slower for the same price. The size of the card is irrelevant. The radiator precludes the card from being used in most SFF cases, and even if it could fit, a blower design is much more desirable than blowing a whirlwind of hot air into a tiny case. As for noise, multiple sites note that the pump doesn't exactly qualify as silent. Could be a quality control issue which would be terrible since only reference designs can be used. Because of the radiator, it isn't ideal for multi card setups either. Who wants to try and squeeze, 2, 3 (4?) of these into a case. Again the size of the card is irrelevant when you have to find multiple mounting spots for the radiator.
AMD touted the overclocking ability of the card. OK, where is it? Did any site get more than 10%? Why would you boast about something like that a week before launch when you know the review samples sent out aren't capable of displaying that ability?
Unless you are a hardcore AMD fan who refuses to buy Nvidia, why would you choose a Fury X over a custom 980Ti?