• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

[Rumor (Various)] AMD R7/9 3xx / Fiji / Fury

Page 83 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Enigmoid said:
They bumped speeds. So did the 770 over the 680 (same vram though). Straight up rebrand (just like 860m -> 960m was). Its nice they increased the speeds but they also bumped the price.
Click to expand...

A "rebrand" is taking the exact same card but putting it into a different box. You weren't around back then, but 8800gt ---> 9800gt is a classic example of this. If NV bumped up the base clock by 1 mhz on 9800ti and called it 9800tix, that wouldn't even be a rebrand.

You can't alter the definition of a word just because it suits your agenda.

Creig said:
Exactly. I would guess it was more a case of the Fury driving down the price of the 980Ti. The name "Nvidia" isn't exactly synonymous with affordable high end gaming, after all. They wouldn't have dropped the price on the 980Ti unless forced to.
Click to expand...

That works both ways though. Neither company is a charity. Remember the rumors of $850 for Fury X?
 
Last edited:
Tuna-Fish said:
I would be very surprised if every HBM stack bonded perfectly. Even if every stack provided by Hynix worked well, and every interposer was flawless, there would still be two steps that could possibly screw it up during the interposer attachment of the stack and the GPU die. No manufacturing steps have 0% loss rate.

If this loss rate is high enough, and if the failed attachment typically destroys a single channel, it would make a lot of sense to have a downbinned version with slightly less ram.
Click to expand...


The loss rate is well under 1%, though, since the process is extremely mature.

The interposer, IIRC, is 65nm, and has a solder mask. A camera inspects the solder mask, then a solder paste is spread on top, then a camera inspects the solder paste application and thickness. Next, the components are precision placed, then they go into an oven. When the solder paste melts the components float and self-align through the surface tension of the paste. The solder is then slowly cooled.

I am not clear as to whether or not the whole assembly is soldered at once, but I believe so (so the interposer is a 'live' layer between two beds of solder).

I read this information years ago, so someone correct me if I'm wrong as to how the current process is performed. 😉
 
bryanW1995 said:
I would say that Fiji is going to be decent, assuming there was no subterfuge or outright lying going on today. It still seems like 980 ti will win after a bit of overclocking, and it's now more likely that we end up with something like 9800gs +-+ again, but at least things are looking to be interesting and competitive again this summer.

Agreed. 980, 970, 390 and 390x are all going to get really cheap really fast I expect.
Click to expand...

Technically, they can't lie, since that would land them in hot water with the SEC.

And they did say that the Fury is a o/c'ing beast, so, who knows, it might end up beating a o/c'ed 980ti.

The other cards only advantage will be, they got more VRAM, which some people need.

In 2016 when the Fury refresh comes around with 8/16/32GB VRAM, we are talking a whole new price structure, and there wouldn't be a reason to get the other cards, unless they are dirt cheap.
 
bryanW1995 said:
That works both ways though. Neither company is a charity. Remember the rumors of $850 for Fury X?
Click to expand...

Exactly this. You think AMD don't want massive margins and be profitable? AMD will price gouge if they can.

980Ti matching or exceeding (custom models) Titan X at $649-699 means that AMD have to sell for around that price if they have better performance.

If they match it on perf, they have to sell for less. If they are slower, they have to sell for a lot less.

We're gamers and we understand that NV commands a higher premium. I'm pretty sure AMD also understands that very well.
 
Just got two r9 390 from best buy. Both will not show bios with displayport. Will go to Windows8.1 log in then blank scree. Returned the first one and second same issue.

So figured maybe weird motherboard issue. Switched it to my plex pc. Wont boot displayport either. Hdmi works for a few seconds then goes to a multi color screen.
 
Azix said:
I'd say their yields are too good for launching pro and nano sooner
Click to expand...

What makes you think that? It's common practice to bring out the highest-performer first in order to get the early adopters to pay a premium.

sm625 said:
A 50% increase in perf/watt really doesnt do anything for the 290X. It would still be 10-20% below the 980ti. Which means the Fury X would need to draw 300+W to match a 260W 980ti. AMD basically openly admitted Fury cannot compete on perf/watt. Since they cant do that, there is no realistic way they can win an overclocking contest. Look at how the big maxwell perf/w scales with clockspeed. 15% performance gained for only a 4% loss in efficiency.
Click to expand...

Did you miss the whole "Water cooled" thing? Default from the factory the Fury X will be quieter and likely OC quite well. And it's quite a bit cheaper than getting a water cooled 9800ti (and less hassle for those of us who don't like to mess with water cooling). I think that it's way too early to tell, but a good bet would be that Fury X overclocks a lot better than Fury Pro.
 
Last edited:
I take exception to the assertion that calling the non-Fiji stuff rebrands instantly means one must be anti-AMD. I am very bullish on AMD GPUs but haven't been shy about calling some of them rebrands because that is substantially what they are. One individual doesn't get to arbitrarily decide the definition of a word around here. I will very likely be buying a Fiji card, but the 390X and everything below it seem rather ho-hum this time around.
 
crashtech said:
I take exception to the assertion that calling the non-Fiji stuff rebrands instantly means one must be anti-AMD. I am very bullish on AMD GPUs but haven't been shy about calling some of them rebrands because that is substantially what they are. One individual doesn't get to arbitrarily decide the definition of a word around here. I will very likely be buying a Fiji card, but the 390X and everything below it seem rather ho-hum this time around.
Click to expand...

We will know whether its a rebrand or not when we get power consumption numbers. If its basically 250W gaming load, its a rebrand with more vram and it will fail to be competitive due to the horrendous efficiency gap compared to 970/980.

Fury/X/Nano on the other hand, is going to smash it out the park.

ps. The old ChipHell leak from a year ago, SPOT on. Unbelievable in fact with ES so early back then, they had it 4096 SP, faster than Titan X, similar power to R290X..
 
sze5003 said:
Agreed, water cooling alone costs about that much. I didn't get a chance to watch the conference either so I didn't catch if there will be aftermarket fury x cards available. This would be my first water cooled device so I wasn't sure about the fit. Hopefully it's no longer than my 7970 now so it should fit fine. Hopefully we see some good results Thursday.

I'm not a fanboy of either brand but this seems like a best value for the money if performance turns out to be good for the fact that you also get water cooling.
Click to expand...
You should probably read the thread or just learn anything about fiji first the if you didn't watch the conference. Because one of the first known things about the water cooling edition is that it's extremely small. Of course it's smaller than the 7970. I'd link you but I'm on mobile but read up and come back....
 
tential said:
I'm getting wce no questions asked if it's 100 price difference. I think you'd be stupid not to. Like you said the benefits are big and amd cards get better with time. That's the thing people will judge off launch and initial game reviews.

These cards will be good, but I expect far better performance down the line vs the 980ti. If you hold onto cards I expect the fury x to be a better buy.

For me the fury x at 650 has too many positives to ignore. Will buy and attempt to eBay first but I'll probably keep it if these performance numbers hold up. Either way the 980ti is a no go. They reference cooler is a joke. I can't believe people hate the r9 290x reference cooler but are ok with using a 980ti cooler.
Click to expand...

I don't know that we can count on AMD getting "comparatively better" for this next generation though...NV is extremely responsive to customer complaints. If anything, I'd expect 9800ti to hold up better than Fury X over a period of years.
 
bryanW1995 said:
I don't know that we can count on AMD getting "comparatively better" for this next generation though...NV is extremely responsive to customer complaints. If anything, I'd expect 9800ti to hold up better than Fury X over a period of years.
Click to expand...
I expect it for nvidia to be harder to optimize for pascal, kepler, and maxwell, and whatever comes next while amd basically does gcn.... It already seems nvidia can't keep up with maxwell and kepler right now, imagine when pascal drops?

Sorry, especially when a lot of nvidia high end customers are willing to upgrade quite regularly to get the new fastest card on the market? Absolutely not.
 
bryanW1995 said:
I don't know that we can count on AMD getting "comparatively better" for this next generation though...NV is extremely responsive to customer complaints. If anything, I'd expect 9800ti to hold up better than Fury X over a period of years.
Click to expand...

I disagree in that with nV also moving to HBM, things are going to be shifting away from the older tech. Though I could be all kinds of wrong about their needing to be different optimizations for the different memory structures... but meanwhile AMD will likely continue to optimize for Fury as they have for the 200 series.
 
bryanW1995 said:
I don't know that we can count on AMD getting "comparatively better" for this next generation though...NV is extremely responsive to customer complaints. If anything, I'd expect 9800ti to hold up better than Fury X over a period of years.
Click to expand...

I am going to have to agree that 6 GB is going to hold up better over the next two years. Some games are already passing 4GB at 4K. Just see the VRAM usage chart from HardOCP on the 980ti review.
 
bryanW1995 said:
I don't know that we can count on AMD getting "comparatively better" for this next generation though...NV is extremely responsive to customer complaints. If anything, I'd expect 9800ti to hold up better than Fury X over a period of years.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the Kepler owners. Especially tell that to the owners of the original Titan, Titan Black, GTX 780, and GTX 780TI. They might disagree. I'm sure a lot of them bought those cards less than a year ago. Suddenly, the moment Maxwell dropped, performance on Kepler has been on a steady decline. But, in Nvidia's defense, the lack of optimization was due to a "BUG". Just like disabling overclocking on Laptop was a "BUG". Those pesky "BUGS".
 
iiiankiii said:
Tell that to the Kepler owners. Especially tell that to the owners of the original Titan, Titan Black, GTX 780, and GTX 780TI. They might disagree. I'm sure a lot of them bought those cards less than a year ago. Suddenly, the moment Maxwell dropped, performance on Kepler has been on a steady decline. But, in Nvidia's defense, the lack of optimization was due to a "BUG". Just like disabling overclocking on Laptop was a "BUG". Those pesky "BUGS".
Click to expand...

I am still rocking a 680 gtx lightning and my BF4 / GTA V experience has been great, granted at 1920x1200.
 
iiiankiii said:
Tell that to the Kepler owners. Especially tell that to the owners of the original Titan, Titan Black, GTX 780, and GTX 780TI. They might disagree. I'm sure a lot of them bought those cards less than a year ago. Suddenly, the moment Maxwell dropped, performance on Kepler has been on a steady decline. But, in Nvidia's defense, the lack of optimization was due to a "BUG". Just like disabling overclocking on Laptop was a "BUG". Those pesky "BUGS".
Click to expand...

Yea, it really "BUG"ed them that I didn't upgrade my 780ti faster so they decided to "HELP" me make that decision.
 
I got to check in this thread at work and it was really depressing.

All there was to talk about was the 300 series....so rebrand this and rebrand that.

When people were like, "where is fury news, what is going on"..........
I was preparing for the worst. I though, man this cant be good.

But then, hours later, i check back and what a surprise!!!!!!!

Fiji sounds really really good. Every bit of it. I just hate we have to wait for reviews. Man, I want to see some reviews!!!!!!!!


So, i am able to accept that fiji will have improved performance per watt. According to AMD, phenomenal performance per watt. It doesnt even have to meet their claims, anywhere near that is fantastic. That is great to hear.

Also, the prices. I think they sound pretty good.

The nano, what an interesting card. I think it is great. Really sounds great.

I just cant wait till the card launches and we get some reviews.

My day got better, for sure though.

As for my concerns,
Performance.
I am not saying Fiji wont perform. See, I just have already heard that nvidia is in trouble and they cant or dont have any way to respond. I dont think we should be saying those things just yet, just because it can build up expectations.
I just want to note that AMD had no problem with performance projections on the other cards today. They were posting performance claims against Nvidia cards as well as their prior gpus. So, leaving out Fiji, no performance projection in comparison to other cards, it is not consistent. It doesnt mean it is bad or good. But this is a pretty big show they put on and not only did they have a lot of peoples attention, there were many of them expecting and wanting them to say something about fiji performance. I dont know why they would leave something like that out when they had everyone there on the edge of their seats. I just keep thinking that seems a little odd. If i think about that, it makes me think that perhaps it means fiji will be as fast as titanX. But i might be reading too much into it.

Everything about fiji sounds great. I am really glad for that. It sucks we have to wait for performance and maybe AMD thinks the mystery is a good thing. I think that the event would have been that much better had they said something like,

"Fiji is titanX +10%, but for $649"

But they didnt.

We will have to wait for that.
But as a precaution, I think we all expect fiji to be a good performer. I just dont think we should make any grand projections just yet. We dont need to set the bar too high and over hype this one. It is looking to be a monumental achievement. If it performs 20% faster than all the better when i launches. The buzz will be that much louder. But if it turns out 5%, some could be disappointed because they had such high expectations.
 
Those wccf links, if reasonably accurate (and shockingly, they have been quite right on r9, so far) - indicates a Fury X lead on Titan X.

The people spreading pages upon pages of FUD were happy to use Firestrike as a benchmark earlier, and if it displays a general ability to keep up like that, that puts them in a bind. There is possibly the fastest card & better perf/dollar. The x2 card will likely crush the rest. I mean performance is all that matters, if the script is understood correctly?

And the "rebrand" nonsense panned out wrong since the 3xx cards are showing better efficiency as well.


The only thing left to harp about will be 4GB isn't enough. Which doesn't matter to an enthusiast since the average enthusiast upgrade cycle is fairly fast, and HBM2 will be here by the time games are actually consistently taking advantage of >4GB VRAM.
 
Silverforce11 said:
Exactly this. You think AMD don't want massive margins and be profitable? AMD will price gouge if they can.

980Ti matching or exceeding (custom models) Titan X at $649-699 means that AMD have to sell for around that price if they have better performance.

If they match it on perf, they have to sell for less. If they are slower, they have to sell for a lot less.

We're gamers and we understand that NV commands a higher premium. I'm pretty sure AMD also understands that very well.
Click to expand...
better marketing would cure that 😎
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top